    [Senate Hearing 115-413]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 115-413

                           NOMINATION HEARINGS OF THE
                          115TH CONGRESS-FIRST SESSION

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

                                    HEARINGS

                                   BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   ----------

                       JANUARY 3, 2017 TO JANUARY 3, 2018

                                   ----------

     Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                                                            S. Hrg. 115-413

                           NOMINATION HEARINGS OF THE
                          115TH CONGRESS-FIRST SESSION

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

                                    HEARINGS

                                   BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                       JANUARY 3, 2017 TO JANUARY 3, 2018

                                   __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    33-623 PDF             WASHINGTON : 2018

                    COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

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

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

                                  (ii)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

    The nominees' responses to additional questions and any other
      additional material submitted for the record are located at the
      end of each hearing transcript.
                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Wednesday, January 11, 2017......................................    na

        Tillerson, Rex, to be Secretary of State, transcript printed
          under seperate cover, S. Hrg. 115-4........................    na

    Wednesday, January 18, 2017......................................    na

        Haley, Gov. Nimrata ``Nikki,'' to be Ambassador to the United
          Nations, transcript printed under seperate cover, S. Hrg.
          115-345....................................................    na

    Thursday, February 16, 2017......................................     1

        Friedman, David, of New York, to be Ambassador to Israel.....     9

    Wednesday, April 26, 2017........................................    71

        Mushingi, Hon. Tulinabo Salama, of Virginia, to be Ambassador
          to the Republic of Senegal and to the Republic of Guinea-
          Bissau.....................................................    73
        Haskell, Todd Philip, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of the Congo......................................    75

    Tuesday, May 2, 2017.............................................    93

        Branstad, Hon. Terry, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to the
          People's Republic of China.................................    98

    Tuesday, May 9, 2017.............................................   145

        Sullivan, Hon. John J., of Maryland, to be Deputy Secretary
          of State...................................................   149

    Wednesday, May 17, 2017..........................................   207

        Brown, Scott P., of New Hampshire, to be Ambassador to New
          Zealand, and to the Independent State of Samoa.............   211

    Thursday, May 18, 2017...........................................   227

        Hagerty, William Francis IV, of Tennessee, to be Ambassador
          to Japan...................................................   231

    Thursday, June 15, 2017..........................................   259

        Green, Mark Andrew, of Wisconsin, to be Administrator of the
          U.S. Agency for International Development..................   266

    Tuesday, July 11, 2017...........................................   303

        Bohigian, Hon. David Steele, of Missouri, to be Executive
          Vice President of the Overseas Private Investment
          Corporation................................................   307
        Washburne, Ray, of Texas, to be President of the Overseas
          Private Investment Corporation.............................   309
        Currie, Kelley Eckels, of Georgia, to be U.S. Representative
          on the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations...   312
        Murray, Jay Patrick, of Virginia, to be an Alternate
          Representative for Special Political Affairs in the United
          Nations....................................................   315

                                     (iii)

    Tuesday, July 18, 2017...........................................   345

        Gingrich, Callista L., of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
          Holy See...................................................   349
        Sales, Nathan Alexander, of Ohio, to be Coordinator for
          Counterterrorism, Department of State......................   352
        Glass, George Edward, of Oregon, to be Ambassador to the
          Portuguese Republic........................................   355
        Risch, Carl C., of Pennsylvania, to be an Assistant Secretary
          of State, Consular Affairs.................................   358

    Wednesday, July 19, 2017.........................................   389

        Arreaga, Hon. Luis E., of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Guatemala......................................   389
        Day, Sharon, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of
          Costa Rica.................................................   391
        Urs, Krishna R., of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Peru...........................................   393

    Thursday, July 20, 2017..........................................   415

        Hutchison, Hon. Kay Bailey, of Texas, to be U.S. Permanent
          Representative on The Council of the North Atlantic Treaty
          Organization...............................................   425
        Craft, Kelly Knight, of Kentucky, to be Ambassador to Canada.   429
        Johnson, Robert Wood IV, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.......   432
        Eisenberg, Lewis M., of Florida, to be Ambassador to the
          Italian Republic and to the Republic of San Marino.........   434
        McFarland, Kathleen Troia, of New York, to be Ambassador to
          the Republic of Singapore..................................   437

    Wednesday, July 26, 2017.........................................   491

         Raynor, Hon. Michael Arthur, of Maryland, to be Ambassador
          to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.............   492
        Brewer, Maria E., of Indiana, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Sierra Leone...................................   494
        Desrocher, John P., of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          People's Democratic Republic of Algeria....................   496

    Tuesday, August 1, 2017..........................................   517

        King, Stephen B., of Wisconsin, to be Ambassador to the Czech
          Republic...................................................   518

    Tuesday, September 12, 2017......................................   531

        Ueland, Eric M., of Oregon, to be an Under Secretary of State
          (Management)...............................................   536
        Bass, Hon. John R., of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          Islamic Republic of Afghanistan............................   556
        Siberell, Justin Hicks, of Maryland, Nominee to be Ambassador
          to the Kingdom of Bahrain..................................   560
        Dowd, J. Steven, of Florida, to be U.S. Director of the
          African Development Bank for a Term of 5 Years.............   563

    Tuesday, September 19, 2017......................................   617

        Huntsman,Hon. Jon M. Jr., of Utah, to be Ambassador to the
          Russian Federation State...................................   624
        Mitchell, A. Wess, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Secretary
          of State (European and Eurasian Affairs)...................   640

    Wednesday, September 27, 2017, (a.m.)............................   693

        Kritenbrink, Daniel J., of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
          Socialist Republic of Vietnam..............................   695
        Fitzpatrick, Kathleen M., of the District of Columbia, to be
          Ambassador to the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste.......   698

    Wednesday, September 27, 2017 (p.m.).............................   715

        Hoekstra, Hon. Peter, of Michigan, to be Ambassador to the
          Kingdom of the Netherlands.................................   718
        Buchan, Richard Duke, III, of Florida, to be Ambassador to
          the Kingdom of Spain.......................................   721
        Grenell, Richard, of California, to be Ambassador to the
          Federal Republic of Germany................................   725
        McCourt, Jamie, of California, to be Ambassador to the French
          Republic, and to the Principality of Monaco................   728
        McMullen, Edward T. Jr., of South Carolina, to be Ambassador
          to the Swiss Confederation, and to the Principality of
          Liechtenstein..............................................   732

    Tuesday, October 3, 2017 (a.m.)..................................   763

        Juster, Hon. Kenneth Ian, of New York, to be Ambassador to
          the Republic of India......................................   767

    Tuesday, October 3, 2017 (p.m.)..................................   789

        Andre, Hon. Larry Edward, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Djibouti.......................................   792
        Barlerin, Peter Henry, of Colorado, to be Ambassador to
          Republic of Cameroon.......................................   794
        Whitaker, Eric P., of Illinois, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Niger..........................................   796
        Dodman, Michael James, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          Islamic Republic of Mauritania.............................   807
        Fite, Nina Maria, of Pennsylvania, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Angola.........................................   810
        Foote, Daniel L., of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Zambia.........................................   813
        Reimer, David Dale, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to the Republic
          of Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles................   815

    Wednesday, October 4, 2017.......................................   849

        Sison, Michele Jeanne, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Haiti..........................................   851
        Brownback, Hon. Samuel Dale, of Kansas, to be Ambassador-at-
          Large for International Religious Freedom..................   855

    Thursday, October 5, 2017........................................   883

        Sands, Carla, of California, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom
          of Denmark.................................................   884
        Kohorst, W. Robert, of California, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Croatia........................................   887

    Wednesday, October 18, 2017......................................   903

        Carter, Thomas, of South Carolina, to be U.S. Representative
          on the Council of the International Civil Aviation
          Organization...............................................   905
        Newstead, Jennifer Gillian, of New York, to be Legal Adviser
          of the Department of State.................................   907
        Singh, Manisha, of Florida, to be an Assistant Secretary of
          State (Economic and Business Affairs)......................   910
        Evanoff, Michael T., of Arkansas, to be an Assistant
          Secretary of State (Diplomatic Security)...................   911

    Wednesday, November 1, 2017......................................   955

        Goldstein, Irwin Steven, of New York, to be Under Secretary
          of State (Public Diplomacy)................................   957
        Lawler, Sean P., of Maryland, to be Chief of Protocol of the
          Department of State........................................   960
        Johnson, Lisa A., of Washington, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Namibia........................................   962
        Gonzales, Rebecca Eliza, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the
          Kingdom of Lesotho.........................................   964
        Evans, James Randolph, of Georgia, to be Ambassador To
          Luxembourg.................................................   966

    Tuesday, November 28, 2017.......................................  1013

        Poblete, Yleem D.S., Ph.D., of Virginia, to be an Assistant
          Secretary of State (Verification and Compliance)...........  1019
        Ford, Christopher Ashley, D.Phil., of Maryland, to be an
          Assistant Secretary of State (International Security and
          Non-Proliferation).........................................  1022
    Thursday, November 30, 2017......................................  1071

        Bierman, Hon. Brock D., of Virginia, to be an Assistant
          Administrator of the United States Agency For International
          Development................................................  1076
        Braithwaite, Rear Admiral Kenneth J., USN (Ret), of
          Pennsylvania, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Norway....  1080
        Trujillo, Hon. Carlos, of Florida, to be the Permanent U.S.
          Representative to the Organization of American States......  1083
        McClenny, M. Lee, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Paraguay.......................................  1086

    Tuesday, December 19, 2017.......................................  1123

        Vrooman, Peter Hendrick, of New York, to be Ambassador to the
          Republic of Rwanda.........................................  1125
        Danies, Joel, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Gabonese
          Republic and to the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and
          Principe...................................................  1128

                                    APPENDIX

    Alphabetical listing of nominees considered by the committee,
      including important dates......................................  1151

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                          THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m. in
    Room 419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Rubio,
    Johnson, Flake, Gardner, Young, Barrasso, Isakson, Portman,
    Paul, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen, Coons, Udall, Murphy, Kaine,
    Markey, Merkley, and Booker.
        Also Present: Senator Graham.

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

        The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        We welcome Mr. David Friedman, who has been nominated to be
    Ambassador to Israel. We also welcome two very distinguished
    guests, two Members--a Member and a former Member--that have
    tremendous respect by all of us up here. We thank you for
    coming. Ben and I are going to defer our opening comments so
    you do not have to sit through that, and we will let you go
    ahead and introduce.
        I talked to some of the folks here that from time to time
    have a tendency to want to interrupt the meeting a little bit.
    In the past I have asked some people to be removed, and as it
    turned out, they were arrested. I was able to get them un-
    arrested---- [Laughter.]
        The Chairman [continuing]. But I do not have that ability
    anymore. The protocol is that if you are asked to be removed
    from a meeting, you are arrested, and I do not have the ability
    anymore to keep that from happening. So, if you would, please
    do not put yourself in a position to need to be removed.
        We thank everybody for being here. It is part of our
    democratic process that people participate. We are glad to have
    everyone here.
        And with that, let me turn to a friend of all of us, the
    great Senator from the State of South Carolina, Senator Lindsey
    Graham.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. LINDSEY GRAHAM,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA

        Senator Graham. Well, thank you.
        To the protesters, I am a lawyer. I come cheap if you do
    get arrested. [Laughter.]
        Senator Graham. But you will probably get what you pay for.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Chairman, nobody believes he comes
    cheap. [Laughter.]
        Senator Graham. Speaking of lawyers, Mr. Friedman is
    described as a deal-making bankruptcy lawyer and also a very
    good trial lawyer. I cannot think of a better choice to cover
    the Mid-East than a bankruptcy lawyer except maybe a divorce
    lawyer. [Laughter.]
        So I have not known Mr. Friedman that long personally, but
    I have known him by reputation as being a very passionate
    supporter of the State of Israel. Everybody up here I think
    deserves to be described as pro-Israel. Having said that, that
    does not mean we cannot disagree as to what that means. I think
    most of us agree that when the U.N. has 20 resolutions against
    Israel for their settlement policy and six against the world at
    large, they have sort of lost their way.
        But I think it is okay to tell Israel be careful about
    settlements. The President said that. And I think a lot of us
    would agree that Israel is the only democracy in a very
    troubled region, and they are not beyond criticism. You can be
    pro-Israel and criticize the Government or the policies of any
    particular government. I understand that, and that is what
    makes us a unique friend to Israel. Sometimes you have to tell
    your friends things they need to hear.
        So settlement policy is a contentious issue. We have
    different views about it, but I think the President struck a
    good tone yesterday.
        The pro-Israel community, the American Jewish community is
    divided like every other group in America. We have AIPAC, we
    have J Street, and we have the RJC. All of them believe they
    are pro-Israel and the other group is a little crazy.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Graham. That is why we have so many different
    views.
        Mr. Friedman is very passionate. He has said some things
    that I do not agree with, but I never doubt that he did it
    based on what he thought was the right thing to say at the
    time. And what is encouraging to me that Mr. Friedman has said,
    ``Maybe I need to watch my rhetoric.'' That is why I believe he
    is the right guy at the right time. He will be Trump's voice.
    Trump won the election. Secretary Clinton would not have picked
    Mr. Friedman. Donald Trump picked him because I believe
    President Trump understands that Mr. Friedman would be a voice
    consistent with Trump's view of the U.S.-Israel relationship,
    that he is qualified, that he has the experience and the
    passion and the skill set to be America's voice, not just
    Trump's voice.
        To my Democratic colleagues, I know what it is like to be
    disappointed in an election outcome. I have not voted for a
    President who has won in 12 years. But I find myself supporting
    people for jobs that I would not have picked. The one thing I
    would say about David Friedman, that he loves the United States
    and Israel with all of his heart and all of his soul, that he
    has been effective as a lawyer, that his reputation as a lawyer
    is beyond reproach.
        And what does a good lawyer do? A good lawyer tries to take
    people with differing views to get to a win-win situation, to
    represent your client with passion but also to understand that
    the other side has an interest, too. When you look at his
    career as a lawyer, those on the other side of Mr. Friedman
    would say that he is an honest, ethical, capable advocate that
    you can do business with. I believe he will bring that skill
    set to the job of U.S. Ambassador to Israel, the only democracy
    in a region that is falling apart. If Israel ever needed a
    strong voice in her court, it is now. If Israel ever needed a
    unified Congress, it is now. Israel can be criticized, but
    Israel needs to be supported, and Mr. Friedman will get that
    support. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much. And now, Senator, that
    again is loved on both sides of the aisle and missed, was a
    strong and great voice for our country's national security and
    foreign policy issues. We welcome Joe Lieberman. And thank you
    for being here today.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN,
                  FORMER U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Lieberman. Thanks so very much, Mr. Chairman, for
    your generous words. I do not know about Lindsey, but I was
    actually looking forward to the opening statement you and
    Senator Cardin were going to make but---- [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. You still act like a politician. [Laughter.]
        Senator Lieberman [continuing]. You know, as my wife says,
    I have an incurable disease so---- [Laughter.]
        Senator Lieberman [continuing]. Anyway, like all of our
    spouses.
        Chairman Corker and Senator Cardin, members of the
    committee, former colleagues, friends, I am really delighted to
    be here this morning to introduce my friend David Friedman, who
    of course is before the committee as the President's nominee to
    be the next Ambassador to Israel.
        After I left the Senate in 2013, I became senior counsel at
    the law firm of Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman, as in David
    Friedman. Probably neither David or I thought that we would
    both be here this morning at that time when I joined the firm,
    but I have in those four years come to know David first as a
    legal colleague and I will say, too, that I have learned a lot
    from him. He has extraordinary professional skills that will
    serve him well as Ambassador. And I am thinking of really great
    intelligence, a warm personality that engages and engenders
    trust, and an impressive ability to advocate a cause but also
    to know when to compromise and negotiate so that all parties
    can walk away from a dispute feeling that they have
    accomplished something.
        Now that I say that, I may want to suggest that Congress
    retain David for mediating purposes. Okay. I could not resist
    that.
        Beyond our association in the law firm, David Friedman and
    I have become really good personal friends. And if--and what
    might be called a point of personal privilege, I want to
    explain how that happened. For three years our youngest
    daughter Hani, who some of you may remember, lived with her
    husband and growing family in Woodmere, New York. At the time
    they resided in a two-bedroom apartment with one bedroom, Hani,
    Daniel, and their two boys who then became three boys, thank
    God.
        When Hadassah my wife and I visited, the only place we
    could sleep was on a sofa bed in the living room. I would say
    diplomatically it was not comfortable. And now, I confess my
    own shortcomings. It was I, not my sainted wife, who said we
    have got to find another place nearby to stay when we are
    visiting our children and grandchildren.
        It happens that David and Tammy Friedman live a 10-minute
    walk from where our children lived, and they have a great guest
    suite. That, as they say in the movie, was the beginning of a
    beautiful friendship.
        During those three years--incidentally, my children are now
    in Pikesville, the birthplace and growing place in Baltimore of
    Senator Cardin. So----
        Senator Cardin. They chose well.
        Senator Lieberman [continuing]. They chose well, and they
    have a much bigger house and we have our own room now.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Lieberman. I thought you were going to say
    something, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. No. No.
        Senator Lieberman. During these three years, we shared a
    lot of time and a lot of Sabbaths together with David and Tammy
    Friedman, and we got to know them very well. They are genuinely
    devoted to each other and their family. They have the best of
    values and live by them. Tammy is a bright, compassionate, very
    likeable person who will be, I believe, as great a partner in
    diplomacy if David is confirmed as Ambassador as she has been a
    partner to him in life.
        During those weekends with the Friedmans, David and I had a
    lot of time to talk about things. And I reached some
    conclusions about him that I think are relevant to his
    nomination to be Ambassador that I want to share in just a few
    sentences.
        First, he is a patriotic, proud, and grateful America,
    grateful for the opportunities America has given his family and
    him. Second, he knows a lot about Israel and cares deeply about
    its relationship with the United States. I am confident that he
    will bring his considerable personal skills to bear to
    strengthen this very important bilateral relationship.
        As I suggested earlier, I do not think David ever dreamed
    that he would be nominated to be America's Ambassador to
    Israel, but then again, he probably never dreamed that one of
    his clients, who became his friend, would end up as President
    of the United States either. The fact that he has such a close
    personal relationship with the President, a trusting
    relationship, I think will help him be an extraordinary
    Ambassador and enable him to strengthen the already-strong
    bridges between the United States and Israel at a difficult
    time for Israel but also for the United States.
        Until a few months ago, David Friedman's life has basically
    been private. No more. I must say that the David Friedman I
    have seen described sometimes in the media in the last several
    weeks is not the thoughtful, capable, personable, and even
    funny David Friedman I know. Has David ever said or written
    anything that he wishes now he had phrased differently or even
    not said at all? I believe he has. He does. Who has not? I
    certainly have said something things I wish I could rephrase or
    not say at all.
        So I ask you to listen to what he has to say today with an
    open mind. If he has said something in the past that bothers
    you, ask him about it, but please put it in the larger context
    of his life, his character, his capability, and his deep desire
    to serve our country.
        From many long conversations we have had over the years, I
    can tell you that David Friedman does not only pray for peace
    between Israel and its neighbors every day, he yearns for it.
    And if you confirm him, he will, as U.S. Ambassador to Israel,
    do everything anyone could do to achieve peace between Israel
    and its neighbors.
        In short, I believe David Friedman deserves the support of
    this committee and the full Senate.
        And if I may, Mr. Chairman, Senator Cardin, I do want to
    say that I hope that support will be bipartisan because it
    would be a shame to have this committee and the Senate divide
    along party lines on a matter so central to America's
    relationship with Israel, which has historically and
    importantly been a safe zone of nonpartisanship even when just
    about everything else was divided along party lines.
        I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity, and I
    am very proud to introduce David Friedman to you and the
    committee.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much. We appreciate both of you
    being here and your comments. You are welcome to leave. We do
    not consider that impolite. I will say if you stay, it is
    likely you will be interrogated, so I would leave.
        With that, let me make a brief opening comment. I know that
    Senator Cardin does. I know we have a vote at 10:30 that will
    drag on for a while. Hopefully, we can get through Mr.
    Friedman's opening comments, take a break for a moment, and
    then come back and return for questioning.
        I want to welcome Mr. David Friedman to the committee today
    to discuss his nomination to be our Ambassador to Israel. Over
    the last 70 years, the United States and Israel have enjoyed a
    close and meaningful relationship. This alliance has been a
    pillar of America and Israeli foreign policy and greatly
    beneficial to both nations.
        Israel serves as the greatest model for democracy in the
    Middle East and is our most important ally in the region.
    American support for Israel is a widespread bipartisan effort,
    and it should remain so. Congress has repeatedly pushed for
    increased military aid and security cooperation between our two
    countries, and I believe that we have taken necessary steps to
    ensure that Israel will have every tool and resource needed to
    defend itself in an increasingly destabilized region.
        Yet even as we in Congress have done the things needed to
    strengthen our bond with Israel, we have to acknowledge that
    the relationship between our two great nations has been
    strained in recent years. It is clear that action taken by the
    U.N. Security Council in December was counterproductive to
    reaching a long-term peace between Israel and the Palestinian
    people. A durable peace agreement will only come from direct
    negotiations. Any third-party efforts to supersede those
    negotiations only serve as impediments to peace. In a
    neighborhood torn apart by terrorism and civil war, the
    disproportionate focus on Israel by the U.N. runs counter to
    the organization's stated goals.
        So with these challenges in mind and the onset of a new
    administration, now more than ever we must recommit ourselves
    to the vital, long-term support of Israel.
        Mr. Friedman, we are here to consider your nomination to be
    the U.S. Ambassador to Israel and to be the President's chief
    representative to that country. I look forward to hearing more
    today about how you will promote increased cooperation between
    our two nations, your views on the two-state solution and other
    avenues towards peace and how you will be an effective
    instrument for achieving the policy goals of the United States.
        We thank you for being here, and I will turn to my friend
    and ranking member, Senator Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Chairman Corker. And, Mr.
    Friedman, welcome. We welcome your family. It is good to have
    everyone here. We thank you for your willingness to serve the
    public in this critically important position as the United
    States Ambassador to Israel.
        The U.S.-Israel relationship is a strategic anchor for the
    United States in the Middle East. Indeed, it is one of the most
    important relationships of any country. It is a deep and
    genuine friendship that extends across our governments and
    enriches by intense, deep, people-to-people ties. Your
    nomination comes at a critical point for Israel and for the
    U.S.-Israel relationship.
        As I know my colleagues on the committee appreciate, Israel
    finds itself in a sea of instability, confronted with threats
    on every border. To the south, ISIS in the Sinai continues to
    be a serious security threat despite much-improved cooperation
    with Egypt. As recently as last week, ISIS militants launched a
    barrage of rockets into Eilat. To the west, Hamas maintains a
    stronghold in Gaza and is diverting materials intended for
    civilians to rebuild its rocket arsenal and construct terror
    tunnels into Israel. To the north, Hezbollah is gaining
    battlefield experience in Syria that will inevitably be focused
    on Israel when the terror group's fighters return to Lebanon.
        To the east, the war in Syria is a magnet for violent
    extremists, and Iran, with Russia's acquiescence, maintains a
    strategic corridor with a willing Assad in Damascus to its
    proxy force Hezbollah in Lebanon. And across the region,
    Iranian regimes continue to spew anti-Semitic and anti-Israel
    rhetoric, sponsoring terror groups that pose a direct threat to
    Israel's security.
        In contrast to its neighbors and at a time when forces of
    authoritarianism, xenophobia, and illiberalism are on the rise
    in all too many places, Israel is and remains a vibrant
    democracy. It is home to a lively civil society and energetic,
    opinionated political discourse. Its vibrant and diverse
    economy offers tremendous opportunities for its high-tech
    sector and a startup culture to its achievements in agriculture
    and alternative energy. Our defense sector has collaborated to
    produce Iron Dome, a lifesaving missile defense system.
    Israel's innovative green and renewable energy sector, one of
    the leaders in the world, puts Israel in a position to be an
    energy provider to the region.
        The U.S. Ambassador to Israel plays a key role in engaging
    all communities within Israel, all sectors of its economy, and
    representing our government and the American people to Israel's
    Government, Parliament, and people. The U.S. Ambassador also
    plays a vital role in opening up U.S. Embassy doors to all
    groups, regardless of their politics or views. The Ambassador
    will help chart the U.S. response to countering Israel's
    isolation international organizations, as Senator Graham
    pointed out, and effectively counter the BDS movement, which
    threatens the legitimacy of Israel and fosters anti-Semitism.
        Given the breadth, depth, and complexity of the issues
    included in the portfolio of the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Mr.
    Friedman, I have questions about your preparedness for this
    important post. I am uncertain of how you will represent all
    Americans to all Israelis and whether you are committed to a
    longstanding U.S. policy for a two-state solution.
        Of the last 10 Ambassadors to Israel across Republican and
    Democratic administrations, all 10 had prior U.S. Government
    experience, nine had prior professional experience in the
    Middle East, and eight had already served at least once as a
    U.S. Ambassador to other countries. I do not question that your
    background as a bankruptcy lawyer has enabled you to develop
    skills navigating complex multilateral negotiations, but
    serving as the top diplomat to one of the most important allies
    in the region that is beset by violent conflict, armed militant
    and terrorist groups, an unstable autocrat which requires a
    distinct set of skills and a distinct temperament.
        Frankly, the language you have regularly used against those
    who disagree with your views has me concerned about your
    preparedness to enter the world of diplomacy. So I will follow
    Senator Lieberman's advice and ask directly that you respond to
    these types of concerns.
        For the record, it is important to note the examples:
    reviving Holocaust terms to equate J Street supporters with
    Nazi collaborators or questioning their commitment and love for
    Israel; calling the Antidefamation league ``morons''; stating
    that liberal Jews suffer from ``constant disconnect in
    identifying good and evil.'' And, Mr. Friedman, I could mention
    your specific comments about President Obama or your specific
    comments about Members of the United States Senate, including
    the Democratic leader. And I would ask that you respond to
    that. These are written comments, cases where you had the
    opportunity to consider what you were saying, to make judicious
    edits if you so desired. You chose otherwise.
        I hope you will also offer a clear and unequivocal
    rejection of these inflammatory accusations as part of your
    testimony here today and also reassure us that you are capable
    of acting with the discipline, tact, wisdom, and diplomacy that
    serving as a U.S. Ambassador requires.
        I am also concerned that your views on the two-state
    solution constitutes an unprecedented break with longstanding
    U.S. policy. Republican and Democratic administrations alike
    have promoted two states living side by side in peace and
    security: a democratic Israel Jewish state and a demilitarized
    Palestinian state.
        Written excerpts from your writings on this topic include
    your August 2, 2016, piece in the Israeli publication entitled
    ``End the Two-State Narrative,'' where you go on to call it a
    ``damaging anachronism'' and ``illusory solution in search of a
    nonexistent problem.'' In that same piece you state that the
    Palestinians recognize ``the advantages of integration into
    Israeli society.''
        I do not see how Israel can remain democratic and Jewish in
    a one-state solution. Demographics are unambiguous in this
    regard. I still have not heard one realistic solution to what
    happens to Hamas in Gaza in a one-state solution. I hope you
    will be crystal clear on what your views are in regards to a
    realistic, sustainable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
    conflict.
        Finally, your record of financial and rhetoric support for
    the settlements far outside the blocs--presumed to join Israel
    with mutually agreed land swaps as part of a two-state
    solution--are troubling. The web page for the gala dinner last
    year in New York in support of the Beit El settlement
    explicitly states that it is ``creating facts on the ground''
    and notes a new initiative to ``train students with the tools
    to successfully delegitimizing the notion of a two-state
    solution.''
        In an August 2015 piece you wrote, ``Some 10 years ago, the
    State of Israel went through an extraordinary internal angst in
    compelling the evacuation of 8,000 brave Jewish souls in the
    relatively remote Gaza Strip. Does anyone really think that
    Israel has the political will to do the same to many hundreds
    of thousands of residents of Judea and Samaria? These are not
    people who live on the fringes of Israeli society. They are
    completely integrated into Israeli's commerce and culture and
    serve in the most elite units of the Israeli Army. They will
    never be forced to leave their beautiful homes.''
        Even President Trump last week said in an interview to an
    Israeli newspaper, ``Settlements do not help the process. There
    is so much land left, and every time you take land for
    settlements, there is less land left.''
        So again, Mr. Friedman, I hope you will clarify your views
    on settlements, on the two-state solution, and on the comments
    that you have made about my colleagues and others during the
    course of this hearing.
        My commitment to Israel is unyielding. I believe that it is
    a critical relationship for the United States, and I have
    worked in many decades in public service to assure that there
    is strong, stable, and mutually beneficial relationship between
    our countries. Likewise, I am confident of the commitment and
    support of my colleagues on the committee, even though we may
    have the--different views and conflicting views as to how best
    carry out that commitment.
        So in that spirit, Mr. Friedman, I look forward to your
    testimony.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Friedman. We thank you for
    your willingness to serve. Without objection, your written
    testimony will be entered into the record. If you would
    consider summarizing your views in about five minutes or so, we
    look forward to robust questioning. Again, thank you for being
    here. And by the way, you are welcome to introduce your
    wonderful family who happens to be with you today. I hope you
    will, as a matter of fact. Thank you.

       STATEMENT OF DAVID FRIEDMAN OF NEW YORK, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                           AMERICA TO ISRAEL

        Mr. Friedman. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin,
    members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I appreciate
    very much the opportunity to appear before you today. It is a
    great privilege to address this committee, which has done so
    much to advance America's interests around the world--
    [Disturbance in hearing room.]
        The Chairman. Continue.
        Mr. Friedman. It is a great privilege to address this
    committee, which has done so much to advance America's
    interests around the world and which, together with the entire
    United States Congress, has for generations maintained
    unwavering support on a bipartisan basis for the State of
    Israel.
        I am grateful to the President of the United States for
    nominating me to the post of Ambassador to Israel, and I am
    humbled by the trust and the confidence that he has placed in
    me to strengthen the unbreakable bond between our country and
    Israel and to advance the cause of peace within the region.
        I would like to thank Senator Graham and Senator Lieberman
    for their kind words of introduction and for their leadership
    on so many critical matters that affect our nation.
        I would like to introduce my family members who are here
    today and thank them for their support and encouragement. My
    beautiful bride of 36 years, Tammy, and my children Daniel,
    Aliza, and her husband Eli, and Talia. Watching at home are
    Daniel's wife Jana, my son Jacob and his wife Danielle who just
    had a baby boy, our daughter Katie and our seven beautiful
    grandchildren. Whatever success I have achieved in life would
    have been unthinkable without their love and support,
    especially that of my dear wife. I would also like to wish good
    luck to my youngest child Katie who is litigating her first
    mock trial today in her high school trial advocacy program.
        I could not continue without reflecting upon my father,
    Rabbi Morris Friedman, who passed away some 12 years ago. He
    was my mentor, my hero, and my closest friend. The child of
    poor immigrants, my father was a great patriot who felt an
    enormous debt of gratitude to our beloved country for its
    essential goodness in giving his parents and so many others the
    enormous opportunities embedded in United States citizenship.
        In 1948, my father and my mother sat nervously at their
    radio listening to the session of the United Nations that was
    then held in Queens, New York, and they rejoiced as the United
    States became the first nation to recognize the nascent State
    of Israel. My father cared deeply for Americans of all
    religious and political stripes. He marched in the civil rights
    movement, he convened prayer vigils to mourn the assassination
    of President Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, and in the
    '70s he handcuffed himself on numerous occasions to the Soviet
    mission to protest the Kremlin's refusal to allow Soviet Jews
    to emigrate.
        In October 1984 my----
        [Disturbance in hearing room.]
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. In October 1984 my father had
    the privilege to host President Ronald Reagan for lunch in our
    home in Long Island with my mother doing the cooking and to
    later introduce him as he addressed our synagogue. Those were
    dark days at the United Nations for the State of Israel. It
    operated under the cloud of a General Assembly resolution that
    equated Zionism with racism.
        President Reagan, in his remarks to my father's
    congregation, was unambiguous. He said, and I quote, ``If
    Israel is ever forced to walk out of the United Nations,
    America and Israel will walk out together.'' It was an
    unforgettable moment and a watershed in U.S. relations.
        Seven years later, with the overwhelming bipartisan support
    from this body, America led the effort to repeal the infamous
    U.N. resolution. I would like to thank Senator Cardin, who was
    serving in the House at that time, for his leadership in
    advocating for that effort. And to think that my father played
    a small role in setting that whole process in motion is of
    great pride to my family.
        My father's values are my values. I could never replicate
    the contributions he made. I have certainly never been forced
    or asked to sacrifice in the same manner of that great
    generation. But I have sought meaning and fulfillment in life
    through my faith, my incredible family, and through various
    philanthropic endeavors.
        As you know, our nation's support for Israel is
    longstanding, steadfast, and strongly in our national
    interests. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the
    Senate, I will dedicate my mission to two things: advancing the
    national interest of the United States in strengthening its
    relationship with Israel and working tirelessly to bring peace
    and stability to the region. I will bring to this mission a
    deep understanding of Israel's history, culture, geography and
    commerce, developed over a lifetime of study and more than 50
    visits to the State of Israel.
        I will bring to this mission a close relationship with the
    President and a demonstrated ability to carry out his
    directions and strategies. And finally, I will bring a
    negotiating skill developed over many years to resolve
    multilateral disputes, often extraordinarily contentious. I
    will bring an unshakeable commitment to this country, an
    ability to positively engage with the Israelis, and a working
    command of the Hebrew language. I approach this with unbridled
    optimism and excitement.
        Some of the language that I used during the highly charged
    presidential campaign that ended last November has come in for
    criticism, and rightfully so. While I maintain profound
    differences of opinion with some of my critics, I regret the
    use of such language. I want to assure you that I understand
    the critical difference between the partisan rhetoric of a
    political contest and a diplomatic mission. Partisan rhetoric
    is not appropriate in achieving diplomatic progress, especially
    in a sensitive and strife-torn region like the Middle East.
    From my perspective, the inflammatory rhetoric that accompanied
    the presidential campaign is entirely over and, if I am
    confirmed, you should expect my comments to be respectful and
    measured.
        If confirmed, I will also faithfully observe----
        [Disturbance in hearing room.]
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. If confirmed by the Senate, I
    also intend to faithfully observe the directions given me by
    the President and the Secretary of State, without regard to my
    personal opinions.
        I would like to thank this committee for permitting me to
    appear today. I look forward to answering all of your questions
    and, if I am confirmed, I look forward to working with each and
    every one of you to enhance our relationship with the State of
    Israel. Thank you.
        [The Mr. Friedman's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of David M. Friedman

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee:
        I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. It is a
    great privilege to address this committee, which has done so much to
    advance America's interests around the world and which, together with
    the entire United States Congress, has, for generations, maintained
    unwavering support, on a bipartisan basis, for the State of Israel.
        I am grateful to the President of the United States for nominating
    me to the post of Ambassador to Israel, and I am humbled by the trust
    and confidence that he has placed in me to strengthen the unbreakable
    bond between our country and Israel and to advance the cause of peace
    within the region.
        I would like to thank Senator Graham and Senator Lieberman for
    their kind words of introduction and for their leadership on so many
    critical matters affecting our nation.
        I would also like to introduce my family members who are here today
    and thank them for their support and encouragement: My beautiful bride
    of 36 years, Tammy, and my children Daniel, Aliza and her husband Eli,
    and Talia. Watching at home are Daniel's wife, Jana, my son Jacob and
    his wife Danielle (who just had a baby boy), our daughter Katie and our
    7 beautiful grandchildren. Whatever success I have achieved in life
    would have been unthinkable without their love and support, especially
    that of my dear wife. I would also like to wish good luck to our
    youngest child, Katie, who is litigating her first ``mock trial'' today
    in her high school trial advocacy program.
        I could not continue without reflecting upon my father, Rabbi
    Morris Friedman, who passed away some 12 years ago. He was my mentor,
    my hero and my closest friend. The child of poor immigrants, my father
    was a great patriot who felt an enormous debt of gratitude to our
    beloved country for its essential goodness in giving his parents and so
    many others the enormous opportunities embedded in American
    citizenship.
        In 1948, my father and mother sat nervously by their radio
    listening to a session of the United Nations, then headquartered in
    Queens, NY, and rejoiced as the United States became the first nation
    to recognize the nascent State of Israel. From that day forward my
    father dedicated much of his professional life to fostering the
    extraordinary relationship between the United States and Israel. My
    father cared deeply for Americans of all religious and political
    stripes--he marched in the civil rights movement, convened prayer
    vigils to mourn the assassinations of President Kennedy and Dr. Martin
    Luther King, and, in the 1970's, often handcuffed himself to the Soviet
    mission to protest the Kremlin's refusal to allow Soviet Jews to
    emigrate. My father led a congregation of 1,000 families, as well as
    the New York Board of Rabbis, at that time the largest cross-
    denominational rabbinic organization of its kind.
        In October, 1984, my father had the privilege to host President
    Ronald Reagan for lunch in our home in Long Island (my mother actually
    did the cooking) and to later introduce him as he addressed our
    synagogue. I was fortunate enough to have been able to participate in
    that incredible event.
        Those were dark days for Israel at the United Nations. It was
    operating under the cloud of a General Assembly resolution equating
    Zionism with racism. President Reagan, in his remarks to my father's
    congregation, was unambiguous. He said, ``If Israel is ever forced to
    walk out of the United Nations, America and Israel will walk out
    together.'' It was an unforgettable moment, and a watershed in U.S.-
    Israeli relations. Seven years later, with the overwhelming bipartisan
    support from Members of this body, America led the effort to repeal the
    infamous UN resolution. I want to thank Senator Cardin, who was serving
    in the House at the time, for his leadership in advocating for that
    effort. To think that my father played a role in setting that whole
    process in motion is of great pride to me and my family
        My father's values are my values. I could never replicate the
    contribution that he made to his community and country--he was
    certainly of the greatest generation. I have never been called upon to
    sacrifice in the same manner as so many of that generation, and I have
    been blessed beyond measure by the vast opportunities that America has
    bestowed upon me. But I have sought meaning and fulfillment in life
    through my faith, my incredible family, and through various
    philanthropic endeavors. Let me describe one of those endeavors now.
        I was an early supporter of United Hatzala, an Israeli organization
    of volunteer first responders that uses advanced technology and
    ``ambucycles'' to weave through traffic to provide emergency services
    and save lives. Here's what makes Hatzala so special: It is comprised
    of volunteers from the entire spectrum of the Israeli population--Jews,
    Muslims and Christians, religious and secular, right wing and left
    wing. They all operate under a single credo: treat patients in the
    order of the severity of their affliction and never let any other
    considerations--political, religious or otherwise--influence your
    commitment to saving lives. Hatzala represents the best of the Israeli
    people--all the Israeli people--and gives me a strong sense of optimism
    that peace will one day come to this region of conflict.
        As you know, our nation's support for Israel is longstanding,
    steadfast and strongly in our national interest. Israel provides
    critical intelligence support to the United States, cooperates
    extensively with the United States in military initiatives, and acts as
    an ``incubator'' for many cutting edge strategic projects. Most
    importantly, Israel shares America's values and is of enormous
    religious and cultural importance to tens of millions of Jews,
    Christians and Muslims. Because Israel is surrounded by hostile enemies
    and has no friend in the world like us, I share the President's view
    that, notwithstanding the inevitable disagreements that may arise
    between our two countries, there should never be any ``daylight''
    between the United States and Israel.
        If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, I will
    dedicate my mission to two things: 1) advancing the national interest
    of the United States in strengthening its relationship with Israel, and
    2) working tirelessly to bring peace and stability to the region. I
    will bring to this mission a deep understanding of Israel's history,
    culture, geography, commerce and politics, developed over a lifetime of
    study and at least 50 visits to this extraordinary country. I will
    bring to this mission a close relationship with the President and a
    demonstrated ability to carry out his directives and strategies.
    Finally, I will bring a negotiating skill-set developed over 35 years
    of resolving multi-lateral disputes involving complex transactions, an
    unshakeable commitment to advance our national interests, an ability to
    positively engage with the people of Israel and a working command of
    the Hebrew language. I approach the prospect of this engagement with
    unbridled excitement and optimism.
        Some of the language that I used during the highly charged
    presidential campaign that ended last November has come in for
    criticism--and rightfully so. While I maintain profound differences of
    opinion with some of my critics, I regret the use of such language and
    I want to assure you that I understand the important difference between
    a political contest and a diplomatic mission. Partisan rhetoric is
    rarely if ever appropriate in achieving diplomatic progress, especially
    in a sensitive and strife-torn region like the Middle East. From my
    perspective, the inflammatory rhetoric that accompanied the
    presidential campaign is entirely over, and, if I am confirmed, you
    should expect that my comments will be respectful and measured. If
    confirmed by the Senate, I also intend to faithfully observe the
    directions given me by the President and the Secretary of State,
    without regard to any personal opinion I may hold.
        Again, I would like to thank this committee for permitting me to
    appear today. I look forward to answering your questions and, if I am
    fortunate enough to be confirmed, I look forward to working with you to
    enhance our relationship with the State of Israel.

        The Chairman. Thank you for those comments. For the state
    of play, the vote has not yet gone off, and we will just
    continue with questions----
        [Disturbance in hearing room.]
        The Chairman  [continuing]. So we will begin questioning
    with Senator Cardin, and if Senator Barrasso comes back, he is
    next. If not, it will be Senator Risch.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Friedman, you and I have something very much in common.
    Our parents were proud Zionists, worked everything they could
    in order to strengthen the support for the State of Israel and
    the values that it stood for and stands for.
        But my parents also taught me that words have consequences.
    My father, who, a blessed memory, was a circuit court judge,
    served as president of our synagogue, which he told me was the
    toughest position he ever held, and taught me how to just
    respect different views and to do that in an effective way.
        So I am having difficulty understanding the language that
    you have used. You have sort of justified that in your comments
    here that it was part of a campaign. These were written
    statements. But in some cases they go back before the campaign.
    I am specifically referring to your comments about the
    Democratic leader in the Senate and his motivation in regards
    to the Iran nuclear agreement and how he came about his
    decision-making during that very difficult time.
        As a person who struggled with that decision, I know the
    deliberations that Senator Schumer went through. I know the
    deliberations that I went through and all Members went through.
    It was a tough decision.
        So I am having difficulty understanding your use of that--
    of those descriptions and whether you can be a diplomat because
    a diplomat has to choose every word that he or she uses. So why
    should I believe that these were just emotional expressions and
    that you now understand the difference between that role and
    that as a diplomat?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, Senator, I provided some context for my
    remarks, but that was not in the nature of an excuse. There is
    no excuse. I will--if you want me to rationalize it or justify
    it, I cannot. These were hurtful words and I deeply regret
    them. They are not reflective of my nature or my character. And
    I will tell you that for many, many years I have been involved
    in some of the most difficult, contentious, highly personal
    disputes that one can imagine, albeit in a commercial context,
    and I have dealt with judges and government officials, and over
    a lengthy period, no one has ever found me to be unable to
    control my temperament or my rhetoric.
        The Iran deal was something I felt passionately about. I
    was concerned that the United States was embarking upon a deal
    that presented an existential risk to Israel and potentially a
    significant risk to our great country as well. I do not--I did
    not have access to all the classified information that the
    members of the Senate have, but from my perspective as a
    private citizen, I felt it was important to speak out. And I
    did so, again, in a private manner. Those are my private
    opinions. They will be left in New York if I am privileged
    enough to travel to the State of Israel for this mission.
        Senator Cardin. So just to put this in context and then I
    am going to move on to the second issue I want to talk about,
    you are accusing the Democratic leader of ``validating the
    worst appeasements of terrorism since Munich.'' Those words
    just are beyond hurtful. They are--Senator Schumer is one of
    the champions on these causes. Anyway, let me move on to the
    two-state solution.
        We had a chance to talk in my office. We know the
    demographics. We also understand the geographical area of a
    viable Palestinian state. We know--we do not know exactly where
    those lines will be but we have an idea. We both agree that
    that must be negotiated directly between the Palestinians and
    Israelis. No third party can dictate those terms. We are in
    total agreement that that will be a decision made by the
    Israelis and the Palestinians.
        But we also know the geographical areas that are likely to
    be part of those discussions, and settlements in areas that are
    outside of that generally accepted area has been perceived by
    America as being less than helpful in the debate. You of course
    have been involved in supporting settlements and in
    conversations that seem to imply that the two-state solution is
    no longer a viable option. What do you mean by that?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, if the Israelis and the Palestinians
    were able, through direct negotiations, to achieve a two-state
    solution along parameters agreeable to them--and the Prime
    Minister of Israel yesterday outlined some of them--I would be
    delighted. I would be delighted to see peace come to this
    region where people have suffered on both sides for so long.
        I have expressed my skepticism about the two-state solution
    solely on the basis of what I have perceived as an
    unwillingness on the part of the Palestinians to renounce
    terror and accept Israel as a Jewish state. I think that, in my
    view, is a foundational problem, but I think it can be
    remedied, and I hope it is.
        Senator Cardin. I do not think anyone would disagree with
    that statement. The prerequisite of a two-state solution is
    that there is a Jewish state that is recognized by its neighbor
    and no longer can there be the cry that it is not legitimate. I
    mean, I think that is--I think we all agree on that. I am not
    sure that is responsive to the concerns that I have.
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, again, I would be delighted if a
    two-state solution could be achieved. The two-state solution,
    as you know, began to take form in 1993 with the Oslo Accords.
    One of the primary commitments of those accords was Chairman
    Arafat's commitment to end incitement and to begin to educate
    his people to stop hatred. And we have not made progress since
    then. And in the aftermath of Oslo, terrorism has increased
    fourfold since before Oslo.
        I do not think you and I disagree. I think that we both
    support Israel, we both love this country, and we both want
    peace. And I--frankly, I think that there is more that we have
    in common than divides us. I do want to see peace in the
    region, and I do believe that a two-state solution, if it could
    be achieved, would bring tremendous benefits to both the
    Israelis and the Palestinians.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. I think because of the type of hearing I see
    this developing into, we will have seven minutes on the clock
    for a round. And I know you just took seven, so I will let
    you----
        Senator Cardin. I would have taken nine if----
        The Chairman [continuing]. Bertie, if you would--I
    understand that so that is why I waited. But put seven minutes
    on the clock if you will.
        Senator Risch.
        Senator Risch. Well, thank you very much.
        Mr. Friedman, thank you for your willingness to take on
    what is obviously going to be a difficult struggle, as it
    always has been in recent years.
        Let me try to drill down a little bit in one of the
    concerns that I have. All of us sit and think about how if
    there is indeed a solution, if a solution is even possible, how
    do you get there? And the problem I see or one of the many,
    many problems that I see is kind of foundational to the whole
    thing, and that is who you are negotiating with. I mean, it
    seems to me that Palestinian Authority and Hamas are deeply
    divided and deeply polarized. And how do you accomplish that
    when you are supposed to be dealing with a single entity that
    can make a deal that everybody is willing to live with? Because
    the deal is not going to work unless the majority, the vast
    majority of the people on each side are in agreement and
    committed to make it work. So how--what are your thoughts on
    that? I understand it is getting a little bit in the weeds, but
    to me it is really foundational to how you get to the end.
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I think you have identified the
    gating problem, and it is an extraordinary challenge. And if--I
    think if we did not have that problem, this would have been
    settled already. Hamas is a terrorist organization. They seek
    the destruction of the State of Israel, the entire State of
    Israel. Their issues are not settlements; their issues are the
    existence of Israel. They control the Gaza Strip, and I do not
    know who would control the West Bank if there were elections
    tomorrow.
        I think that from--I do not have a good answer to making
    peace with an entity controlled by Hamas. I do believe that the
    future needs to begin with greater efforts to empower and to
    some extent to create a Palestinian middle class. Gaza is
    ungovernable. It has a 30 percent or higher unemployment rate.
    Until that changes, I do not think we will be able to uproot
    Hamas from the Gaza Strip. And so I am--my approach has been
    and if asked by the President, it is--I am not here to make
    policy, but if asked by the President, I would recommend
    deepening the efforts, along with our allies in the Gulf and
    Israel's neighbors to work harder on empowering the economic
    opportunities for the Palestinian people, who I believe are
    being held hostage by a ruthless regime.
        Senator Risch. You know, I appreciate that. And that
    observation seems to be very legitimate in that the Gaza Strip
    and the West Bank seem like worlds apart as far as economic
    opportunity and for that matter as far as just culture. And,
    again, I do not know how you get those--how you bring those
    together to get where you need to be, but I wish you well in
    that. And I think we will all be watching to see how that works
    out. But it is--and those--that may very well be out of
    everyone's control except the Palestinians themselves.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I think what we will do is instead
    of having a roving--I know people want to hear the answers to
    these questions. We are going to recess. We have a vote, and
    unfortunately, there is a 10-minute debate period in between
    and then another vote. If everybody would just come back
    promptly after the second vote, so you may want to come back
    into the back, Mr. Friedman, or do whatever, but we are going
    to recess until that time. Thank you. [Recess.]
        The Chairman. First of all, we are back in session. And in
    order to move on with it, Senator Udall, if you would--since
    you are ready, we will move on to you and thank you.
        Senator Udall. Thank you very much. And I appreciate the
    hearing.
        And, first of all, I would like to just put in the record
    the letter from the five Ambassadors if it has not already been
    put in the record, bipartisan group of Ambassadors that say
    that Mr. Friedman is unfit to be Ambassador. So I would----
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        Senator Udall [continuing]. I would do that.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 61.]

        Senator Udall. And I am going to agree with much of what
    they said. I am strongly opposed to this nominee. I believe
    Secretary Tillerson and President Trump should recognize that
    Mr. Friedman is completely unfit for this or any other
    diplomatic office and withdraw him immediately.
        If not, I strongly recommend that this committee not
    recommend him for confirmation. Mr. Friedman does not represent
    American values in the region. That is evident from his past
    statements, and they are not random off-the-cuff remarks. Much
    of his offensive, inflammatory, and insulting rhetoric has been
    reported in the newspapers and repeated over and over. He has
    called for an arbitrary ban on many Muslims entering the
    country. Mr. Friedman has stated that Muslims should submit
    internet and telecommunications activity for inspection, and he
    has said, and I quote, ``No need to worry about the First
    Amendment.'' And he has also said the ``the rights of free
    speech do not apply'' to Muslims attempting to enter our
    country.
        Mr. Chairman and colleagues, just last week, the Republican
    majority chose to censure a colleague under Senate Rule 19 for
    imputing bad conduct to a Senator. Well, if we truly care
    whether Senators are maligned, we should look at Mr. Friedman's
    words, which I think have been mentioned earlier by Mr. Cardin,
    and I agree with him in his opening talking about him rejecting
    these comments.
        But he has insulted and denigrated members of the Senate,
    including Senator Schumer and Senator Franken. Mr. Friedman
    said, and I quote, ``No matter how we ultimately vote--no
    matter how he ultimately votes, by making his decision such a
    close call, which it plainly should not be, Schumer is
    violating the worst--is validating the worst appeasement of
    terrorism since Munich,'' end quote.
        When the Anti-Defamation League and Senator Franken
    criticized the Trump campaign ad as being anti-Semitic, he
    said, and I quote, ``I do not see how anybody can take the
    Anti-Defamation League seriously going forward. This is what
    happens when people take these insane arguments to their
    logical extension. They lose all credibility, and frankly, they
    sound like morons,'' end quote.
        He has slandered President Obama and his administration.
    And I quote, ``The blatant anti-Semitism emanating from our
    President and his sycophantic minions is palpable and very
    disturbing.''
        He has denigrated Secretary Clinton's personal views on
    Israel. And I quote, ``I do not think she particularly likes
    Israel.''
        Responded--responding to President Obama and Secretary
    Kerry's condemnations of violence in Israel, he said, and I
    quote, engaging in ``blatant anti-Semitism,'' end quote.
        I think we can all detect a pattern here. Anyone who
    disagrees with his extreme views or approach to Israel is an
    anti-Semite. For the record, Mr. Friedman has also said that
    liberal Jews, and I quote, ``suffer a cognitive disconnect in
    identifying good and evil,'' end quote. By these words, he
    disrespects many in the Jewish community, including my home
    State of New Mexico, which I have had many calls from New
    Mexico urging that we reject this nomination.
        Such divisive and hateful comments against any who disagree
    with him on--are--is unbecoming of an ambassador to any
    country. It is clear that Mr. Friedman's appointment would
    represent a profound break with decades of U.S. foreign policy
    supporting a two-state solution and resisting illegal
    settlements that make such a solution more remote. President
    Reagan said that settlement activity was, and I quote, ``no way
    necessary for the security of Israel and only diminishes the
    confidence of Arabs that a final outcome can be freely and
    fairly negotiated,'' end quote. I wonder, were President Reagan
    here today, would Mr. Friedman label him anti-Semitic?
        Mr. Friedman is profoundly unfit to lead members of the
    State Department. He accuses many of them of being, quote,
    ``over 100 years of anti-Semitism,'' end quote. I say this as a
    friend of Israel, who has always supported military aid to
    defend her borders. If we confirm him, we are running a
    dangerous risk that Mr. Friedman will inflame a volatile
    situation and inflame other foreign governments in the region.
    We need a steady hand in the Middle East, not a bomb-thrower in
    a position of high power and responsibility.
        One final note: Sometimes Mr. Friedman does not stop at
    merely name-calling those who disagree with him as anti-
    Semitic. He wrote in an article in 2015, and I quote here, ``J
    Street supporters are far worse than kapos, Jews who turned in
    their fellow Jews in the Nazi death camps. They are just smug
    advocates of Israeli--Israel's destruction delivered from the
    comfort of their secure American sofas. It is hard to imagine
    anyone worse,'' end quote. That statement--in a written
    article, not in off-the-cuff remarks--demonstrates his complete
    and total unfitness for this extremely important office.
        Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter all the source
    documents for all of these quotes into the official hearing
    record.
        The Chairman. Without objection.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 63.]

        Senator Udall. Thank you.
        If the majority wants to jam through all of the
    President's--President Trump's diplomatic nominees, they
    probably can. But I urge them to caucus in private and talk to
    the President's team to see if we can move in a different
    direction.
        Mr. Friedman, have you ever issued a public apology for any
    of your insulting comments regarding other's views on Israel
    and Middle Eastern issues? And will you today reject those
    comments here?
        Mr. Friedman. I reject the----
        Senator Udall. Could you turn on your microphone, please,
    sir?
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. Yes, Senator. I have and will
    continue to reject the inflammatory comments. I have reached
    out over the last several months to a number of people who have
    been hurt by the things I have said or have communicated to me
    that they would like to speak with me. It includes the head of
    the Union of American Reform Rabbis. It includes members of the
    New York Board of Rabbis. It includes a personal meeting with
    Senator Franken. It includes a telephone called followed up by
    emails with Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League.
    In at least the latter two cases the apologies were fully
    accepted, and I expect ongoing--on an ongoing basis those
    relationships and others will be inclusive and respectful.
        Senator Udall. Now, I also would like to ask--I know my
    time is out and I will submit questions for the record. But you
    have invested massively in the settlement movement, and so I
    would like you for the record to answer in writing whether you
    have separated your financial interests from that of Beit El
    and all other settlements you have an interest in and have done
    so. And I appreciate very much the chairman's courtesies in
    allowing me to run over a little bit. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Absolutely. I do not know if that is a yes or
    no answer, so I do not know if you want to.
        Mr. Friedman. I will be happy to submit answers to all of
    your questions, Senator.
        Senator Udall. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 53.]

        The Chairman. Senator Portman.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I appreciate the opportunity to hear you respond to
    some of those allegations. And you use the word reject. I think
    you regret perhaps also some of those comments it sounds like,
    not to put words in your mouth but that is----
        Mr. Friedman. I do. I do, Senator.
        Senator Portman [continuing]. That is what I sense from
    today, including your prepared remarks. You could have no
    better advocate than Joe Lieberman, and he does have enormous
    respect on both sides of the aisle and he knows you as a friend
    and as a colleague. And so you are smart to have brought him
    with you today. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        Senator Portman. Graham I will not talk about. [Laughter.]
        Senator Portman. Just kidding. He is fine, too. [Laughter.]
        Senator Portman. But I do have concerns. You know, this is
    not a typical ambassadorship. I mean, it is--having been to
    Israel a number of times and met with our Ambassador there, let
    us be frank. In a lot of countries of the world it does not
    matter that much who the Ambassador is. The State Department
    has taken a bigger and bigger role over the last several
    decades in foreign policy and even the White House, you know,
    plays a big role in certain countries. But this is a really
    important one, and that person on the ground, developing those
    relationships I think is critical for two reasons. One, we do
    have a lot of divergent points of view here, as you can see. We
    all are very supportive of Israel I think it is fair to say. I
    hope that is true.
        But there are different approaches to the policy issue, so
    an ambassador has to be able to bring all these different
    points of view together and provide counsel to our President
    and to our Secretary of State and others, National Security
    Advisor. You will get a lot of visitors, assuming you are
    confirmed, from this body but also from around the world, and
    so it is a very important role in terms of taking all these
    different points of view.
        And so one of my questions for you is do you think you are
    capable of doing that, you know, listening to all points of
    view and being in some respects a broker, you know, of those
    points of view to describe to our administration as to the best
    approach forward?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, thank you. And yes, I do think I can
    do that. I think that bipartisanship has always been the
    hallmark of America's support for Israel. And--I am sorry. As I
    have commented occasionally to several of the Senators I have
    had the privilege to meet, I want to do everything I can to
    work with the Members of Congress to build upon what is, I
    think, much more that unites us than divides us on the State of
    Israel. There are obviously divergent views, and I think all
    those views need to be considered. And I think they are all
    made in good faith. And if I am confirmed, it will be a high
    priority of mine to synthesize and to the extent possible
    harmonize the views of the Congress and also to do the same in
    Israel because, as divided as the United States is, the State
    of Israel is just as divided. And their governing system is
    very challenging.
        Senator Portman. Mr. Friedman, let me continue. The second
    role that I was going to mention is the one that you are sort
    of suggesting now, which is--my sense is the Ambassador to
    Israel typically has been someone who has a personal
    relationship with the leadership there and not just the Prime
    Minister but also members of the cabinet and members of the
    opposition parties because, as you say, it is pretty diverse
    and sometimes a little chaotic in their Parliament, but you
    have to have those relationships. And so my question to you is
    do you think you can be effective there? And, specifically, how
    would you go about representing the United States of America?
    Would you be interested in more public comments? Some
    Ambassadors have taken that route. Or would this be more
    private conversations? And do you feel as though you have
    relationships in the country beyond the coalition government,
    beyond the existing parties that are in power to be able to
    perform that role?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, Senator, on the issue of public
    comments or private, I happen to believe that with regard to
    the State of Israel discretion is incredibly important. And I
    think public comments can be self-defeating. The--as you saw
    yesterday, people hang on every word that is issued on this
    subject, whether or not the speaker intended that or not. I
    think you have to be careful. I think the--if there is progress
    to be made in the Middle East in the peace process, it is
    through private diplomacy, through forging agreements and
    coalitions and common interests behind the scenes. And I think
    that is important.
        I do understand well the center, the left, and the right of
    the Israeli Knesset. They are all good people. Many of them
    have sacrificed--I think they have all sacrificed for their
    country. Many of them have paid the ultimate sacrifice through
    the loss of loved ones for their country. You know, people on
    the left who have lost their families continue to maintain
    positions on the left with--and they are entitled to do so and
    they should do so.
        So it is hard to bring that together, but ultimately, this
    is a Rubik's Cube, and there is a lot of pieces that have to
    come together. And I do think I know the issues, I know the
    players, and I do think I have worked in an albeit much less
    complicated capacity, but I have worked to develop the skill
    set that I think will be complementary to that task.
        Senator Portman. In your law practice?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Portman. Yes. One specific issue that I want to
    raise is BDS, boycotts, divestments, and sanctions. And I think
    the Ambassador to Israel will have to be someone who is a
    spokesperson for the U.S. point of view on this and will have
    the ability, I hope, to be able to communicate to the rest of
    the world what it means, for instance, to have sanctions or
    boycotts with regard to the West Bank. What would that mean in
    terms of Israel? What does it mean in terms of the
    Palestinians?
        Mr. Friedman. Sure.
        Senator Portman. Golan is the other issue that has now, as
    you know, become part of BDS in some forms. So what are your
    views on BDS? Ben Cardin and I got legislation passed. We are
    looking at additional legislation. The Congress is on record
    now on this issue. We want to do more. But just talk to us a
    little how you think as an ambassador to Israel you can be an
    effective communicator on the BDS issue and pushing back,
    combatting this what is, I think, a global effort now that
    needs strong support from the United States to combat it.
        Mr. Friedman. Well, I will be a fierce advocate against the
    BDS movement, as I understand, Ambassador Haley has committed
    to do as well. I look at the example of SodaStream. I do not
    know if you are familiar with that company, but SodaStream was
    a--is--was an extraordinarily successful company that employed
    hundreds of Palestinians and hundreds of Israelis and paid them
    all the same wages and gave them the same benefits and it was a
    paradigm of Israelis and Palestinians working together. And
    because SodaStream happened to be on the wrong side of the
    green line, they were boycotted throughout the world and had to
    move, so they moved to the Negev and the Palestinians lost
    their jobs. This is an entirely self-defeating prospect not
    only for Israel but for the Palestinians as well.
        Senator Portman. My time is expired. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr.
    Friedman, and welcome.
        I just want to talk about one thing, and that was the press
    conference yesterday between Prime Minister Netanyahu and
    President Trump. U.S. policy since resolution 181 in 1947 has
    been to support--and this is in the words of the resolution
    itself--``a partition of the area previously known as Palestine
    into two states, a Jewish state and an Arab state.'' And the
    idea of the two states has been the cornerstone of American
    foreign policy and reaffirmed often by the U.S., Palestinians,
    and Israel since the Oslo Accords in 1993 and 1995.
        Yesterday, President Trump signaled potentially a new
    direction, and I just want to quote him. And I am just going
    to--I really want to talk to you about exactly what he said,
    not editorializing about it, just what he said. Quote, ``I am
    looking at two-state and one-state formulations. I like the one
    that both parties like. I am very happy with the one both
    parties like. I can live with either one.'' As I read that, I
    assumed that ``both parties'' mean Israel and Palestine or
    Israelis and Palestinians more broadly. Is that how you
    understood that comment?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, and I watched that from my iPhone with
    keen interest. I was not involved in the meeting with the Prime
    Minister or the leadup to it or the follow-up, so I am relying
    upon what I saw as well as you. But, yes, I heard it that way.
    It was whatever the Palestinians and the Israelis agree upon.
        Senator Kaine. And I think this is something that would get
    near unanimous view up here. U.S. policy should be to support a
    resolution that both parties like, but if either or both
    parties do not accept it, then the U.S. should not support that
    policy. Is that fair?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, I could not speculate on the policy
    that might not gain, you know, bilateral support. Certainly, it
    has been the policy of this country for generations to foster
    direct negotiations and to help bring those to a conclusion.
        Senator Kaine. But would you agree with the general thrust
    of the President's statement that ``I like the one that both
    parties like''?
        Mr. Friedman. Certainly.
        Senator Kaine. Regarding a two-state solution, Israel would
    not like--would not accept any formulation where a neighboring
    Palestine refused to recognize it as the Jewish state
    contemplated by resolution 181. Is that fair to say?
        Mr. Friedman. I think so.
        Senator Kaine. And Israel would not like any formulation
    where a neighboring Palestine refused to treat it peacefully
    and live with it as a peaceful neighbor. Do you agree with
    that?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Kaine. So based on the President's statement, if
    Israel did not like a two-state proposal for one of those two
    reasons, then the U.S. could not support it based on this ``I
    support something that both sides like''?
        Mr. Friedman. Again, that--the U.S. could not support--I
    think I would have to know more about what exactly the U.S. was
    being presented with.
        Senator Kaine. But you would not expect the U.S. to support
    a two-state deal where there was not a pledge to recognize
    Israel's right to exist or Israel's security?
        Mr. Friedman. No, Israel is one of our strongest allies,
    and I think we owe it no less.
        Senator Kaine. So let me now switch over to the one-state
    formulation. Palestinians would not like any one-state solution
    where they would be evacuated or forced to lose their land,
    would they?
        Mr. Friedman. I would not think so.
        Senator Kaine. And Palestinians would not like any one-
    state solution unless they had full and equal legal rights in
    such a state, correct?
        Mr. Friedman. I do not think anyone would ever support a
    state where different classes of citizens had separate rights.
        Senator Kaine. And I think you and I agree on that. In
    fact, we talked in my office yesterday. Not only would the U.S.
    not be able to accept a situation where people were consigned
    to a second-class status, but from my, you know, somewhat
    limited experience in Israel and your dramatically greater
    experience, the Israelis I know--I do not believe the majority
    of them would accept a one-state solution where Palestinians
    were consigned to a second-class legal status.
        Mr. Friedman. I do not know Israelis even on the right
    who--even on the far right who would support that. It is an
    untenable and immoral construct.
        Senator Kaine. So based on the President's formulation
    yesterday, one-state solution would only be acceptable if
    Palestinians accepted it, and Palestinians are not going to
    accept it if they are treated as second-class citizens in that
    one-state formulation.
        Mr. Friedman. I agree.
        Senator Kaine. So now just let me summarize. Based on the
    President's theory and his words, that we cannot support any
    formulation--we can support any formulation that makes both
    sides happy. The U.S. could never accept--talking about U.S.
    policy now, not Israeli or Palestinian policy. The U.S. could
    never support a two-state solution if it did not require full
    recognition of Israel as the Jewish state contemplated by the
    resolution in 1947 and a commitment to live in peace with
    Israel. We could never support such a policy, correct?
        Mr. Friedman. Correct.
        Senator Kaine. And the U.S. could never support a one-state
    solution or indeed any solution where Palestinians are deprived
    of full and equal legal rights that are accorded to any other
    citizen, correct?
        Mr. Friedman. I think so.
        Senator Kaine. I do not have any other questions, Mr.
    Chair. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Sir.
        Senator Johnson.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Friedman, thank you for your willingness to serve.
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        Senator Johnson. Having done an awful lot of negotiating
    myself, you have to sit down at a negotiating table with people
    and negotiate in good faith. And I can think the fundamental
    problem here is that you have the other side, Palestinians,
    just refusing to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Is that
    not basically the fundamental problem here?
        Mr. Friedman. It has been the problem for a generation.
        Senator Johnson. I want to talk a little bit about--you had
    mentioned in your testimony that Palestinians are being held
    hostage. In their education system for decades they have been
    teaching pretty vile things about Israelis and Jews, correct?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, they have.
        Senator Johnson. In Palestinian law they actually are
    rewarding terrorists, correct? And it is an increasing
    incentive based on the number of people terrorists have
    murdered, is that not correct?
        Mr. Friedman. Exactly true.
        Senator Johnson. So is it really true that a majority of
    Palestinians are being held hostage and would really like a
    peaceful coexistence with the Israeli State?
        Mr. Friedman. I believe the majority of Palestinians would
    like peaceful coexistence.
        Senator Johnson. Okay. I hope that is true.
        To what extent should America continue to provide foreign
    aid to the Palestinian Authority when they are teaching their
    young children the vile things they teach, when they are
    incentivizing Palestinian terrorists to continue to murder
    Jews?
        Mr. Friedman. I think it is an important question for
    Congress to consider. We cannot continue to incentivize this
    behavior. It is entirely self-defeating to the Palestinians, to
    Israel, to the entire world. And I understand Congress is
    looking at this, and I certainly applaud that effort.
        Senator Johnson. Do you know what the new administration's
    position is going to be on that? Are we going to continue to
    provide that foreign aid unless--or are we going to condition
    foreign aid on certainly their not teaching these things, not
    providing those types of incentives?
        Mr. Friedman. I do not know if the administration has
    formed a specific position on it, but I would be delighted to
    find out and get back to you, Senator.
        Senator Johnson. In 1981 in the Golan Heights I think
    Israel recognized that it just was not working to have
    different rules of law apply, kind of to Senator Kaine's
    question here. There--for those Syrian citizens at Golan
    Heights they needed some certainty, so Israel decided to take
    the measure to apply Israeli law in the Golan Heights. Can you
    speak a little bit to what happened there and what the effect
    has been?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, I think the Golan Heights is an
    incredibly important strategic area for Israel. One can only
    imagine what Israel would be--how Israel would be suffering now
    if it did not have the Golan Heights and the Golan Heights were
    occupied by ISIS. The Golan Heights is not an area of conflict.
    I mean, I am not saying there may not--there may be some
    conflicts, but my experience I think it worked out quite well.
        Senator Johnson. I do not want to speak for Syrians living
    in the Golan Heights, but I think if I were a Syrian, I would
    rather be living in the Golan Heights right now than, let us
    say, Aleppo.
        Mr. Friedman. I am sure that is true.
        Senator Johnson. One of the questions I have asked some
    European representatives is if they had to move their family to
    the Middle East, could choose any country in the Middle East,
    where would they choose to locate their family? I can tell you
    my answer on that. I choose Israel. That is my final question.
    Thanks.
        The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Coons. Well, thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking
    Member Cardin, for holding this important confirmation hearing.
    And thank you, Mr. Friedman----
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Coons [continuing]. For your willingness to serve
    the U.S. Government and the America people.
        We had a constructive--pointed but constructive, I thought,
    conversation yesterday, and I am going to make an opening
    statement and then ask a few questions.
        You are well-known to the Delaware bar, and I will
    stipulate for the record at the outset that your legal skills
    are widely and well-respected. And as many of my colleagues
    have asked questions around this, that is really not the
    central concern raised by former Ambassadors, raised in this
    hearing. It is not whether you are skilled at reaching complex
    legal resolutions but whether your intemperate previous
    statements should suggest to us that in a unique circumstance
    with a President unskilled in diplomacy and inclined towards
    inflammatory tweets, that your temperament is appropriate for
    this critically important post. So that is sort of, I think,
    our central question today.
        Let me first say that one of my core concerns, as we
    discussed, is that the vital alliance between the United States
    and Israel should not be sacrificed on the altar of partisan
    politics. And as a strong supporter of Israel, I have long
    believed that bipartisanship in support of Israel advances our
    nation's interest, Israel's interests, and is the best path
    towards peace in the world.
        But I am gravely concerned that political forces in the
    United States and in Israel are pulling officials away from a
    sensible middle ground and towards increasingly extreme
    positions on the left and right. And at a time of real division
    in both our nations, I think it is important that this Congress
    act in a way that reaffirms our bipartisan commitment to
    Israel.
        We share a lot of interests. We have a great deal at stake.
    Iran continues to threaten Israel and American interests,
    continues to destabilize the broader Middle East, terrorist
    groups like ISIS, Hamas, and Hezbollah jeopardize the safety
    and security of too many Americans, Israelis, and Arabs. And on
    these and many other issues Israel is a vital partner for the
    United States. Much of the media coverage surround our
    relationship focuses on shared challenges, but recent successes
    should not go unnoticed.
        We discussed the 10-year MOU and the $38 billion of support
    that is the largest U.S. aid package ever and something for
    which I think President Obama deserves real credit. Israel
    officials with whom I meet regularly, including most recently
    Defense Minister Lieberman, say that our security cooperation
    intelligence-sharing has never been stronger. But I worry that
    with so much to gain by further cooperation, we are allowing
    actions and rhetoric by hardliners, both hardliners in Israel
    and extremist Palestinians and statements by American
    politicians are driving us further apart.
        So I think it is critical for there to be progress towards
    the long-hoped-for two-state solution for Palestinians to give
    an unequivocal recognition of Israel's right to exist as a
    Jewish state and to stop incitement and to direct their efforts
    towards sorting out their leadership in a plan for peace, but
    both sides have to consider the extent to which their words and
    actions contribute to these dangerous divisions that exist and
    continue to grow. And I am concerned that both sides need to
    listen to each other and will have to make real sacrifices to
    come together for a lasting peace.
        As we discussed, demographic challenges facing Israel in my
    view are real and inevitable and put real pressures on the
    possibility of a Jewish democratic state in the long run, but
    that is not our only challenge.
        I was concerned and disappointed that President Trump did
    not explicitly support a two-state solution in his remarks
    yesterday, something that for decades has been a fundamental
    pillar of bipartisan support for Israel. And as Senator Kaine's
    questioning and your responses a few minutes ago suggested it
    is very difficult to articulate a rational plan or a framework
    in which Palestinians would accept the sort of status required
    for a one-state solution to have any viability.
        Tomorrow, I will be meeting with a wide range of
    representatives of the Jewish community in my home State, and
    many of them have expressed concern, given previous statements
    you have made that were intemperate or even insulting about
    whether as Ambassador they would be welcome, valued in the U.S.
    Embassy in Israel. And I am concerned that successful diplomacy
    means considering the consequences of our rhetoric and our
    behavior.
        So, Mr. Friedman, my central question really is do you
    believe that in the role of Ambassador if confirmed that you
    can act in a way that welcomes and celebrates and validates the
    entire American pro-Israel and Jewish community in a way that
    really advances and sustains bipartisan support for Israel and
    in a way that steers the Trump administration and its agenda in
    the Middle East towards peace and away from division and
    partisanship?
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you, Senator, for that question. The
    answer--the short answer is yes. I think it is extraordinarily
    important, as we discussed yesterday, to cause the issue of
    Israel to not be a political football. It never has been in the
    past. I am--I am not--I am certainly not immune from criticism.
    I deserve the criticism and I have probably contributed to the
    problem, but many people in the Jewish community and the pro-
    Israel community have become more partisan, more separated
    when, at the end of the day, as I said earlier, they all
    support Israel, they all love this country, and they all want
    peace. And I think on those common footings it is important to
    reunite the pro-Israel community. And I will pledge to you that
    I will do everything I can to do that, and I will be inclusive
    and respectful of different views. And if I am fortunate enough
    to be confirmed, I will solicit and very seriously consider all
    the views of people who in good faith want to strengthen the
    bond of the United States and Israel.
        Senator Coons. I appreciate that. I cannot remember a
    previous confirmation hearing for an ambassador that was
    interrupted repeatedly by protests. Clearly the campaign, the
    rhetoric of the campaign, the explosive environment in the
    Middle East, the longstanding deep divisions within Israel and
    in the region between Israelis and Palestinians and the
    regional adversaries excites very intense passions. And your
    statements have been intemperate and in many cases
    inappropriate and insulting, and that has been a subject of
    great back-and-forth today.
        Let me ask, if I might, just two simple and concrete
    questions. Do you support or will you advocate for Israeli
    annexation of the West Bank or of land in the West Bank?
        Mr. Friedman. I will not.
        Senator Coons. And do you believe a two-state solution is
    the most ideal path towards peace?
        Mr. Friedman. I think it is the most ideal. I think it is
    the path that has received the most thought and effort and
    consideration. Obviously, it has been tried for a long, long
    time and we continue to wrestle with it. Smarter--much smarter
    people than me have tried to make progress and have failed but
    it still remains, I believe, the best possibility for peace in
    the region.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Friedman. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Young.
        Senator Young. Mr. Friedman, I enjoyed our time together in
    the office. We spent roughly an hour talking about a full range
    of topics pertaining to U.S.-Israel relationship and more
    broadly the lack of stability in the Middle East, our national
    security, and so on. I think I shared with you that I was a
    Marine Corps intelligence officer in a prior life, and my role
    was to serve with a unit that flew around drones, which were
    jointly developed with the State of Israel. I came to
    appreciate through that experience the importance of
    information-sharing between our two countries and also
    technology development. And during my recent years as a Member
    of Congress, I have also come to appreciate the importance of
    military aid in arms sales.
        Israel and the U.S., we both understand, confront common
    threats and we have shared ideals. And our military cooperation
    benefits both countries. So I just need public reassurance here
    that, if confirmed as Ambassador to Israel, would you do all
    you can to strengthen and deepen, even further these military-
    to-military efforts of cooperation between our countries?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I would do all I could to strengthen
    that. Whether on a strategic, technological, military basis, it
    has been a--it has been one of the great success stories of the
    relationship and I think very much benefiting both countries,
    and I will do everything I can to continue to improve and
    strengthen that level of cooperation.
        Senator Young. Sure. Well, that is encouraging. Closer to
    home, we have been doing our part in the State of Indiana. The
    Indiana National Guard has a longstanding relationship with the
    Israel Defense Forces since at least 2010, our Guard has joined
    counterparts from Israel in conducting combined training
    exercises. Our guardsmen have regularly traveled Israel from
    training. We have had training occur in Jerusalem, my home town
    of Bloomington, Indiana, various other sites, the Muscatatuck
    Urban Training Center, which I know the IDF has found
    particularly helpful in preparing for their own defense.
        In 2016, 65 Indiana National Guard soldiers participated in
    an operation known as United Front. It was a small unit
    exchange in Israel and conducted--they were search-and-rescue
    operations that were conducted there.
        So I just urge you to continue to seek more of these
    opportunities should you be confirmed as Ambassador, as I think
    is highly probable.
        I would like to turn briefly to the issue of the prospect
    of peace between the Palestinians and Israel. Do you believe an
    acceptable agreement can be reached between the Israeli
    Government and the Palestinians with Mahmoud Abbas at the helm?
        Mr. Friedman. I would hope so, Senator, but I think the
    challenges are daunting. I would point out that President Abbas
    refuses to accept Israel as a Jewish state. He has made that
    position quite clear. And obviously, as Senator Johnson noted,
    the Palestinian Authority, while undoubtedly preferable to
    Hamas and to their credit they have engaged with Israel very
    productively in security matters, but I still think they have
    positions that are inconsistent with lasting peace.
        Senator Young. So you have spoken to the challenges. Do you
    see a successor with whom we might be able to do business in a
    much easier fashion? And maybe you could speak to what is
    perceived by some to be a chaotic succession crisis occurring
    among Palestinian leaders?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, there is--there appears to be a crisis
    almost by definition when you have a President who has exceeded
    his elected term by I think it is seven or eight years now past
    his electoral mandate. I think--I hope that there are--that
    there is a new generation of Palestinians that wants the same
    thing that everybody wants, which is a better life, better
    opportunity for their children, and to live in peace. I would
    be--it would just seem obvious to me that they are out there,
    and I know some Palestinians who are just like everybody else.
    And I would venture that the vast majority just want what
    everybody in the world wants. And we have to do what we can to
    help foster both economically and politically the development
    of that political class and an accompanying middle class to try
    to draw out that type of leadership.
        Senator Young. Yesterday, as has been mentioned, Prime
    Minister Netanyahu laid out his two prerequisites for peace:
    recognition of a Jewish state and Israeli security control over
    the entire area west of the Jordan River. What is meant by
    security control over the entire area west of the Jordan River?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, this has been I think the Prime
    Minister's position since 2009. It is really the analog to the
    naval control with regard to Hamas. There is an extraordinary
    risk of weapons transfers in that area. If the Israelis did not
    block the flow into Gaza, there would be even more horrific
    weapons than there are now. And I think the Prime Minister is
    concerned of a comparable flow of weapons out of Jordan into a
    Palestinian state. And I think that, as has been explained to
    me, an Israeli red line in terms of their own security. I am
    not a security expert but I understand that is very important
    to the Prime Minister.
        Senator Young. This would likely require a perpetual
    presence of military forces on the ground in that area, though.
        Mr. Friedman. I think it would--I do not know how control
    would be achieved. Again, I am not an expert in that. But it
    would require some military control of the border, yes.
        Senator Young. Can you conceive of Palestinian leaders who
    would be amenable to this sort of situation?
        Mr. Friedman. Not today. I think that, ultimately, it would
    be in their interests as well to stop the flow of arms into a
    state that ideally should be demilitarized. So, again, if
    calmer voices prevail, it should not be a deal-breaker, but at
    this point, I think the answer is no.
        Senator Young. And lastly, what role might the Saudis and
    Emiratis play in moving forward, helping to advance a potential
    agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis?
        Mr. Friedman. I think the Saudis, the Emiratis, the
    Egyptians, the Jordanians, perhaps others, as we heard
    yesterday in the Prime Minister's speech, seem to be far more
    amenable to productive discussions than in the past. Israel
    does not seem to be the third rail that it once was with regard
    to these countries, and from what I heard at the press
    conference yesterday, just based upon what I heard, it would
    seem to me that that is a very productive avenue for future
    discussions.
        The Chairman. Before turning to Senator Booker, I think the
    Prime Minister has been really clear that when he talks about
    security in the West Bank, he is talking about ad infinitum,
    perpetual, forever military presence. So I do not think he has
    been equivocal on that. Do you agree with that?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        The Chairman. Senator Booker.
        Senator Booker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to thank you, first of all, for coming to my office
    yesterday. I really appreciated the respect you showed me, and
    I appreciated our conversation, especially to see the depth of
    your love for the State of Israel, something that I admire.
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        Senator Booker. I want to zone in, though, on some of the
    things that have already been said and discussed, but I have
    grave concerns about the volume and breadth of your past
    statements, as we discussed a bit in my office. You stated in
    your testimony that you regret some of this particular hurtful
    language that you used against not only President Obama but
    also Secretary Clinton, someone who spent her entire
    professional career in service, two people who have sent a
    considerable amount of their careers in service. You talked
    about President Obama as engaging in ``blatant anti-Semitism''
    and other words. You do not believe President Obama is an anti-
    Semite, do you?
        Mr. Friedman. Not at all, Senator. I do not believe that
    for a second. My only comment was I thought the language that
    the President used in--with regard to the Iran deal when he
    accused wealthy donors of making common cause with the Mullahs
    I thought that was--at least I perceived it to be something
    which was a historically anti-Jewish canard that----
        Senator Booker. Well, the comments you have about the--
    about President Obama were not just about that incident. You
    said it is ``blatant anti-Semitism,'' ``sycophantic missions.''
    But let us move on to Senator Kaine, who you just heard give a
    very thoughtful discussion about the State of Israel. You call
    him an Israel-basher. You do not believe Senator Kaine is an
    Israel-basher, do you?
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. No. I had a great meeting
    yesterday with Senator Kaine and learned a lot that I did not
    know about him, and I completely retract that statement. It was
    absolutely wrong.
        Senator Booker. And the comments go on about sitting
    Members of the United States Senate that you have made in the
    past. Secretary Clinton, former Senator Clinton, you talked
    about her having anti-Semitic sentiments, harboring anti-
    Semitic sentiments. Senator Schumer, as has been discussed
    before, one of the--again, someone who shares your depth of
    love for the State of Israel, it has been read already but you
    said ``No matter how he ultimately votes, by making the
    decision--such a close call, which is plainly it should not
    be''--and these words are very dramatic--``Senator Schumer is
    violating the worst appeasement of terrorism since Munich.''
    That obviously to me I try to find other Ambassadors for posts
    such as this as Israel who said such things that--you would
    agree that we are not just policy disagreements or not just the
    heat of a politician. Those are comments that actually demean
    the character of another human being. Would you agree that they
    were demeaning to the character of those individuals?
        Mr. Friedman. I tried to criticize the words rather than
    the person, but I can certainly understand how it extended to
    the character. It was not intentional, but I certainly
    understand that.
        Senator Booker. Sir, you and I both, from our family
    histories, know a lot about people demeaning folks. We know a
    lot about hate speech and hate words.
        Mr. Friedman. We do.
        Senator Booker. And we know that when people dismiss things
    as just words or, hey, it was just politics, that they are
    belittling actually the harm and the damage that can do to
    individuals and entire communities. You would agree with that?
        Mr. Friedman. I would.
        Senator Booker. You also attacked the State Department with
    a hundred-year history--you said, ``The State Department, with
    a hundred-year history of anti-Semitism, promotes the payoffs
    of corrupt Palestinians in exchange for their completely
    duplicitous agreements to support a two-state solution.'' You
    also said after--four months ago about--you gave a speech in
    which you referred to the State Department as ``The State
    Department has been anti-Semitic and anti-Israel for the past
    70 years.''
        The Ambassadors, Republican and Democrat, who wrote a
    letter that has already been entered in the record, but they
    really took issue with someone who is now going to be working
    with the State Department to cast such a broad net over the
    incredible professionals that work there who often put
    themselves in harm's way for this country, who make sacrifices
    for the family of resources. They write in one paragraph, ``Mr.
    Friedman has accused President Obama''--as we have already
    discussed--``and the entire State Department of anti-Semitism.
    He has propagated the false conspiracy theory that Hillary
    Clinton's advisor, Huma Abedin, has well-established ties to
    the Muslim Brother hood. He has referred to the Anti-Defamation
    League as morons. He has characterized supporters of J Street,
    a liberal Jewish organization, as kapos, the Jews who
    cooperated with the Nazis during the Holocaust.'' They say that
    ``These are extreme radical positions.''
        Words like kapos resonate with me in particular because
    they reflect words, again, that you and I both know personally
    from our family histories. How cruel, mean-spirited that kind
    of language is, you understand that, right?
        Mr. Friedman. I understand it, Senator, and in addition to
    understanding it, in the course of thousands of emails I
    received in response to those comments, I received an email
    from--I mean, some of those comments were unrepeatable, some
    were frightening, but a few of them were extraordinarily
    touching, one from a Holocaust survivor who wrote me and said
    that he survived the Holocaust, he loves Israel with all his
    heart. He disagreed with me on the best tactics to support
    Israel, but he felt that I had invalidated the good faith of
    his positions. And I can tell you, the last person in the world
    I would want to offend would be someone like that, and it has--
    it is something that I deeply regret.
        Senator Booker. So your past comments to me--and I
    understand that you are apologizing, but you and I both know
    the difference between apology and atonement, correct?
        Mr. Friedman. I think an apology might be the first step to
    atonement.
        Senator Booker. Yes, sir. You are looking to be in a
    position as a diplomat right now at a time where you are
    entering an area of the globe that is delicate to say the least
    in which there is tremendous passion and heart invested, in
    which my love and your love of the State of Israel often, as
    you said earlier in your testimony, a measured word the wrong
    way can have great ramifications.
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Booker. I have deep concerns with that history you
    have of uttering words, writing them, thoughtful ones and not
    understanding the ramifications even in the American context
    that those could have. I just want to ask and turn to another
    just simple question I asked you about the USAID programs going
    on in the West Bank. Do you have intention to visit the West
    Bank--should you be confirmed as Ambassador?
        Mr. Friedman. If the State Department rules are changed and
    I am permitted to do so.
        Senator Booker. I appreciate you recognizing that. Do you
    have intention of visiting the Temple Mount?
        Mr. Friedman. No, I never have visited. I have been to
    Israel countless times. I have never visited the Temple Mount.
        Senator Booker. Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for your
    allowance of going over my time. Thank you, sir.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Friedman, for being here, for your
    willingness to serve.
        Let me begin by saying that I find this whole process to be
    unreal. I mean, this sort of ordeal you are being put through
    to account for all these words, in particular given some of the
    groups that are ratcheting all this up. This group J Street
    that, for example, a few years ago invited the chief
    Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat to address their conference,
    a person who has justified the murder of Jews as self-defense,
    as a person they invited to speak at their conference. This is
    a group who has routinely attacked people who hold my views
    with content that I find to be a smear and, quite frankly, a
    mischaracterization of our positions.
        The second thing I think you are confronting--not in this
    hearing per se but writ large--is what I believe is the sort of
    existent orthodoxy among many of the people in the State
    Department and among the so-called smart people in American
    foreign policy that somehow the United States needs to be a
    fair and balanced arbiter in this situation that we are facing
    in the Middle East. I do not understand that view. I really do
    not. First of all, my view is that Israel is our strongest ally
    in the region. My view is that, in addition to a moral
    obligation that we have to protect the right of the Jewish
    people to a homeland, especially one founded in the aftermath
    of the Holocaust, they also happen to be the only pro-American,
    free-enterprise democracy in the region. That alone is reason
    enough to be strongly aligned to them.
        The second point I would make is that I find it startling
    is all these so-called professionals in the State Department
    and, again, among the foreign policy elite, are out there all
    the time--I very rarely hear them stand up and speak
    vociferously on the sorts of activities that are being
    conducted by some in the Palestinian leadership, yet they are
    never, never reluctant to step forward and lead the efforts to
    condemn Israel time and again. And this is what you are going
    to confront when you are confirmed in terms of some in the
    State Department.
        There is also this misconception that continues to be
    spread around in the letters and all this whole dialogue that
    is around this that you somehow have issued a wholesale
    rejection of the so-called two-state solution. I think you have
    already testified here today and you have said before, and
    others have said as well, that in a perfect and ideal world you
    would have two independent states, a Jewish state and a
    Palestinian state, peacefully side by side living with one
    another.
        The problem is there are significant impediments to that,
    perhaps the least of which is the existence of Jewish
    settlements in Judea and Samaria. For example, I would say that
    one of the biggest obstacles to that would be efforts by the
    previous administration to pressure Israel and to impose upon
    them a negotiated settlement outside the bounds of what the
    Jewish people and Israel support and what is in the interest of
    the nation of Israel.
        I would say a bigger impediment is the unwillingness of the
    leadership of the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel's
    right to exist as a Jewish state. And that is the key phrase,
    not just Israel's right to exist, but as the homeland for the
    Jewish people. That is a big impediment to a deal because how
    are you going to negotiate a peaceful coexistence with a
    neighbor who does not recognize your right to exist? What are
    you negotiating? The terms of your destruction? I think that is
    a much bigger impediment.
        Or how about the wholesale, systematic indoctrination of
    young Palestinians into a doctrine of hatred and justification
    for the killing and the murdering of Jews that begins sadly,
    tragically, and outrageously at a very young age? I think that
    is a pretty big impediment.
        You know what else is a big impediment? These international
    efforts to impose on Israel a negotiated solution along the
    terms that other countries think are appropriate. I think that
    is a bigger impediment.
        You know what else is a bigger impediment? The incitement
    of violence by leaders of the Palestinian Authority. And that
    is not widely reported because often--that does not make it
    into their English press releases, but when they go around
    justifying these attacks, when they dedicate monuments to so-
    called martyrs who are nothing but terrorists, when they spread
    ridiculous rumors about what the Israel Government is going to
    do on the Temple Mount or the Dome of the Rock, these things
    that incite violence.
        And so I view these things as bigger impediments than all
    the other things, and I think it is accurate to say that your
    position, it is not that you are opposed to this ideal outcome
    in which there would be two states but that you recognize that
    at this moment, given the circumstances that exist in the world
    today and in that region in particular, it is not likely to
    have that outcome.
        And hopefully, that will change. Hopefully, the
    Palestinians will have better leadership. Hopefully, they will
    be more prosperous. Hopefully, they will have an opportunity to
    grow their economy and their security, and maybe in 20 years,
    15 years, 5 years, sooner rather than later we all hope, there
    will be the opportunity for this to occur. But right now, those
    conditions are perhaps not in place, and the worst thing we can
    try to do is to go in there and impose on our most loyal and
    important ally in the region a deal that is bad for their
    security and bad for their future.
        Is that an accurate characterization of your feelings with
    regards to the two-state solution?
        Mr. Friedman. I think it is, Senator.
        Senator Rubio. Let me just say, Mr. Chairman, I do want to
    enter into the record a letter from the Union of Orthodox
    Jewish Congregations of America.
        The Chairman. Without objection.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 59.]

        Senator Rubio. One last point that--as an ambassador, at
    the end of the day your role will be to represent, advocate
    for, and implement the policy of the President, is that
    correct?
        Mr. Friedman. One hundred percent correct.
        Senator Rubio. And so on any issue, whether it is the
    location of the Embassy, whether it is our position on any
    given matter, it is your job ultimately to be an advocate for
    the decisions made from the Oval Office and by this
    administration, not your personal views?
        Mr. Friedman. Sir, I will be an advocate for the President
    in the same way that I would be an advocate for clients. My
    personal views are completely subordinated to the views of the
    President and the Secretary of State.
        Senator Rubio. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Friedman, for taking time to come and
    meet with me yesterday.
        I am not going to relitigate the concerns that people have
    raised about some of your statements with respect to Senators
    and the former President, though I share those concerns. But I
    am concerned about an article that you wrote in November of
    2015 talking about Russia's intervention in Syria where you
    held up that intervention as a model and predicted that they
    would succeed in defeating ISIS. And the title of the article
    is ``Learn a Lesson from Russia.'' And I would ask, Mr.
    Chairman, that it be entered into the record.
        The Chairman. Without objection.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 69.]

        Senator Shaheen. I think at that time we had already seen
    news reports about Russia's failure in fact to go after ISIS
    and their motives to hold up the Assad regime. And we have seen
    since then their indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Aleppo,
    their blowing up of aid workers, their bombing of hospitals. So
    I would just ask, do you still believe that in the last year
    the Russian military has done more to defeat ISIS than the
    United States?
        Mr. Friedman. No. And my--I was not intending to in any way
    praise Russia. My point there was simply that Russia had--
    Russia used ISIS as a platform, an excuse if you will, to enter
    the region to prop up the Assad regime. It was I thought a
    deplorable act. My--the point of my article was simply that I
    lamented that the United States had not acted as it had
    threatened to do when the President set the red line to--and
    left the area open to a vacuum. But much has changed since
    then, and the United States has certainly since that time done
    much more to defeat ISIS than Russia.
        Senator Shaheen. I appreciate that, though you did in that
    article characterize the situation as, and I quote, ``American
    leaders forced their stellar military commanders to fight with
    two hands and a leg tied behind their backs. Vladimir Putin
    gets it. He may be a thug, as he was recently described, but he
    knows how to identify a national objective, execute a military
    plan, and ultimately prevail.''
        In the article you also refer to the Global Coalition to
    Counter ISIL as, I quote, ``a coalition of cowards,
    freeloaders, and hypocrites led from behind by the American
    President.'' Do you think that kind of rhetoric is conducive to
    securing partners in this fight against ISIL?
        Mr. Friedman. No, I do not. I think that was a view I
    raised as a private person without that objective.
        Senator Shaheen. So I appreciate the comments that you made
    about ensuring that Israeli Arabs are treated fairly. I
    appreciated that comment when you met with me yesterday. I have
    heard troubling stories from Arab Americans who say they have
    experienced discrimination by Israeli authorities at the
    Israeli border for no other reason than because they have Arab
    last names. And as someone who has an Arab last name--as you
    can probably tell, it is not me; it is my husband who is of
    Lebanese descent--but how would you, as Ambassador, address
    that concern that you hear--should you hear that from Arab
    Americans who feel like they have not been treated fairly?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, I would obviously be the Ambassador for
    the benefit of Arab Americans, as well as any other Americans,
    and it is inexcusable for any country to discriminate on the
    basis of one's nationality, religion, or otherwise. I would
    want to engage with the Israelis and understand the process
    that they were using for their immigration and encourage them
    obviously to have their own national security issues, which I
    think we all respect, but that is not a basis to engage
    especially against the American population in any process that
    would be discriminatory. So I would certainly oppose that and
    work to make sure that it did not proceed.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. You have written that Israel's
    policy of schizophrenia of criticizing disloyal Arab citizens
    while simultaneously bestowing upon them the benefits of
    citizenship simply is not working. Can you clarify if there are
    any circumstances under which citizens of Israel should be
    stripped of their benefits and what benefits you think could
    reasonably be removed?
        Mr. Friedman. I think this was in the context of criminal
    activity, not on the basis of any--not on the basis of their
    nationality certainly. Just to be clear, I do not support any
    activity in Israel, this country, or anywhere else that would
    be based upon one's nation of origin.
        Senator Shaheen. So how do you feel about the President's
    Executive order on immigration?
        Mr. Friedman. It was--I accept the President's
    representation that it was a temporary ban to keep the country
    safe.
        Senator Shaheen. Even though we had not had any incidents
    from terrorist from any of those seven countries that we could
    point to?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I do not know. I was not involved in
    that order, and I do not have access to the classified
    information, so I just do not know. I am sorry.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I want to just end by reading
    you excerpts from a letter that I received from a constituent
    from Concord, New Hampshire. She says in this letter, ``As a
    Jewish constituent of yours whose great-uncle survived the
    Holocaust, I am appalled by David Friedman's likening of
    liberal Jews to Nazi collaborators. My great-uncle Leon Messer
    was born in 1920 in Poland. He was interns in the notorious
    Auschwitz concentration camp. He lost both his mother and his
    sister during the Holocaust. He was only able to survive due to
    his talent for fixing watches.''
        She goes on to say, ``It is such a shame that someone who
    survived the brutality of the Nazi regime and who lost so many
    loved ones in the Holocaust would be disparaged today by the
    Israeli Ambassador nominee, David Friedman, as a kapo or Nazi
    collaborator simply for standing up for what he believes is
    right.''
        Mr. Friedman, what do I tell Alicia, my constituent, about
    why she should feel differently that you could in fact
    represent her and that you are not disparaging people who have
    her views?
        Mr. Friedman. If you--I will be happy to give you--give to
    you my number and I would apologize to her personally. I am
    sorry she feels that way, and I respect her feelings and I
    would like to make amends.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you. Before turning to Senator Flake, I
    did not use any of my time for questioning. It is just an
    observation.
        First of all, thank you for being here and I know we had a
    very good meeting.
        You are here today having to recant every single strongly
    held belief that you have expressed almost. And I am just
    curious about this job and its importance to you to be willing
    to recant every single strongly held belief that you had. I
    just wondered if you would share that with us because it is
    interesting to listen and, you know, you have done a lot of
    that and I appreciate that. And sometimes when people run for
    public office, they say things and they have to massage them to
    a degree. But this is fairly extraordinary, and I wonder if you
    would share with us why you are willing to do that to serve in
    this capacity.
        Mr. Friedman. The opportunity to serve my country as
    Ambassador to Israel would be really the fulfillment of a
    life's dream, of a life's work, of a life of study of the
    people, the culture, the politics of Israeli society. One of
    the great things I love about this country is the fact that it
    was the first country to recognize Israel and has stood with
    Israel steadfastly through thick and thin over very, very many
    challenging circumstances.
        I believe that, based upon my relationship with the country
    and its people, I can be helpful; I can do good. I believe
    that, based upon my relationship with the President, I can help
    him get to the right place and, as he said colloquially, to
    make a deal, to bring peace to the region.
        My views are my views. Some of them I recant certainly the
    rhetoric and the inflammation that I have caused, the hurt that
    I have caused. I need to do a much better job going forward and
    I intend to and I will with regard to a diplomatic mission. It
    is very different obviously than being a private citizen and
    writing articles.
        But this is something I really want to do because I think I
    can do it well. And there is not more important to me than
    strengthening the bonds between the United States and Israel.
        The Chairman. Senator Flake.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Friedman.
        Let us kind of continue on that theme for a minute. How
    important is it--Congress has really been the bulwark of
    support for Israel over the years, as we mentioned--you
    mentioned in my office. It is Congress that is the enduring
    institution that has supported Israel. And it has always been
    marked by bipartisanship, that support. Can you talk about the
    importance of that?
        Mr. Friedman. I can, Senator. I think it has been the
    exception rather than the rule that the Congress has divided
    over an issue like Israel. Israel really is not a political
    issue. For the United States it is very much a moral issue. The
    United States stands with Israel obviously because Israel and
    the United States have common interests militarily,
    economically, technologically, but first and foremost, the
    relationship is on the basis of shared values. And shared
    values are not political. Shared values are that direct
    connection that the two countries have, a commitment to
    democracy, to human rights, to biblical values.
        And to me it would be greatly disappointing if I could not
    help de-partisanize--if that is a word--the relationship--the
    United States' relationship with Israel.
        Senator Flake. Thank you. Let me just address for a second
    the comments yesterday with the Prime Minister's visit, some of
    the comments that made some people report that we are no longer
    committed in this country to a two-state solution. I know that
    has been addressed at length here but just one aspect of it. Do
    you see--for one, I do not see that break. I think the
    framework that is most likely to product lasting peace is a
    two-state solution. But is there any likelihood at all that our
    fundamental principles is that the parties themselves, through
    direct negotiations, arrive at a solution? Is there any
    likelihood that the parties would adopt anything other than a
    two-state solution? I would just like your thoughts on that?
        Mr. Friedman. I have seen no evidence of an appetite by the
    Palestinians to a one-state solution. But I guess I would say
    if it happens, we will notice it, but I have not seen it yet.
        Senator Flake. Right. But the bedrock principle is still
    direct negotiations between the parties----
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Flake [continuing]. And not have a solution imposed
    by outside organizations, be it the General Assembly or
    Security Council or any other outside body----
        Mr. Friedman. Correct.
        Senator Flake [continuing]. Including the United States?
        Mr. Friedman. That is correct, Senator.
        Senator Flake. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you for being here today and for your willingness to
    serve.
        I think building off of the opening question from Senator
    Flake, the reason many of us are asking you these detailed
    questions about statements that you have made in the past about
    those who have sometimes been supportive of diplomatic
    engagements in the region have not always been supportive of
    the positions that Netanyahu has taken is that we are very
    worried that support for Israel is just becoming another
    political football in this place. It used to be something that
    united Democrats and Republicans. We had differences, but what
    was most important was keeping our support for Israel out of
    the political playing field. And today, that is not the case.
        In the very short time that I have been in public service
    Israel has gone from an issue that united us to an issue that
    is now used in political campaigns in order to try to divide
    us.
        And so I think you are being asked these questions because
    we are very worried about what the future holds, and your
    nomination is one of the strongest partisans on the issue of
    Israel. Being willing to call Democrats all sorts of terrible
    names suggests that we are just in for another really rough
    stretch when it comes to trying to heal those divisions.
        And I appreciate what you said, that you want your tenure
    to be one of healing partisan divisions, but if that was really
    the intent of this administration, there are frankly a lot of
    other people who would have been better suited to play that
    role.
        And so I do want to just ask some questions here. I think
    Senator Corker is right to ask about, you know, these--this
    exceptional level of recantations and reversals. And I guess it
    is something different to me to regret words that you said than
    it is to actually change your underlying opinion. So let me
    just make sure that, on probably your most controversial
    statement, that I have this right.
        When you said that J Street and supporters of J Street are
    worse than kapos, I hear that you say that you regret those
    words, but have you changed your opinion on that matter?
        Mr. Friedman. I have profound differences of opinion with
    the J Street organization. I do not think that will change. My
    regret is that I did not express those views respectfully,
    recognizing that they are every much as entitled as I am to
    have a different view. My regrets are as to the language and
    the rhetoric. I am not withdrawing my personal views as to the
    organization.
        Senator Murphy. But is your--but is your personal view
    still that J Street and its supporters are worse than the kapos
    of the World War II era?
        Mr. Friedman. No.
        Senator Murphy. Okay.
        Mr. Friedman. That is not my view.
        Senator Murphy. Okay. Let me ask about the word anti-
    Semite. You have thrown it around fairly liberally to describe
    actions of the Obama administration. And you draw a distinction
    between calling actions anti-Semitic versus calling individuals
    anti-Semitic. The pushback on that is that that phrase is a
    description of motivations. It is a description about what lies
    in someone's heart, right, the idea that someone hates Jews and
    thus carries out actions based upon that belief. So can you--I
    just want to make sure that you believe that in calling my
    words or my actions anti-Semitic that you are calling me anti-
    Semitic.
        Mr. Friedman. I do not agree with that, Senator.
        Senator Murphy. Why?
        Mr. Friedman. Because I think someone could inadvertently
    or unintentionally say something that is perceived by someone
    with a long history of being exposed to anti-Semitism as being
    anti-Semitic while the speaker himself would have done it
    completely unintentionally or with even good intentions.
    Sometimes words are uttered by one and perceived by the other,
    and it--you know, the speaker and the recipient----
        Senator Murphy. But----
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. Are just on different pages.
        Senator Murphy. But perception is in the eye of the
    beholder, so you are saying that the phrase anti-Semitic is
    owned by the person who hears the words? It is not about the
    motivation of the individual? So my motivations have nothing to
    do with whether my actions or my words can be described
    legitimately as anti-Semitic?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, as I said, words could be legitimately
    perceived as anti-Semitic even though the speaker would harbor
    no anti-Semitic feelings.
        Senator Murphy. And you would call--and you have no problem
    calling my actions anti-Semitic even if you believe that in my
    heart I have no desire to discriminate against Jews?
        Mr. Friedman. I can see challenging the words without
    challenging the motivations of the speaker.
        Senator Murphy. Another one of your more controversial
    statements was your hope that Donald Trump would fire
    individuals in the State Department who have opposed policies
    that you and he have espoused to, such as moving the Embassy.
    President Trump, through his press secretary, has said that
    those in the Department of State that do not agree with the
    President's viewpoints should get on board or get out and has
    suggested that the typical means of expressing dissent within
    the Department of State are no longer legitimate; you either
    agree with the President or you have no place in the
    administration, which would topple decades of precedent within
    the Department. Your statement suggests you agree with that,
    that the President should fire individuals who do not agree
    with positioning.
        Can you--is that also a statement that you recant and have
    reversed? Would you try to seek the ouster of individuals
    working for the Embassy that do not agree with your viewpoints?
        Mr. Friedman. No, Senator. I think any executive has a
    right to have people that support his--who are willing to
    execute his views, however they feel. Obviously, within the
    State Department it--there are tens of thousands of people who
    are entitled to their opinions and have differing views. At
    certain levels, the President is entitled to have people report
    to him who are prepared to execute his directives on foreign
    policy. He is the Commander in Chief, the Chief Executive, and
    I think he has that right.
        Senator Murphy. Well, given that you will be running an
    Embassy, last question, what level is that? You are going to
    be--you are going to have a lot of civil servants who have
    served the country very well. They will be in important
    positions like political military officers, people liaising
    with the Israeli Government. What level of individual has to
    believe in their heart in the same direction as you in order to
    maintain their position?
        Mr. Friedman. I think in my case none because I am not
    making any policies. I am simply observing the directives of
    the President. So whether people agree with me or not in the
    Embassy is, I think, completely irrelevant.
        Senator Murphy. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Gardner.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Friedman, for your willingness to serve,
    and welcome to your family and for your patience through this
    endurance test of a hearing. I really appreciate the chance to
    get to know you a little bit better and talk about the
    leadership opportunities we have with the United States, with
    Israel, and our great opportunities between the two both from a
    security standpoint and economic standpoint.
        I had the last--chance the last time I was in Israel to
    visit with Senator Cardin, Senator Markey, Senator Merkley just
    about a year ago, perhaps--I think it was March if that is
    correct, Senator Cardin. And the first time I had the
    opportunity to visit Israel was I think August of 2011 with a
    few other Members of Congress. And we went to IDF headquarters
    and we visited with a general. I believe at the time he was the
    head of Israel--Israeli planning division, General Eshel I
    think if I recall correctly was his name. And one of the--one
    of my colleagues asked a very simple question--I thought was
    simple--to General Eshel at the time and it was, you know, what
    is your view of U.S. foreign policy in the region? And after
    about 45 seconds or a minute of hemming and hawing and the
    trying to avoid the question, my colleague said please just
    give us the answer; you are not going to offend us.
        General Eshel then spent several minutes frightening us and
    talking about his answer. And his answer was simply this: They
    did not know where the United States foreign policy was. They
    did not know where the United States would be tomorrow because
    they did not understand what we were doing in the region, who
    our friends were and who our friends would be. That was 2011.
    There was a lot happening around that time frame.
        Sometime later, I had the opportunity to go back to Israel
    and visit with General Eshel again. Now, General Eshel had no
    reason to remember me, but General Eshel made--I asked--was
    able to ask him the same question: What is your view of U.S.
    foreign policy in the region? And I was startled with the same
    answer.
        Today, Mr. Friedman, what would you say Israel views the
    U.S. foreign policy as and what do you believe can be
    accomplished under your leadership as Ambassador to Israel that
    they would walk away with understanding the firm commitment the
    United States has to our great ally, friend, Israel?
        Mr. Friedman. I think the most important thing in the
    relationship between our two countries is something that I
    picked up this morning or late last night in the read-out from
    the meeting between the Prime Minister of Israel and the
    President, which is that there be no daylight between the two
    countries. It does not mean that there should be no
    disagreements, but Israel has no other friends like the United
    States. Sometimes they do not have any friends at all other
    than the United States. And when the rest of the world sees
    that the United States and Israel are not aligned, they--there
    is a risk that they will become more aggressive against Israel.
        So I think that loyalty and respect and no daylight is
    the--I think everything else is sort of details and can get
    worked out. And it is what I think Israel needs from us, and I
    think that is where the President is now.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Friedman. The strategic
    outlook for Israel in the region, where are we going with Iran
    right now? I do not know if you have had an opportunity to
    address the Iran deal, what is happening in Jordan, the
    stability of Jordan obviously key to security in Israel. And
    could you talk a little bit about the strategic outlook for the
    region?
        Mr. Friedman. I think the Gulf States, the Egyptians, the
    Jordanians, and the Israelis are all united--perhaps
    inadvertently so--but they are all united in a common concern
    about Iran. Iran is a state-sponsor of terrorism. I think that
    without relitigating the Iran deal--obviously, it is no secret
    that I was very much against the Iran deal--but sitting here
    today, Iran just recently tested ballistic missiles. I am not
    sure why anyone would have a ballistic missile except to
    deliver a nuclear warhead. They continue to provoke the United
    States. They--as the Prime Minister of Israel said yesterday,
    they write in Hebrew on their missiles ``destroy Israel.'' Now,
    Israel does not have the distance between itself and Iran that
    we have, and we all know how nervous they are about it. And I
    think all the other Sunni states are nervous as well.
        I do not think this is something that I will be engaged on,
    but I certainly support the President's view that we need to
    reinstitute leverage on Iran to hold them to the very first
    page of the JCPOA, which says that Iran will not develop or
    acquire a nuclear weapon. I am not sure what the other pages
    are. Given that first page, I am not sure I would need another
    90, but that page is the page that we ought to be focusing on
    and enforcing as hard as we can.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Friedman.
        Mr. Chairman, I had--when we were in Israel with Senator
    Cardin's delegation, we were there over Purim I believe it was,
    and we visited Iron Dome missile battery--rocket battery right
    outside of Ashkelon I think if I remember correctly. And as the
    celebration was taking place in Ashkelon, you could hear the
    voices participating in that holiday right by the Iron Dome
    facility. And so I think the mention of daylight between our
    two nations is important and that we have to spend time, the
    United States and Israel, assuring and restating the fact that
    there is no daylight between our two nations. And I look
    forward to working with you to make that happen.
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Menendez.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Friedman, congratulations on the nomination and welcome
    to your family.
        You are a lawyer, and as a lawyer, you have obligations to
    clients. Could you describe succinctly what is your obligation
    to any given client?
        Mr. Friedman. Zealous advocacy, loyalty, confidentiality.
        Senator Menendez. Faith and fidelity?
        Mr. Friedman. No question.
        Senator Menendez. So who is your client if you ultimately
    achieve, confirm your position?
        Mr. Friedman. Well, I would pledge to support and defend
    the Constitution of the United States, and I interpret that as
    having, in the broadest sense, an obligation to the entire
    country.
        Senator Menendez. And in that context it is the national
    interest and security of the United States that one would
    pledge fidelity to, is that not correct?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
        Senator Menendez. And in that context, you know, you have
    presented yourself here and in our very long private
    conversation as someone who is smart and measured and
    temperate, yet I get a sense that your love for the State of
    Israel overwhelmed your language, which was not necessarily
    temperate at the end of the day. And so the question is we
    cannot have an ambassador who ultimately will be moved, as much
    as they may be passionate about the country that they are being
    sent to or by the Prime Minister of that country, as much as we
    may have the greatest of relationships, that will not bend
    their will to that but will bend their will to what is in the
    national interest and security of the United States. Can you
    tell the members of this committee that that is in fact where
    your loyalty and commitment is?
        Mr. Friedman. That will be 100 percent my loyalty and
    commitment and to no one else.
        Senator Menendez. Now, you have rejected many of the past
    comments that have been made; I will not go through them again.
    In some cases I have actually heard you use the word you have
    apologized to individuals. I take your rejection of some of
    what you said as intemperate remarks, also an apology to those
    who may be affronted by them. Is that a fair statement?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Menendez. Now, let me ask you this. When you came
    to see me, I was quite interested in hearing from you
    unsolicitedly--I asked you many questions, but unsolicitedly
    you spoke about promoting economic development in the West Bank
    and helping to build a strong Palestinian middle class. We have
    not heard a lot about that today. Can you talk to me a little
    bit about that?
        Mr. Friedman. There are--there is business activity in the
    West Bank. There are people--there are businessmen in the West
    Bank who are building industries. The unemployment rate in the
    West Bank is too high. The only way I can think of to bring it
    down is to foster that type of industry.
        I would like to work with Israel to make the commercial
    environment in the West Bank less burdensome. There are issues
    of water, there are issues of electricity, there are issues of
    the movement of goods and services. There is also obviously
    security considerations that overwhelm everything else. But
    technologies are improving. Security can be less intrusive now
    than it has been in the past. I think Israel could probably do
    better, and I--without a specific instance, I think they could
    do better. And I think we could in--as part of the effort
    within the region, the Gulf States, the Egyptians, the
    Jordanians, to try to improve the Palestinian economy. I think
    we could look to some of those--certainly some of the wealthier
    nations to help.
        Senator Menendez. So some of the ultimate efforts, the
    underpinnings necessary to achieve the peace that we all
    desire, it would be fair to say that in one context building
    the economic livelihood and abilities of Palestinians to
    realize their hopes and dreams and aspirations is an important
    one. Is that not fair to say?
        Mr. Friedman. I think it might be the most important one.
        Senator Menendez. And you share in that--to the extent that
    the administration and the Congress are seeking to pursue those
    goals, you share those goals as well, I would assume?
        Mr. Friedman. I do.
        Senator Menendez. Now, you left out of your statement
    when--I guess for purposes of time something that I found
    interesting. You supported an entity called United Hatzalah. I
    do not know if my pronunciation is right, but ``an Israeli
    organization of volunteer first responders that uses advanced
    technology to weave through traffic to provide emergency
    services and save lives.'' What makes Hatzalah so special is
    that ``It is comprised of volunteers from the entire spectrum
    of the Israeli population--Jews, Muslims, and Christians,
    religious and secular, right and left wing. They all operate
    under a single credo: treat patients in the order of the
    severity of their affliction and never let any other
    considerations--political, religious, or otherwise--influence
    your commitment to saving lives.'' And you go on to say,
    ``Hatzalah represents the best of the Israeli people.''
        Does Hatzalah capture the essence of your feelings towards
    both Palestinians and Israelis?
        Mr. Friedman. It does, Senator. And in fact I was in Israel
    this past summer at a session of the Knesset when an eight-
    year-old boy gave an award to a Muslim volunteer at United
    Hatzalah. The Muslim volunteer had pulled his mother out of a
    burning car a year-and-a-half earlier, saved her life, and the
    boy gave an award to this--a Jewish boy gave this award to a
    Muslim volunteer for saving his mother's life. I do not think
    there was a dry eye in the house, and it--again, this
    organization, because of the way it operates, represents the
    very best of all the Israeli people. It gives me great hope and
    optimism for the future.
        Senator Menendez. Do you believe that the life of a
    Palestinian child is of the same value as the life of a Jewish
    child?
        Mr. Friedman. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. Do you believe the dignity of a
    Palestinian woman is the same as the dignity of a Jewish woman?
        Mr. Friedman. I sure do.
        Senator Menendez. Do you believe that Palestinians
    ultimately have a right in some form and fashion to self-
    governing themselves?
        Mr. Friedman. I do.
        Senator Menendez. You know, in addition to pursuing the
    national interest and security of the United States, I assume
    that whatever personal interests that you may have in Israel
    that you will wall those off in such a way that that will not
    be a question as well?
        Mr. Friedman. I have agreed to sell my business interests
    in Israel.
        Senator Menendez. And finally, some might think that this
    is a nomination conversion versus a true process towards
    atonement for some of the things that may have been said in an
    ideological war and in an political context and environment and
    that they are just for the purposes of achieving the goal of
    getting your nomination through. What would you say to that, to
    those who are thinking that as they sit here?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I am sitting here under oath, taking
    that oath seriously. My views are entirely heartfelt.
        Senator Menendez. And so what you have told me in response
    to my questions is what you have in your heart, what you have
    in your mind, and what you will do if in fact you are confirmed
    by the Senate?
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Paul.
        Senator Paul. Welcome, Mr. Friedman. Congratulations on
    your nomination.
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        Senator Paul. I think sometimes there is a presumption that
    America knows best, is in charge of everything, and that we are
    going to tell everybody the way things are going to be, and I
    think it sort of ignores the sovereignty of other nations and
    the opinions of other nations frankly, particularly in the
    peace process, that we have decided what the peace process is
    since 1947, and it does not look like there is peace yet so
    maybe there ought to be some other thoughts.
        I am not here to say what the best peace process is, but I
    would say that maybe sometimes we need to take a step back and
    realize that any kind of peace process is going to have to take
    agreement from both sides and that what both sides of the
    conflict think is probably more important than us. It does not
    mean we should not have any role, but I do not think we should
    be so presumptuous as that we are going to dictate the role.
        The same would apply somewhat to settlements. So we can all
    have our own opinion, and I know you have your opinion on
    settlements. But it is also not our country, and we do not live
    there. And it is not saying it is not problem. I am just saying
    that I am not so sure the United States should dictate this.
        That being said, I think that we ought to be aware of the
    ramifications of policy, and we can voice our--you know, our
    opinions on these. And I think yours have been very strong
    that--you know, in favor of settlement.
        My question is is that--you know, and this has come up
    recently with the press conference. President Trump has
    actually sort of voice, you know, some hesitancy to the 5,400
    new units in the West Bank. And while I am not here to say what
    my opinion is or what the Government should tell Israel what to
    do, I would say that we ought to account for and think about
    what 5,400 new settlements in the West Bank do to the
    possibility of peace.
        Are you open to thinking about what the ramifications are
    and that there is another side to the settlement issue other
    than just saying, hey, we should build everywhere all the time?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, I am.
        Senator Paul. Okay. I think that is the open-mindedness
    that people want to hear and want to know is are you open-
    minded enough to know there is another position and that there
    are ramifications and that you will listen.
        I think sometimes, particularly in our country, we think
    everybody thinks alike in Israel. We have no idea what goes on.
    If anything, they have more diversity of opinion and thought
    than we do on issues of Israel I would say, and we need to
    understand that. And your job as Ambassador is to understand,
    you know, that maybe a third of the population of Israel, maybe
    40 percent--I do not know the number--but a significant number
    do not want new settlements in the West Bank either, but I
    think your job will be to report that to the President and to
    let him know the different viewpoints within Israel, what are
    the ramifications of new settlement even if we do not get a
    say.
        Now, the capital is a little bit different. Israel gets to
    decide the capital of their country, but as you and I
    discussed, I think while we have talked about moving it to
    Jerusalem, no one else has an Embassy there, right?
        Mr. Friedman. Correct.
        Senator Paul. There will be ramifications if we move it.
    What I want to know is are you a thoughtful individual? Will
    you think about the ramifications? Will we think to ourselves
    long and hard that if we do move our Embassy there and a
    thousand Israeli soldiers die because of it or somehow
    Americans are caught up in it, that will be--will it have been
    something that was worth our while if we do it for the
    symbolism of it if people die because of it? And will you think
    through the ramifications of that and advise the President that
    there is more than one side to the issue?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, Senator. The decision obviously will be
    made by the President, and I am confident he will--and I would
    support him considering all of the political security and other
    ramifications associated.
        Senator Paul. I do not put myself out as an expert or
    someone who has an answer to Middle East peace. I wish I did.
    But having traveled there once, I have an opinion like everyone
    else. And my opinion basically is it is illusive, and I think I
    am fairly justified in that. But I would say that I came back
    from Israel thinking that our best hope is incremental change.
    And I think it is an equation where Israel does hold most of
    the cards and most of the power. They have an unparalleled
    military, and I do not think things are going to change
    militarily. That just--these are the facts on the ground.
        So I would say that there is chance for improvement, but it
    is going to be incremental. And one of the things--I met with
    Palestinian businessmen, some of the ones you referred to in
    general; I do not know if any specific--recently, and they
    mentioned to me Area C in West Bank. And when you look at the
    dots and which areas are controlled by people, Area C is like
    80 percent of the West Bank and they feel like they do not have
    access to it, that they are forbidden from, you know, drilling
    for water, drilling for minerals, trying to set up enterprises
    where they make more money.
        And my advice would be to meet with Palestinian
    businessmen, listen--and women, listen to them and say, gosh,
    if this is a way that we can lessen tension and hostility
    between the groups, why do we not see if there is a way that
    Palestinians can make more money, that trade can be enhanced.
        There is all kinds of things that are not the ultimate, you
    know, and final agreement, which is illusive, that we could do.
    And I want to know that you are open-minded to saying, you know
    what, we are less likely to have war the more we trade, the
    more we have interaction. Are you open-minded enough to hear
    the other side from the Palestinians on what we could do to
    enhance and lessen hostility?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I would be excited to have those
    discussions.
        Senator Paul. Okay. And I think some of that could be done
    here. I do not know. There is some of that here, you know,
    between the different parties. Some of that can be done over
    there. But I think it is important that you project to them
    that you are open-minded on these things because you have had--
    and I am not--I have strong opinions, too, so I mean the thing
    is having strong opinions is not always a fault, but I would
    say that you have to show people that you are open-minded
    enough to be a diplomat, which means hearing from, talking to
    both parties, and understanding the complexity and the
    ramifications of every little policy that happens over there.
        Mr. Friedman. I will, Senator. Thank you.
        Senator Paul. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Markey.
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        Mr. Friedman, in our office we talked about a two-state
    solution. We talked about what may be possible. You said it was
    the gold standard. But in our conversation, and perhaps you
    could help me to kind of flesh this out a little bit further.
    You mentioned a scenario under which the West Bank could be
    incorporated into Israel and that the country would still
    maintain its Jewish and democratic identity. Could you go
    through that scenario and how you look at those numbers and how
    you would view that as an alternative?
        Mr. Friedman. Senator, I do not view it as an alternative.
    I think--at least to me the discussion was more in the
    hypothetical. But I think that the--I think there is a general
    conventional wisdom that Israel can either be Jewish or
    democratic but not both under that type of a scenario.
        I do not know the demographics of the West Bank well
    enough. There are multiple studies that have been done. I think
    demographics of the West Bank are a very important part of
    working forward. And I think we ought to all have the same data
    because the swings of population assumptions go from a million-
    and-a-half Arabs to three million, and at a million-and-a-half
    Arabs it is one scenario; at three million it could be another.
    And I do not know which is true or if some number in the middle
    is true. I am not sure it matters. I was speaking really in the
    hypothetical. But because demographics matters to any future
    discussion, we ought to have good data, and I would certainly
    encourage the Israelis on a nonpartisan basis to try to get
    better data on those demographics.
        Senator Markey. But ultimately, do you think the
    Palestinians would accept a solution that had the West Bank
    incorporated into Israel, and then if the demographics were
    such that then they remained in the minority and that Gaza was
    excluded from a final agreement? Do you think there is a
    scenario under which the Palestinians could accept a deal that
    created that new entity and kept the Palestinians in a
    permanent minority in--within that greater Israel that would
    have been created?
        Mr. Friedman. I cannot imagine that either Israel or the
    Palestinians would accept a scenario where there were different
    rights for different citizens in terms of whether the
    Palestinians were in the majority or the minority. I could not
    speak for them. I would only point out that Israel itself has a
    very good track record of providing good education, health
    care, commercial opportunities, human rights, rights to the
    LGBTQ community, support of women's rights. I think Israel is
    very good to its Palestinian citizens, and so that might be a--
    something that the Palestinians in the West Bank might be
    attracted to, but I would never speak for them.
        Senator Markey. So you do not personally support Israeli
    annexation of the West Bank?
        Mr. Friedman. No, I do not.
        Senator Markey. You do not? You are saying that that would
    have to be part of an agreement?
        Mr. Friedman. As the President said, all of this, all of
    this has to be agreed to by the parties or else it will not
    proceed.
        Senator Markey. Yes, because I--it is hard for me to
    envision a situation where the Palestinians would allow a
    division of the question where the West Bank was a part of the
    agreement, then Gaza in its resonance did not have rights that
    were vested with the citizens of that part of the Palestinian
    population.
        What are--if you could, you talked about the two-state
    solution as the best possibility of--can you give us another
    possibility in your mind that you think could unfold in terms
    of an agreement that could be reached between the Israelis and
    the Palestinians?
        Mr. Friedman. Sitting here today, I do not have a better
    option.
        Senator Markey. You do not have a better option?
        Mr. Friedman. No, I do not.
        Senator Markey. No. And I know that this terrain has
    already been traveled in the hearing, but if I could, I would
    like to go out and just talk a little bit about the Beit El
    settlement----
        Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
        Senator Markey [continuing]. And some of the comments from
    people who are out there. Beit El is training students, for
    example, to, quote, ``successfully delegitimize the notion of a
    two-state solution and creating facts on the ground in the face
    of the international community's desire to uproot us.'' Can you
    talk about comments like that coming out of the Beit El
    community in Ramallah and your views on those comments in terms
    of its implication for reaching a two-state solution?
        Mr. Friedman. I think they are a challenge among many to
    achieving a two-state solution. I should point out that my
    affiliation with Beit El is as the president of the American
    Friends of Beit El Yeshiva Center. We support a Talmudical
    Academy and a boys' high school and a girls' high school, and
    it primarily derives from my commitment to Jewish education.
    The quality of those schools are excellent, and everything that
    we have given money to has been in the nature of gymnasiums,
    dormitories, dining rooms, classrooms, things like that. So my
    philanthropic activity there has not been connected to their
    political activity, which I really had no part in.
        Senator Markey. If the land in Beit El was included in a
    two-state solution and that land had to be returned to the
    Palestinians, would you support the return of that land to the
    Palestinians?
        Mr. Friedman. In the context of a consensual fully-agreed-
    to two-state solution?
        Senator Markey. That is correct.
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Markey. You would?
        Mr. Friedman. Yes.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        I have some questions. I have refrained from asking until
    the end, but I know Senator Cardin has some questions. I will
    let him finish.
        Senator Cardin. If I could. And I--with no disrespect to
    the chairman, I have a commitment that--so after I ask these
    one or two questions I am going to thank Mr. Friedman for your
    patience and thank you very much again for your willingness to
    serve and for your passion for the relationship between Israel
    and the United States. It is--it comes across very clearly from
    your testimony and I just want to underscore that.
        The White House issued a statement on February 2 saying,
    ``We do not believe the existence of settlements is an
    impediment to peace. The construction of new settlements or the
    expansion of the existing settlements beyond their current
    borders may not be helpful to achieving that goal.'' What is
    your view in regards to expansion of settlements or new
    settlements?
        Mr. Friedman. I think the expansion of settlements into new
    territories that are beyond borders--I agree with the
    President. They may not be helpful, and I think it makes sense
    to tread very carefully in that area.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. And the last point I think I
    will--maybe I will ask this for the record. We have been
    talking a lot about the West Bank but very little about Gaza.
    Gaza is much more difficult than the West Bank. And I would--we
    had a chance in my office to talk a little bit about Gaza, but
    just let me put that on the record and I might ask you a couple
    questions for the record because it is a complicated situation
    on how you deal with Gaza if you do not have a viable two-state
    process moving forward.

        [The information referred to is located in the Additional
    Material Submitted for the Record section of this transcript,
    beginning on page 50.]

        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        I saw the headline you had written about the two-state
    solution being somewhat of an illusion, and yesterday, I, with
    others, had a meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu who we all
    respect greatly. And I listened to him say--I am not going to
    say what he said in a private meeting, but it was very much
    along the same lines that he constantly has said publicly,
    which in past comments has referred to the fact that until the
    Palestinians are willing to accept Israel's right to exist, it
    is very difficult to have a two-state solution.
        And then he refers, rightly so, to the fact that one of his
    great responsibilities is the security of the people of Israel,
    and there is not a time that you can see in the future ever
    where there is not military presence by the Israelis in the
    West Bank. And we keep talking about the West Bank because it
    is the place that is most likely for something good to happen,
    and Gaza obviously is way beyond that.
        I do wonder, especially after yesterday, but also seeing
    all of the many efforts that have been put in place around the
    two-state solution--I know Tony Blair--I do not know how many
    times he has been to the area. I think he told me once--I heard
    him speak--he had been there 160 times, and his wife made the
    joke, you know, Tony, it is not the number--it is not the
    amount of effort; it is the result. And of course there has
    been none.
        Are we helping the situation by continually talking about a
    two-state solution when having a military presence in the West
    Bank ad infinitum, forever by Israel is really something
    different than a two-state solution. It is a serious question,
    and I am beginning to wonder whether we are actually
    verbalizing this in the appropriate manner. It is not a gotcha
    question. It is an honest question. I know you have expressed
    very strong feelings. I sometimes think that we here in the
    public arena talk about things and keep holding something out
    regarding many conflicts around the world that maybe is not
    achievable based on the facts on the ground. And I am just
    wondering what your observation would be regarding that.
        Mr. Friedman. Well, Senator, Yitzhak Rabin, who is I think
    regarded universally as the architect of the two-state solution
    and who gave his life in pursuit of the two-state solution, he
    himself said that his vision was for--I think it was either--I
    think he used the term ``state-minus'' or something like that.
    I think the challenges here are Israel's security and the
    Palestinians' quality of life. I do not know if the Palestinian
    people at this juncture care more about the flag over their
    heads, who is leading them, as they care about reducing the
    unemployment rate down from an ungovernable level to a
    manageable level.
        I have heard Palestinians decry their leadership and they
    are no friends of Israel either. I suspect that the key to the
    region is economic empowerment, not political debates, and that
    is why I guess until I am proven wrong, which could be soon----
        The Chairman. What will----
        Mr. Friedman [continuing]. I would work to try to improve
    the economic levels.
        The Chairman. I absolutely think that is something that
    needs to occur. And in my last trip there in speaking with the
    Prime Minister in Ramallah, that certainly was the focus.
        I will say the flip side of that is when you know you have
    got settlements out here and you have got to have security
    around those settlements, it is very difficult to do commerce
    in between. I mean, it is--let us face it; it is more than
    burdensome. I am not criticizing. I am just observing that it
    is very difficult to do commerce when you are dealing with
    that.
        So, again, what would be a better way of describing the
    vision there? Because a state that has ad infinitum, forever
    sort of military--for realistic security measures has a
    military of another country in it, what would we call that? I
    mean, state-minus is not a particularly good description. But I
    think that we talk about this, we use rhetoric that I am
    beginning to believe is unrealistic rhetoric, and I do not know
    that it is useful in getting to a solution when you are
    describing something that to me is becoming more and more
    unrealistic for many, many reasons. I am not casting blame.
        Mr. Friedman. And I do not--Senator, candidly, I do not
    have a good answer to your question, and I certainly do not
    have a good word for--to articulate a vision. It is an enormous
    challenge. It is a very big Rubik's Cube that we all try to
    wrestle with every day. And I take the medical approach--even
    though I am not a doctor--to this which is let us not make it
    worse, let us do no harm, and then let us try to make it
    better. And I think that is the only advice I have right now.
        The Chairman. And I think your response on the settlements
    indicates that.
        Let me ask you this: Prime Minister Netanyahu has been very
    clear on this for many years. You know Israel well. Do you
    think the vision of military presence in the West Bank forever
    is the general view of the--sort of the mainstream of Knesset
    there?
        Mr. Friedman. I think the control of the Jordan Valley is
    something which people on the left and the right agree upon. I
    think that is the single most important feature of any
    Palestinian state. It does not mean that has to be military
    embedded within the communities or even the towns, but at the
    perimeter I do believe that on the left and the right there is
    unanimity that there must be control of the perimeter.
        The Chairman. It just seems to me that if that is the
    case--and I agree with you; I think that is the case--it just
    seems to me that we are at a point in time where we ought to be
    discussing the future, at least the future for the next 20 or
    30 years anyway, in a different way. And I do not know exactly
    how to describe that either, but it just seems to me that in
    addition to having a partner that is not a real partner on the
    Palestinian side, that there is a vision on the Israeli side
    that is not fully compatible with what we would normally
    describe as a two-state solution. Again, it is just an
    observation. And it seems to me that we would be better off as
    a world community to talk about it in terms that are different
    than we are talking about it right now.
        Mr. Friedman. Well, Senator, you heard the President
    yesterday use the term ``a larger canvas,'' and I have not had
    a chance to speak with him about that and flesh out those
    concepts, but I think certainly an open mind, a commitment to
    peace above all else to improve qualities of life is a step in
    the right direction.
        The Chairman. Listen, you have acquitted yourself well
    today. You have been here for many hours, as has your family.
    We thank you for your willingness to serve.
        There will be additional questions coming from folks, and
    we would like to keep the record open until the close of
    business Friday. My sense is you will want to answer those
    questions fairly promptly.
        And with that, without further questions or comments, the
    meeting is adjourned. Thank you.
        Mr. Friedman. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 1:17 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to David Friedman by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As a student, I was actively involved in the Student
    Struggle for Soviet Jewry (``SSSJ'') a grass roots organization
    dedicated to publicizing the plight of Soviet Jews and advocating for
    their right to emigrate to Israel and the United States. Once my law
    practice began, my efforts to advance human rights and democracy were
    more philanthropic in nature, and extended to numerous organizations,
    including United Hatzala which I referred to in my testimony. I hope
    that my efforts have advanced the cause of these extremely important
    goals.
        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Israel? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Israel? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most significant human rights issues in Israel include
    terrorist attacks targeting civilians and politically and religiously
    motivated societal violence and discrimination.
        If confirmed, I would offer U.S. support in countering terrorism,
    strongly condemn terrorist attacks, and support Israel's right to
    defend its citizens. I would also urge the Government of Israel to take
    affirmative steps to protect shared values that are core to both our
    societies.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Israel in advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Israel is a vibrant democracy that respects human rights
    and has a thriving civil society. However, when tensions rise between
    Israel and the Palestinians, it can lead to renewed violence against
    civilians and sometimes intolerance by both sides, posing a challenge
    to advancing these issues.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Israel? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. I believe that a free and functioning civil society is an
    essential element of a healthy democracy and that governments must
    protect free expression and peaceful dissent and create an atmosphere
    where all voices can be heard. If confirmed, I will commit to meet with
    human rights, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations.
        I will pro-actively support the continued implementation of the
    Leahy Law and similar efforts to ensure that provisions of U.S.
    security assistance and security cooperation activities continue to
    reinforce human rights by working to ensure that the United States does
    not furnish assistance to any foreign security force unit if the
    Department of State has credible information that the receiving unit
    has committed a gross violation of human rights.

        Question 5. If confirmed, will you and your embassy team actively
    engage with Israel to address cases of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Israeli Government?

        Answer. I believe all individuals should be treated humanely and
    have their human rights respected and upheld, including prisoners. If
    confirmed, I will actively engage with Israel to address cases, if any,
    of persons who have been unjustly targeted by the Israeli Government.

        Question 6. If confirmed, will you engage with Israel on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. I believe all individuals should be treated humanely and
    have their human rights respected and upheld. If confirmed, I will
    engage with Israel on matters of human rights, civil rights, and
    governance. I believe that the United States and Israel are more than
    just allies--our countries have a friendship based on our mutual
    appreciation and goals, on our common values of democracy and freedom,
    and on our conviction that giving a voice to minority and even
    dissenting views only strengthens our societies.

        Question 7. According to the World Bank, in 2016 the unemployment
    rate in the West Bank has reached 27 percent and in Gaza, unemployment
    is at 42 percent, with youth unemployment at 58 percent, among the
    highest in the world:

       What programs would you support to stimulate Palestinian job
            growth?

        Answer. I support a focused approach to stimulating Palestinian job
    growth which includes programs that directly engage the private sector
    to boost productivity and works with the Government of Israel to find
    ways to address restrictions impacting the Palestinian economy. I
    understand ongoing USAID programs which have taken this approach have
    been effective in creating long term employment prospects for the
    Palestinians. As Ambassador, I would encourage USAID to look at ways to
    further scale these programs and create new ones, as well as look at
    interventions in areas such as education that address other obstacles
    to economic development.

        Question 8. What recommendations do you have for improving U.S.
    programs to address unemployment?

        Answer. Key enablers of Palestinian job growth include the easing
    of restrictions on movement and access which will allow Palestinians to
    increase trade and will increase Palestinians' access to land and raw
    materials. I support the Department of State's and USAID's ongoing
    efforts to engage the Government of Israel to find ways to ease such
    restrictions. Should I be confirmed, I will work with the Government of
    Israel to explore these and other options to enable Palestinian
    economic development.

        Question 9. hat specific recommendations do you have for addressing
    chronic unemployment in Gaza?

        Answer. The unemployment rate in Gaza--the highest recorded
    unemployment rate in the world--is both an economic and a security
    issue. To begin addressing it, Hamas needs to renounce terrorism and
    commit itself to working with the Palestinian Authority and others to
    better the quality of life of the people living in Gaza. I believe that
    we need to explore ways to reduce the restrictions on movement and
    access while respecting Israel's security needs and concerns. We should
    also be looking at ways to expand service delivery, particularly in
    Gaza, where lack of access to water and electricity has a hugely
    negative effect on economic growth and the population as a whole.

        Question 10. During your testimony, you stated that ``the two-state
    solution is the best possibility'' for lasting peace. You commented
    extensively on demographics and aspirations of Palestinians in the West
    Bank. A critical consideration that we did not have time to discuss is
    Gaza:

        As the two-state solution is still the best possibility for peace,
    what specific recommendations will you make to the President to address
    the crisis in Gaza and create conditions for peace?

        Answer. It is difficult for me to identify the ``specific''
    recommendations that I would make to the President without first having
    access to certain classified information and more detailed discussions
    with the President, the Secretary of State and other State Department
    employees. Generally, in order to create conditions for peace, we must
    make it clear that peaceful negotiations, not terrorism, are the only
    possible path forward. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of
    Israel to find ways to empower all Palestinian moderates to be involved
    and ensure security coordination with the Palestinian Authority remains
    robust.
        As I also said during my confirmation hearing, part of moving
    towards peace includes finding ways to grow the Palestinian economy and
    especially the middle class, including in Gaza. This could include
    reducing restrictions on movement and access, as well as encouraging
    the Palestinian Authority to take up their responsibilities in Gaza.

        Question 11. Please explain your perspective on how Gaza may be
    treated differently from the West Bank in a negotiated settlement?

        Answer. I believe Gaza should be a part of any future negotiations.
    That said, Hamas is a violent terrorist organization that continues to
    reject the very basic principles needed for peace, including, among
    other things, recognition of Israel as a Jewish State, acceptance of
    previous agreements, and renunciation of violence. The Department of
    State designated Hamas as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in 1997. For
    any negotiated settlement involving Gaza to be successful, there will
    need to be a significant change in Gaza's leadership.

        Question 12. With respect to economic development in Gaza, what do
    you see as the main barriers in Gaza and how should the United States
    engage to address these barriers and improve conditions for economic
    growth?

        Answer. Hamas' illegal 2007 seizure of Gaza disrupted previous
    agreements on movement and access by displacing the Palestinian
    Authority. Subsequent restrictions on movement and access--put in place
    to address Israeli security concerns--are also a factor slowing
    economic growth in Gaza. As I previously stated, we need to do more to
    explore ways to reduce restrictions on movement and access that also
    respect Israeli security concerns. We should also work with the donor
    community, the Government of Israel, and the Palestinian Authority to
    find ways to increase electricity and water delivery in Gaza.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to David Friedman by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1. Mr. Friedman, you've previously expressed your view of
    Israeli settlement construction as follows: ``As a general rule, we
    should expand a community in Judea and Samaria where the land is
    legally available and a residential or commercial need is present--just
    like in any other neighborhood anywhere in the world.'' You have also
    raised millions of dollars for a yeshiva located in the Israeli West
    Bank settlement of Bet El, which lies well outside the security
    barrier, not far from the Palestinian city of Ramallah.

       Do you think the construction of new Israeli settlements or the
            expansion of existing settlements beyond the security barrier
            impedes efforts to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
            conflict?
       Do you think that Israel should refrain from such construction?
            Please explain your position.
       Do you support the ``Regularization Law'' that the Israeli Knesset
            passed earlier this month that retroactively legalizes Israeli
            settlements built on privately-owned Palestinian lands? What
            impact would this law have on construction at the Bet El
            settlement?

        Answer. I agree with the statement of the President that
    settlements are not an obstacle to peace, although new settlements and
    expansion of existing settlements beyond existing borders may not be
    helpful to the cause of peace.
        I believe that settlement issues should be addressed through direct
    negotiations between the parties in the same manner as other issues in
    the peace process.
        I am not an expert in Israeli law and thus not able to express an
    opinion on the ``regularization law.'' I do not know how the law would
    affect construction in Bet El.

    Bet El Institutions Fundraising and Activity
        Question 2. If confirmed, will you commit to ceasing all
    fundraising for and personal contributions to the American Friends of
    the Bet El Yeshiva Center and any other settlement-related causes that
    you support?

        Answer. I so commit for as long as I am Ambassador to Israel.

    Bet El Institutions Fundraising and Activity
        Question 3. The Israeli daily Haaretz recently reported that a
    building in the Bet El settlement that was funded by the American
    Friends of Bet El Yeshiva, the organization you head, and that
    prominently bears your name is built outside the Israeli-sanctioned
    boundaries of the settlement on privately-owned Palestinian
    agricultural land. According to the news report, the Friedman Faculty
    House at the Raaya Girls High School is situated in a neighborhood of
    Bet El that was partially demolished by order of the Israeli High Court
    of Justice five years ago because the land had been seized illegally.
    According to the Defense Ministry's Civil Administration, which
    supervises construction in the settlements, the demolition order is
    still on the books, although it has been ignored.

       Were you aware that the building bearing your name and which your
            organization funded is located outside of the legally
            sanctioned boundaries of the Bet El settlement?
       Would you support the demolition of this building if the Israeli
            authorities decided to carry out the existing demolition order
            due to its location?

        Answer. I was not aware and do not know the source or accuracy of
    the article. I would have no position since I do not believe that as an
    ambassador any statements should be made or would be appropriate.
    Support for Israeli Political Candidates or Parties
        Question 4. Have you ever contributed to the campaigns of Israeli
    political leaders or political parties? If so, could you specify which
    leaders and which parties and how much you gave them?

        Answer. No.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to David Friedman by Senator Tom Udall

        Question 1. How much money have you raised and how much have you
    personally donated to organizations that support settlement expansion
    in the West Bank? Have you made any political donations to a candidate
    for Israeli office or an Israeli political party?

        Answer. Zero. I do not raise any funds from third parties. I have
    personally donated approximately $300,000 to American Friends of Bet El
    Yeshiva Center, a 501(c)3, over the past six years and lesser amounts
    to other charities in Israel. To my knowledge, all donations are used
    for religious and educational purposes and not for political purposes
    or settlement expansion.Additionally, I have made no political
    donations to a candidate for Israeli office or an Israeli political
    party.

        Question 2. Have you separated your financial interests from that
    of Bet El and any other Israeli settlements you may have an interest in
    and, if so, how have you done so?

        Answer. I have no financial interests in Bet El or any other
    Israeli settlement. If confirmed, consistent with my obligations to the
    Office of Government Ethics (OGE), I will resign my position at
    American Friends of Bet El Yeshiva Center and will not accept any
    position at that or any other Israeli institution for the duration of
    my ambassadorship.

        Question 3. Do you have any real estate or interests in any land in
    Israel or in the West Bank? If so, please list all interests in either
    region. Do you or your immediate family members own any property over
    the 1949 Armistice Line (aka the Green Line)?

        Answer. My wife and I own an apartment in Jerusalem. It is located
    within the Green Line. Additionally, neither I nor my immediate family
    members own property over the Green Line.

        Question 4. In your letter on Ethics Undertakings to the State
    Department's Office of the Legal Advisor, you committed to resigning
    your positions with a number of entities, including businesses and the
    American Friends of Bet El Yeshiva Center, but that you would ``not
    participate personally and substantially in any particular matter
    involving specific parties in which I know that entity is a party or
    represents a party'' for a period of one-year. Given your long-standing
    interests in this organization, will you extend your non-participation
    commitment to your full term in this office?

        Answer. I intend to fully comply with my ethical obligations as
    agreed to with OGE. If confirmed, I will not hold any position at this
    entity for the duration of my ambassadorship.Q02
        Question 5. During the hearing with now U.N. Ambassador Haley, we
    discussed that it has been the longstanding position since President
    Johnson that Israeli settlement activity in territories occupied in
    1967 undermines Israel's security, harms the viability of a negotiated
    two-state outcome, and erodes prospects for peace and stability in the
    region. Yet you have actively funded settlements in opposition to U.S.
    policy. How will you ensure that you represent U.S. policy rather than
    your personal views on the issue of settlements if you are confirmed as
    Ambassador?

        Answer. I have not funded any settlements in violation of U.S.
    policy. I will act strictly in accordance with the directives of the
    President and the Secretary of State without regard to any personal
    opinions which I may hold.

        Question 6. You wrote that Israel, using the term ``we'' QUOTE ``We
    should expand a community in Judea and Samaria [*Biblical names used in
    Israel for the West Bank] where land is legally available and a
    residential or commercial need is present--just like any other
    neighborhood in the world.'' UNQUOTE If you are confirmed as Ambassador
    will you continue to advocate for settlement growth which will continue
    to divide any potential future Palestinian state, publicly or in
    internal administration deliberations?

        Answer. Consistent with the stated position of the President, I
    will advocate for settlement issues to be resolved by direct
    negotiations between the parties.

        Question 7. You wrote that liberal Jews, QUOTE ``suffer a cognitive
    disconnect in identifying good and evil.'' UNQUOTE. This is
    disrespectful to many members of the Jewish community, including in my
    home state of New Mexico. Do you now disavow and apologize for this
    statement?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 8. If confirmed, you will in essence join the State
    Department and will lead State Department employees at our Embassy in
    Israel. You have said the State Department has a ``Hundred year history
    of anti-Semitism.'' This disparages and calls into question the
    character of many American patriots who have served in the State
    Department. Who have actively worked to promote the interests of the
    United States. Do you now disavow and apologize for this statement?

        Answer. The State Department has led the world in advancing the
    cause of peace and acting with moral clarity. There have been,
    unfortunately, isolated occurrences of anti-Semitic behavior over the
    history of this organization (see, E.G. letter of Henry Morgenthau to
    President Roosevelt of January 16, 1944). I have great confidence and
    respect for the current State Department.

        Question 9. Do you support the MOU signed between the United States
    and Israel and will you work to ensure that the terms of the MOU are
    carried out?

        Answer. Yes, I support the MOU and, if confirmed, would confer with
    the President, the Secretary of State, the Congress and the Israelis to
    ensure as robust a support for Israel's security as possible. The ten-
    year MOU provides predictability past FY 2018, which is critical to
    Israel being able to finance and procure critical weapons systems such
    as the F-35.
        It is my understanding that Foreign Military Financing helps to
    support Israel's continued defense modernization; provides for the
    acquisition of U.S.-origin defense equipment and training; and is
    conditioned on having appropriate export control and technology
    security safeguards in place to prevent transfers of controlled
    technology or know-how to potential adversaries and unauthorized
    recipients. It also strengthens interoperability and the capability of
    Israel to participate in coalition operations and exercises.
        U.S. assistance helps ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative
    military edge over potential regional threats, preventing a shift in
    the security balance of the region and safeguarding U.S. interests.

        Question 10. In a piece your wrote in August of 2015 you advocated
    in favor of Israeli bombing of populations centers using ``entirely
    disproportionate force'' in a fictional letter, stating in response to
    the approval of the JCPOA that:

              Rather, we are respectfully informing the leadership of the
            United States, our greatest friend, as well as all of our
            enemies, that any further attacks on Israel, whether by rocket,
            by tunnel, by incursion or otherwise, will be met with entirely
            disproportionate force--the type of force every other nation
            has used and will use under comparable circumstances--designed
            to immediately end the battle and discourage and deter further
            misconduct. You have left us with no other choice.
              Winston Churchill is considered by many to be the greatest
            leader of his generation. To defeat the Nazis, Churchill, in
            coordination with American forces, bombed population centers in
            Dresden, Germany and elsewhere in early 1945. Civilian life was
            lost but the war quickly ended, Nazism was defeated and
            Churchill was regaled as a hero. No one holds life to be more
            precious than the People of Israel and we will never target
            civilians. But we will no longer permit human shields to limit
            our self-defense and we will send a clear message to deter the
            terrorist attacks that we know are coming. We will not be held
            to a different standard than the United States, we will not bow
            to the world's hypocrisy and we will defeat Islamic terrorism
            by any and all means necessary.
              I hope this clarifies our position in response to the JCPOA's
            approval.

        Do you still support such violations of basic human rights and
    warfare? Do you agree that the targeting of civilian populations is
    illegal and a U.S. Ambassador should not encourage such behavior? Do
    you have an explanation for why you advocated for Prime Minister
    Netanyahu to target civilian populations?

        Answer. First, as stated above, this is a ``fictional'' letter and
    does not advocate anything to the Prime Minister of Israel. Second,
    civilian populations should never be used as shields or targeted in a
    war. Launching rocket attacks from civilian populations is reckless and
    inhumane. Israel must be able to defend its citizens and should do so
    in a manner which minimizes collateral damage to civilians. Everyone
    should condemn anyone who fires rockets from within civilian populated
    areas.

        Question 11. You wrote about a proposed compromise where the United
    States would ban ``assault rifles'' in exchange for a variation on a
    Muslim ban. For the record you wrote:

              So let's talk about banning all assault rifles and putting in
            some hard penalties. How about a mandatory ten years in prison
            for possession? This will take these weapons off the street in
            no time and perhaps give law enforcement the ability to
            apprehend terrorists before they can do any damage.
              Now, in exchange for this ban, let's also make sure that law
            enforcement is given the resources to ban all Muslims whose
            words or deeds present the slightest risk of terrorist
            activity. There's no need to worry about the First Amendment--
            the rights of free speech and privacy do not apply to
            immigrants applying for entry to the United States.

        In two paragraphs you made recommendations that would limit both
    the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution. Do you still
    support a ban on assault style rifles in exchange for a modified Muslim
    ban where Muslim First Amendment rights would no longer be protected?

        Answer. No.

        Question 12. In your hearing, you expressed ``regret,'' ``deep
    regret'' and--in some cases--apologized about some of the offensive
    comments you made against individuals and groups with whom you
    disagree. However, you did not apologize for some of these offensive
    comments in the hearing.

       Will you specifically apologize for your comments regarding
            President Obama?
       Will you specifically apologize for your comments regarding J
            Street?
       Will you specifically apologize for your comments regarding the
            Anti-Defamation League?

        Answer. I do not believe, and did not say, that President Obama is
    an anti-Semite. I do believe that certain comments he made were anti-
    Semitic, although I assume this was unintentional. If anyone believes
    that I called President Obama an anti-Semite, I apologize.
        I have already apologized to members of J Street for my hurtful
    language.
        Further, I have apologized to Jonathan Greenblatt who has publicly
    accepted my apology and stated that his organization, Anti-Defamation
    League, looks forward to working with me.

        Question 13. Do you commit to meeting--to the extent you schedule
    permits--with delegations organized by or comprised of pro-Israel
    advocates that you have criticized or with whom you may disagree,
    including J Street?

        Answer. Schedule permitting, I would like to meet with various and
    diverse groups to hear and understand their views.

        Question 14. The Rosh Yeshiva of Bet El, which you have financially
    supported, has written a book in which he instructed Israeli soldiers
    to ``disobey orders to evacuate Jewish settlements in Israel.'' This
    book was subsequently banned by the Israeli military.

       Do you agree with this statement--that it is forbidden to uproot
            Jews from any part of Greater Israel?
       Would you support insubordination if members of the Israeli Defense
            Forces were ordered to dismantle an outpost that was deemed
            illegal by Israeli law?
       Would you support settler violence against Israeli soldiers in
            order to prevent the dismantlement of an outpost that was
            deemed illegal by Israeli law?
       If you do not support the political statements of the leaders of
            Bet El, particularly the head of its Yeshiva, which you have
            supported, why did you choose Bet El to support, out of all of
            the causes in Israel?

        Answer. As stated above, I have personally contributed to the
    American Friends of Bet El Yeshiva Center, a 501 (c) 3 that supports
    education. I am unfamiliar with this book and do not agree with this
    statement.
        I do not support insubordination if members of the Israeli Defense
    Forces were ordered to dismantle an outpost that was deemed illegal by
    Israeli law
        I do not support settler violence against Israeli soldiers in order
    to prevent the dismantlement of an outpost that was deemed illegal by
    Israeli law?
        As stated above, I am unfamiliar with this book or the statements.
    I support Jewish education and Bet El has excellent schools. Bet El is
    situated on a site that has biblical and historical significance, being
    mentioned multiple times in the Old Testament.

        Question 15. It has been reported that a settlement building that
    was funded by the organization you head and which prominently bears
    your name is built outside the Israeli-sanctioned boundaries of the
    settlement on privately-owned Palestinian agricultural land. What is
    the legal status of this building?

        Answer. I am not an expert in Israeli law and cannot opine on the
    legal status.

        Question 16. Given 50 years of US bipartisan opposition to
    settlement activity, it has been our country's practice for decades
    that US Ambassadors to Israel do not visit the settlements. Given your
    considerable support and enabling of the settlement enterprise, do you
    plan to break with this longstanding, bipartisan tradition and visit
    the settlements if you become Ambassador?

        Answer. I will observe the practices directed of me by the
    President and the Secretary of State.

        Question 17. In response to Sen. Booker's question regarding
    whether you would go up to the Temple Mount as Ambassador, you replied
    that you have never been to the site. Will you commit to not going up
    the Temple Mount as Ambassador if you are confirmed?

        Answer. I have no intention to visit the Temple Mount, and will
    observe such practices directed of me by the President and the
    Secretary of State.

        Question 18. You stated there was ``No need to worry about the
    First Amendment'' when you defended your proposal to screen Muslims
    entering this country. It is also notable, that similar proposals
    resulting in increased scrutiny on Muslim Americans have emerged in
    Israel.
        There are concerns that Israel treats Arab Americans at the Israeli
    border differently than other Americans, despite their American
    passports. Reportedly, Arab Americans have routinely been detained,
    interrogated in intrusive manners for hours, and in some cases denied
    entry to Israel and deported for no apparent reason other than they are
    of Arab heritage.
        If confirmed as Ambassador will you work to ensure that all
    Americans are treated equally by Israel, and that all American
    passports are honored?

        Answer. Yes.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to David Friedman by Senator Christopher Murphy

        Question 1. The U.S. Ambassador to Israel often meets with
    delegations of pro-Israel Senators, Members of Congress and pro-Israel
    advocates that travel to Israel, sometimes on missions organized by
    groups that you have criticized or with whom you may disagree. Do you
    commit to meeting--to the extent you schedule permits--with delegations
    organized by or comprised of pro-Israel advocates that you have
    criticized or with whom you may disagree, including J Street?

        Answer. I value the work of civil society; I also value the freedom
    of expression, even in cases where I do not agree with the political
    views espoused. I recognize that giving voice to minority and even
    dissenting views only strengthens our societies and that a free and
    functioning civil society in which all peaceful voices are allowed to
    be heard is an essential element of a healthy democracy. Schedule
    permitting, I would like to meet with various and diverse groups to
    hear and understand their views.

        Question 2. In your letter on Ethics Undertakings to the State
    Department's Office of the Legal Advisor, you committed to resigning
    your positions with a number of entities, including businesses and the
    American Friends of Bet El Yeshiva Center, but that you would ``not
    participate personally and substantially in any particular matter
    involving specific parties in which I know that entity is a party or
    represents a party'' for a period of only on year. Why did you limit
    this non-participation commitment to only one year?

        Answer. The language stated above is the standard language mandated
    by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). I intend to fully comply with
    my ethical obligations as agreed to by OGE. If confirmed, I will not
    hold any position at this entity for the duration of my Ambassadorship.

        Question 3. Given 50 years of U.S. bipartisan opposition to
    settlement activity, it has been our country's practice for decades
    that U.S, Ambassadors to Israel do not set foot inside the settlements.
    Given your considerable support and enabling of the settlement
    enterprise, do you plan to break with this longstanding, bipartisan
    tradition and visit the settlements if you become ambassador?

        Answer. I will govern myself strictly in accordance with the
    practices imposed by the President and the Secretary of State.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to David Friedman by Senator Tim Kaine

        Question 1. Do you believe it would be helpful for Prime Minister
    Netanyahu to express a willingness to engage with Arab Governments on
    the Arab Peace Initiative? If confirmed, is this an approach that you
    would encourage the Israeli Government to pursue?

        Answer. As President Trump made clear, it is very important to him
    personally to work towards achieving peace throughout the Middle East
    region, including a comprehensive agreement that would end the Israeli-
    Palestinian conflict. On matters of policy, I will take direction from
    the President and the Secretary of State.

        Question 2. Do you think it will be more challenging to explore the
    opportunities between Israel and the Arab world if Israel continues on
    its current path of settlement expansion and demolition of Palestinian
    structures and homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank?

        Answer. President Trump is committed to achieving peace throughout
    the Middle East, including an agreement between the Israelis and
    Palestinians, and has stated that existing settlements are not an
    impediment to peace.  I have not been in contact with the leaders in
    the Arab world and would not want to speculate on their views of
    settlement expansion and demolition of Palestinian structures,
    especially in isolation. As stated above, I will take direction from
    the President and the Secretary of State.

        Question 3. Would a hasty decision to move the U.S. embassy to
    Jerusalem help or harm Israel's relationships with Jordan and Egypt,
    and Israel's ability to make progress in a broader approach with the
    Arab world?

        Answer. A hasty decision would not be advisable.

        Question 4. Do you believe the United States should encourage
    Israel to restrict or limit settlement activity? And if so, what
    specific restrictions would you advocate for as ambassador?

        Answer. I believe, as the President has said, that settlement
    expansion beyond existing borders, as well as new settlements, may not
    be helpful to the cause of peace. I could not advise on any specific
    restrictions in isolation without a full appreciation of the parties'
    positions on all relevant issues and detailed discussions with the
    President and the Secretary of State.

        Question 5. Do you plan to be involved in activities and
    fundraising for the Bet El settlement while serving as U.S, Ambassador?

        Answer. I intend to resign from my position as President of the
    American Friends of Bet El Yeshiva Center, a 501(c) 3, if I am
    confirmed by the Senate, and I do not intend to resume that position,
    or any other position at this entity, for so long as I am Ambassador to
    the State of Israel.
        Question 6. Do you agree that people-to-people programs can play a
    valuable role in promoting mutual respect and helping to create an
    environment more conducive to achieving peace?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 7. If confirmed as U.S. Ambassador, will you use your role
    to help champion people-to-people programs and encourage engagement
    across Israeli and Palestinian societies?

        Answer. Yes, subject to the direction of the State Department.

                                   __________

     Letters Submitted in Support of and in Opposition to David Friedman's
                     Nomination to be Ambassador to Israel

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

     Source Material for Controversial Statements Attributed to Ambassador-
                            Designate David Friedman

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  ----------

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:32 p.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Flake [presiding], Barrasso, and Booker.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

        Senator Flake. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee will come to order.
        Today, the committee will consider the nominations of two
    experienced career Foreign Service Officers to be the U.S.
    Ambassadors to the Republic of the Congo, and Senegal and
    Guinea Bissau, respectively. I was pleased to meet with each of
    today's nominees in my office several weeks ago and to learn
    more about them and about their potential postings.
        Thank you for coming by.
        Senegal remains stable in a region often plagued with
    instability around, but it is one of the few countries in
    Africa to have never experienced a coup d'etat. We cooperated
    well with Senegal on counterterrorism and with other issues.
        Our relationship with Guinea-Bissau has been strained on
    account of a near-constant stream of political crises, and the
    previous administration took some steps to try to make that
    relationship more positive.
        The Republic of the Congo continues to present challenges
    for the United States with trade and investment ties. Trade and
    investment ties with Congo center on the country's energy
    resources, and for the region in which it is all too common for
    heads of state to try to alter or bypass congressional term
    limits so they can just hang on to power.
        I thank both of you for your time and for sharing your
    expertise with us. I want to pass along our thanks to your
    family members. I am sure you will make some introductions. We
    appreciate the sacrifices that they make, and for all the good
    work that you do.
        With that, I will recognize Senator Booker.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

        Senator Booker. I appreciate that. I want to echo my
    chairman's words today. This is a tremendous moment to be able
    to sit here with the two of you, who have a very long, esteemed
    careers in the State Department and Foreign Service.
        I have been in the Senate for a short time, a few years,
    and have been on this committee for short weeks, but I am very
    familiar with the important role you play for our country. I
    just want to thank you both for the service that you have
    rendered.
        I want to say it clear, and I know that I speak for all the
    Senators on this dais, that your work, your safety, and your
    success is a priority for me and for us.
        The countries to which you have been nominated to serve in
    have very important U.S. policy interests. Frankly, I think
    they have interests that are important to all of humanity.
        Senegal was discussed by the chairman. They have their
    stability. They are a strong civil society with a relatively
    free press. It is a beacon of hope for Muslim-majority
    countries.
        And for Guinea-Bissau and the Republic of the Congo, they
    continue to have grave concerns, concerns of poor governance,
    political conflict, and humanitarian challenges. I really do
    believe that all of us as Americans should be deeply concerned
    about the success of the people of those countries, and our
    role in that is critical.
        It is a testimony to the two of you, this is something that
    is really exciting to me that we have President Obama and
    President Trump showing their accord. This is the vast
    territory on which they obviously agree on things. And that is
    really a testimony to the qualifications of the two individuals
    that sit before us.
        So thank you very much. I look forward to your testimony.
    And I do want to say, as I said to you in the backroom, we are
    very, unfortunately, crunched for time, having to go see the
    President in regard to North Korea.
        So we look forward to having a good hearing, cogent
    hearing, even if it is relatively brief compared to others.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker.
        Our first nominee Tulinabo Mushingi, a career member of the
    Senior Foreign Service who currently serves as U.S. Ambassador
    to Burkina Faso, a position he has held since 2013. This is the
    second time I have had the pleasure of being present for one of
    his confirmation hearings.
        Mr. Ambassador, welcome back.
        Our second nominee is Todd Haskell, who serves as Deputy
    Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of African Affairs. Prior to
    that, he was the Africa Bureau's director of public diplomacy
    and public affairs. Mr. Haskell joined the Foreign Service in
    1985 and served in the Dominican Republic, South Africa,
    Burkina Faso, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Israel, Egypt, and
    Mexico. I am trying to figure some nexus in all of that, but I
    have failed.
        Senator Booker. They are all on planet Earth.
        Senator Flake. They are.
        So we have before us two very experienced diplomats. We
    appreciate you being here.
        And, Mr. Mushingi, you may begin.

       STATEMENT OF HON. TULINABO SALAMA MUSHINGI OF VIRGINIA, A
         CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF
     COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY
    OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL, AND
     TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
           STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA-BISSAU

        Ambassador Mushingi. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member,
    distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to appear
    before you once again as President Trump's nominee for United
    States Ambassador to the Republic of Senegal and the Republic
    of Guinea-Bissau. I very much appreciate the confidence and
    trust that the President and Secretary of State have shown in
    nominating me for this position. I am equally grateful to
    receive this distinguished committee's consideration.
        Allow me to thank my wife of 35 years, Rebecca, and our
    daughter, who have supported me through my career.
        My work and travels across Africa, including as Ambassador
    to Burkina Faso, have provided me with the experience needed to
    foster strong ties between the United States, Senegal, and
    Guinea-Bissau.
        Senegal is one of our most reliable partners in Africa in
    our efforts to boost economic growth, promote good governance,
    fight terrorism, as well as counter the drivers of terrorism.
    For example, to strengthen our defense capabilities, in 2016,
    our two countries signed a defense cooperation agreement that
    gives the United States the ability to respond quickly to
    emergency situations in the region. Senegal also hosts one of
    the largest Peace Corps programs in Africa.
        Turning now to Guinea-Bissau, its longstanding political
    impasse and weak governance not only threaten the country's own
    development, they also set a dangerous example for the region.
    If confirmed, I will strengthen our efforts to promote economic
    development, step up civilian governance to increase democracy,
    and counter drug trafficking in the Gulf of Guinea.
        Mr. Chairman, I have been fortunate to work in public
    service, in particular on African issues, for over 27 years. If
    confirmed, I will work hard with our U.S. mission teams to
    advance U.S. national security interests, to reflect American
    values, to protect American citizens and interests, and to
    maximize the effectiveness of our cooperation in Senegal and
    Guinea-Bissau.
        Thank you very much for inviting me today. I will be
    pleased to answer any questions you may have.
        [Ambassador Mushingi's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Tulinabo Mushingi

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members of
    the committee, I am honored to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to serve as the next Ambassador to the Republic of
    Senegal and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau. I appreciate the confidence
    and trust the President and Secretary of State have shown in nominating
    me for this position. I am equally grateful to receive the
    distinguished committee's consideration.
        Today, it is my privilege to present my wife, Rebecca, who
    honorably served our country working for the U.S. Peace Corps, and my
    daughter, Furaha. Both have supported me throughout my career in the
    Foreign Service.
        My work and travels across Africa, including as Ambassador to
    Burkina Faso, have provided me with the experience needed to foster
    strong ties between the United States and Senegal and Guinea-Bissau. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the Members of this
    committee and their staffs to promote and protect U.S. interests in
    both countries.
        Allow me to first turn to our relations with Senegal, where a
    shared commitment to democratic values, security, and economic growth
    forms the bedrock of our partnership. Senegal's success in these areas
    sets a strong example for the region, advancing our core interests of
    reducing regional threats and promoting greater trade.
        Through their democratic traditions, the people of Senegal have
    shown over and over again that they can and will hold their leaders to
    account by casting votes in democratically-held elections and
    exercising their right to free speech. Senegal's leaders have also
    shown that they respect the democratic rights and will of the people.
        The United States supports the Government of Senegal's efforts to
    resolve the 34-year, low-intensity, separatist conflict in the southern
    Casamance region. A de facto cease fire has been in place there since
    2013, I believe due in no small part to the success of our economic
    development and diplomatic efforts. This regular and sustained
    engagement with all parties to the conflict, has contributed to real
    change on the ground and the possibility of a lasting peace. If
    confirmed, I will make sure our effort to support the Casamance peace
    process remains a priority.
        Senegal stands as one of our most reliable partners in Africa in
    the effort to promote good governance, fight terrorism, and counter the
    drivers of terrorism. Senegal is a member Global Peace Operations
    Initiative (GPOI) and of the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership
    (TSCTP) programs and is a leading voice for using regional approaches
    to CT challenges. Senegal consistently ranks among the top ten troop
    and police contributors to UN peacekeeping missions. To truly
    understand Senegal's importance, one need, look no further than the
    instrumental role Senegal played in helping ensure the peaceful
    transition to power of a democratically elected president after 22
    years of dictatorship in The Gambia, and the role it continues to play
    in supporting the Economic Community of West African States Military
    Intervention in The Gambia (ECOMIG).
        In 2016, Senegal and the United States signed a defense cooperation
    agreement. This agreement gives us the ability to respond quickly to
    emergency situations in the region, while also supporting Senegal's
    capacity to fight terrorism. If confirmed, I will work with Senegal to
    continue to strengthen our common effort to fight terrorism in West
    Africa and beyond.
        Senegal aims to be an attractive destination for investment--by its
    own citizens and by foreign investors. American entrepreneurs are
    finding new opportunities to do business in Senegal, and U.S.
    development assistance has already made critical contributions to the
    infrastructure the country must have for sustained economic growth.
        In September 2015, Senegal completed a $540 million MCC Compact
    focused on developing transportation and irrigation infrastructure in
    northern and southern Senegal, dramatically improving agricultural
    productivity and market access for farmers. In December 2015, the MCC
    Board selected Senegal as a candidate for development of a second five-
    year compact. The Government of Senegal is working closely with MCC to
    identify ways to alleviate the high cost of energy.
        Lastly, our people-to-people relations have never been stronger
    thanks to robust public diplomacy exchanges and over 275 American Peace
    Corps volunteers placed in communities across Senegal, working on
    projects in agriculture, agroforestry, health, and community economic
    development. If confirmed, I will work to deepen the bilateral
    partnership through programs like these, which are aimed at helping
    Senegal become an even stronger partner for the United States.
        Turning now to Guinea-Bissau, our efforts remain focused on
    promoting stable civilian governance to increase democracy, economic
    development, and counter drug trafficking in the Gulf of Guinea Guinea-
    Bissau has seen five different governments in the last 15 months. This
    reflects deep divisions, driven in large part by personal grievances,
    which have hindered efforts by the United Nations and ECOWAS to bring
    about a resolution to Guinea-Bissau's long-standing political impasse.
        Instability and weak governance not only threaten the country's own
    development; they set a dangerous example in a region where trans-
    national crime already thrives on porous, undefended borders and
    unpatrolled seas. Democracy and rule of law will flourish only if the
    President, the Government of Guinea-Bissau, the National Assembly, and
    leaders of the main political forces work together to establish an
    inclusive, responsive, and an accountable government that serves all
    citizens.
        In FY 2016, Guinea-Bissau received limited assistance in
    International Military Education and Training to support the
    professionalization of its military forces and more constructive and
    stable civil-military relations. The country also received aid to
    promote Rule of Law and support counter-narcotics projects. If
    confirmed, I will work with international organizations, such as the
    United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Guinea-Bissau, and
    regional bodies such as ECOWAS and the Community of Portuguese-Speaking
    Countries, to support security and constitutional rule and to bolster
    economic growth.
        Mr. Chairman, I have been fortunate to work in public service and
    particularly on African issues for many years. I am very familiar with
    the culture and peoples of West Africa and U.S. interests in the
    region. If confirmed, I look forward to working with our truly
    extraordinary U.S. Mission team in Senegal and Guinea-Bissau, and, as
    Chief of Mission, working to ensure the safety, security, and of all
    U.S. citizens as we work together to advance U.S. interests in Senegal
    and Guinea-Bissau.
        Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I would be
    pleased to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you, Mr. Mushingi.
        Ambassador Haskell?

    STATEMENT OF TODD PHILIP HASKELL OF FLORIDA, A CAREER MEMBER OF
         THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
             STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

        Mr. Haskell. If confirmed. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor
    to appear before you today as the President's nominee to be the
    U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of the Congo. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with this committee and with interested
    Members of Congress to advance U.S. interests and U.S. values
    in the Congo, and to help all Congolese achieve the bright
    future they deserve.
        Accompanying me here today is my wife, Jennifer, who has
    traveled to be with us all the way from South Africa, where she
    serves as the management counselor at our Embassy in Pretoria,
    and two of my children, Michael and Jonah, who have come from
    Texas and New York, respectively. My third son is actually
    currently teaching English in China and cannot be with us.
        Senator Flake. Raise your hand, will you?
        Good. Thank you.
        Mr. Haskell. The Republic of the Congo, with a population
    of about 4.5 million people, sits in a strategically important
    position on the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea. It is the fourth
    largest oil producer in sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately 500
    U.S. citizens live in the Republic of the Congo, and U.S.
    businesses are active in the petroleum sector and other
    industries.
        President Denis Sassou N'Guesso has played a valuable role
    as a mediator in regional crises. Under his leadership, Congo
    has deployed peacekeepers to the Central African Republic for
    more than a decade now, and is hosting approximately 35,000
    refugees from that country.
        Congolese troops deploying to the Central African Republic
    receive U.S. Government-sponsored training, and the Congo
    military also participates in the international military
    education and training program.
        U.S. policy seeks to promote the development of democratic
    institutions and the long-term stability of Congo.
        President Sassou has been in power for 33 of the last 38
    years. He overcame constitutional term limits through a
    referendum in October 2015, and he was reelected President in
    March 2016. Our public statements at that time criticized the
    flawed electoral process and the arrests of opposition leaders
    following the vote, while praising the people of Congo for
    their active participation in the election.
        If confirmed, I will continue to emphasize the need for
    good governance and effective institutions that serve the
    citizens of Congo.
        The United States is one of many countries addressing a
    broad range of health issues in Congo, such as poor child
    nutrition, HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis. And U.S. assistance
    in the health sector also focuses on identifying emerging
    infectious diseases such as Ebola.
        Embassy Brazzaville coordinates with several U.S.
    Government agencies to assist Congo on natural resources
    management and the protection of Congo's flora and fauna,
    including lowland gorillas and forest elephants.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will bring the collective
    experience of my 32 or so years in the Foreign Service to
    advance U.S. interests, to ensure the safety and welfare of all
    Americans and U.S. Government employees, and to strengthen
    bilateral relations with and promote the long-term stability of
    the Republic of the Congo.
        I am looking forward to working with this committee in
    furtherance of these goals, and I am happy to answer any
    questions that you might have.
        Thank you.
        [Mr. Haskell's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Todd P. Haskell

        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
    before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador
    to the Republic of Congo (ROC). If confirmed, I will work closely with
    this committee and other interested Members of Congress to advance U.S.
    interests and values in the Congo, and to help all Congolese achieve
    the bright future they deserve.
        Accompanying me here today is my wife Jennifer, who has traveled to
    be with us today from South Africa where she serves as Management
    Counselor at our Embassy in Pretoria, and two of my three children,
    Michael and Jonah, who have come from Texas and New York respectively.
    My third son Seth is currently teaching English in Chengdu China.
        The Republic of Congo, with a population of about 4.5 million
    people, sits in a strategically important position on the oil-rich Gulf
    of Guinea. It is the fourth largest oil producer in sub-Saharan Africa.
    Approximately 500 U.S. citizens live in the Republic of Congo, and U.S.
    businesses are active in the petroleum business and other industries.
        President Denis Sassou N'Guesso has played a valuable role as
    mediator in regional crises. Under his leadership, Congo has sent
    peacekeepers to the Central African Republic for more than a decade
    now, and is hosting approximately 35,000 refugees from that country.
    Congolese troops deploying to the Central African Republic receive U.S.
    Government-sponsored training, and the Congo military also participates
    in the International Military Education and Training program.
        U.S. policy seeks to promote the development of democratic
    institutions and the long-term stability of the Congo. President Sassou
    has been in power for 33 of the last 38 years. He overcame
    constitutional term limits through a referendum in October 2015, and
    was reelected president in March 2016. Our public statements criticized
    the flawed electoral process and the arrests of opposition leaders
    following the vote, while praising the people of Congo for their active
    participation in the election. If confirmed, I will continue to
    emphasize the need for good governance and effective institutions that
    serve the citizens of Congo.
        The United States is one of many countries addressing a broad range
    of health issues in ROC, such as poor child nutrition, HIV, malaria,
    and tuberculosis. U.S. assistance in the health sector also focuses on
    identifying emerging infectious diseases such as Ebola. Embassy
    Brazzaville also coordinates with several U.S. Government agencies to
    assist the Congo on natural resource management and the protection of
    the Congo's forest and fauna, including lowland gorillas and forest
    elephants.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will bring the collective experiences
    of my 31years in the Foreign Service to advance U.S. interests, to
    ensure the safety and welfare of all Americans and U.S. Government
    employees, and to strengthen bilateral relations with and promote long-
    term stability in the Republic of Congo. I look forward to working with
    the committee in furtherance of these goals, and I am happy to answer
    any questions you might have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Thank you both.
        Mr. Mushingi, with regard to Senegal, when we spoke in our
    office, we talked about U.S. business opportunities there. What
    can we do more to encourage U.S. businesses to locate and
    employ those in Senegal?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
    In fact, economic growth and economic development is one of our
    priorities in Senegal. If confirmed, of course, I will continue
    in that same vein.
        For Senegal, as we discussed, we are happy to see the
    interest by American businesses, American companies that are
    now, that have been for a while, and continue to be interested
    in Senegal.
        And Senegal has proven to be a welcoming nation. In fact,
    the hospitality they are known for called teranga is obvious
    when these companies start knocking on the door.
        The list of companies currently in Senegal is actually
    impressive, more than 20, the last time I checked, including
    companies like Citibank. The latest, which is the NBA, it just
    started an academy in Senegal for the whole continent of
    Africa. We have Kosmos that is interested in oil and gas.
        So now we have really an opportunity to increase this range
    of companies interested in Senegal, and we will work hard to
    continue advocating for American companies that are interested
    to come to Senegal.
        Senator Flake. There has been a rift lately between Senegal
    and Israel. I have sponsorship of the resolution with regard to
    settlement activity, and it has caused Israel to actually take
    some measures with regard to economic aid that was promised.
    That might also affect our relationship.
        What do you see as your role there?
        Ambassador Mushingi. If confirmed, my role, Senator, will
    be to continue the dialogue that my predecessors have had with
    the Government of Senegal about our values and about our
    relations with all our friends, including Israel.
        One thing, if I can make just a couple points on that
    resolution, it is good for us to note what the vote was, but
    also, we need to remember that Senegal as a member of the OIC,
    the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, is one of the few that
    has maintained for a long time diplomatic relations with Israel
    despite pressure.
        The second point I just want to make on that resolution is
    that it was a unanimous resolution. The United States will have
    abstained, but it was 14 votes, all the countries on the
    committee voted for that resolution.
        The final point I would make is that, as we speak today,
    the Embassy of Israel is still open in Senegal.
        And, just to conclude, saying that really the discussion
    and the conversation continues between the two countries. And
    as outsiders, as partners, as friends, we can only continue to
    work with the Government of Senegal in making sure they know
    where American values stand and what our stand is in relation
    to the other friends.
        Senator Flake. Just quickly on Guinea-Bissau, there are
    allegations that some of the military have been involved in
    drug trafficking. What cooperation can we have or do we have
    with the Government to ensure that that does not continue?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        Guinea-Bissau, as we said earlier, is really going through
    this political impasse. But we have to note also that the
    current democratically elected government is trying to work
    with their equivalent of the national assembly.
        On drug trafficking especially, I had my briefing, my
    consultation with a colleague from the Drug Enforcement Agency.
    I have had my meeting with the USAID, my meeting with DOD. All
    of us are working with the people of Guinea-Bissau, the
    Government of Guinea-Bissau, to make sure that they keep their
    attention focused on this issue of drug trafficking.
        The U.S. Coast Guard was looking at their port security
    because most of the trafficking comes through the port. And
    with the professionalization of the military, we are trying to
    get a military, a Guinea-Bissau military, that is aware of
    these issues and try to counter this drug trafficking problem.
        Senator Flake. Thank you. We have agreed to try to do this
    in one round, so I will continue to go over my time limit, if
    that is okay.
        Mr. Haskell, how many outside of your immediate family and
    the State Department know there is a Republic of the Congo and
    not just the DRC? [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. You do not have to answer that, but go
    ahead.
        Mr. Haskell. I am trying to think of something clever to
    say.
        No, it is true. I think there is a bit of Congo confusion,
    but I think the relationship with the Republic of the Congo is
    very important in its own right.
        Senator Flake. It is. I am grateful that we have put the
    importance on it.
        Part of the problem that we have had in terms of a business
    environment in the Republic of the Congo has been the
    Government's unwillingness to settle its debt to contractors
    and individuals who have done work there in the past.
        What role will you have, if confirmed, in trying to get
    them to address that issue?
        Mr. Haskell. Thank you for that question.
        I think that if one just looked at Congo-Brazzaville
    neutrally or objectively, you would think that it would be a
    tremendous investment destination for U.S. investment. There is
    really significant natural resources, the petroleum sector and
    mining and forestry. And yet we really do not see that.
        We do see some U.S. companies that have invested there.
    Chevron is active in the petroleum sector. Seaboard, which is a
    Kansas-based food processing company, operates there. But not
    the kind of level that you would expect, given the resources
    that they do have.
        That really has to do with a doing-business environment
    that is extremely difficult. On the World Bank's ranking of
    doing business in countries, I believe the Republic of the
    Congo ranks 177 worldwide out of some 190 or so nations, which
    is poor not just by worldwide standards but, frankly, poor even
    in terms of the neighborhood, which has not always been a great
    place to do business.
        So I think it is really important to work with the
    Government to identify those issues. I think at a time of low
    oil prices, there is real interest in the Government in looking
    at diversifying the economy, about moving into
    entrepreneurship, about looking at other things. That is the
    kind of assistance and help that we can provide.
        I also think that one thing, that one case we have to make,
    and we have made it over time but we need to continue to make
    it, is when you do have the kind of disputes that you referred
    to in your question, it is so important that the Republic of
    the Congo try to resolve these disputes in a transparent manner
    with the folks, with the businesses that they have disputes
    with, because that sends a signal to other investors about the
    possibility of going there.
        So, if confirmed, I can assure you that I will be an
    advocate for U.S. businesses when they did get into conflicts,
    such as the one you described.
        Senator Flake. Thank you. You touched on, in your opening
    statement, but one of the important parts of our relationship
    is the preservation of wildlife, some that are only found in
    large numbers in the Republic of the Congo, lowland gorillas,
    forest elephants.
        How important is our relationship there? And what are the
    biggest threats that we can help with?
        Mr. Haskell. I think our relationship is very important.
        The Congo Forest River basin is the second largest tropical
    rain forest in the world. It is, as I noted, as you also noted,
    home to species which have really no other home or is
    particularly hospitable.
        We have had actually reasonably good success working with
    the Government of the Republic of the Congo in training their
    rangers and in working in efforts to protect their natural
    parks. I think those are important efforts. They are not
    expensive efforts. They are efforts that there are other
    international partners with whom we can work in the region. We
    will continue down that line.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. I am grateful, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Mushingi, thank you very much for being here. Again,
    grateful.
        Your wife, I think she smiled. There she is. It is nice to
    have your family with you. That is tremendous.
        I just want to ask you a little bit about Senegal
    stability. Obviously, it is seen as one of the more stable
    countries, but they still seem to be working on reforms, and
    there were some reforms in 2016.
        Can you just evaluate those reforms for me and let me know
    what you think about its sort of democratic trajectory overall?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        Senegal really has proven in that region to have a
    commitment, strong commitment, to democratic values. It is one
    of the few countries where, in that region, where they have had
    a peaceful transfer of power between different administrations,
    from the opposition to the majority party. And that tradition
    has existed since independence, and it still goes on.
        Now the one thing that, if confirmed, that we will have to
    continue working on is to see how we can strengthen the
    principles that have already been acquired, that they already
    have, and that they are doing in Senegal. I was discussing this
    with a colleague, and one thing that we have to do and we have
    to continue working on are three areas that we can focus on.
        One, trying to strengthen the role of the civil societies,
    because they play an important role of kind of watchdog as far
    as the executive and the assembly, what they are doing. They
    have been vocal, they have proven their role in the society.
        The second one is really the youth bulge that we observe
    all around Africa, how we can get the young people that make up
    the majority of the population, whether in Senegal, whether in
    many other African countries, to encourage their participation
    in the democratic process.
        Nowadays, like we talk about the millennials, in some of
    those countries, we are talking about a generation of
    democracy. So that new generation, how we can get them to
    continue working in, participating in the democratic process.
        The last one is the involvement of women, and women and
    their role in the democratic process, and also their
    participation in all aspects of running the Government.
        So for Senegal, again, the basic principles of democracy,
    we share the same commitment for basic democratic rules,
    democratic principles. We just have to continue working on
    that.
        Senator Booker. If I can, two quick follow-ups on that.
        First of all, we just had a very fascinating hearing on
    Libya. We think of the role of U.S. strength often in terms of
    the military, but the people who were testifying were talking
    about the importance of the efforts we were doing to strengthen
    civil society.
        So I worry about the U.S. investments, especially with some
    of the budget proposals that have already come out, about that
    being the important role that we can be playing in stabilizing
    or even strengthening a democracy.
        Do you have any thoughts or advice, as an Article 1 branch
    of the U.S. Government that focuses on funding the State
    Department, about investing in those aspects of the State
    Department that focus on building civil society?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator.
        Once again, what we are doing, what I did, for example, in
    Burkina Faso, was to make priorities with the resources we
    have. The budget is voted. We were given resources. We work
    within those resources.
        So if confirmed for Senegal, again, to make those
    priorities clear.
        Senator Booker. I am going to interrupt you. I appreciate
    it. I get your point, and you are being very good by not giving
    me your opinion on overall funding levels. I guess that means
    the chairman and I are going to have to do our work without
    your input there.
        Let me ask you this last question on Senegal. Are there any
    concrete lessons that we can apply from Senegal in terms of
    other nations around, in terms of building a stable democracy?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator.
        The concrete lessons that we can apply are that, like we
    observed during the last elections, one lesson was that,
    indeed, the participation of all members of the society, all
    the citizens, is important during an election to give
    legitimacy to the people elected.
        So using civil societies, working with civil societies,
    including giving space to all the political parties, and also
    respecting the constitution of the country, all those were
    principles that were clear when Senegal was going through the
    last elections.
        Senator Booker. I am going to press for maybe one more
    question, and then we have two other Senators who have arrived,
    and I want to give them ample opportunity.
        But, Mr. Haskell, you have had a tremendous experience,
    especially I want to thank you. You have done incredible work
    as a Deputy Secretary over all of Africa, and I guess specific
    countries about the area in which you are going to be, God
    willing, the Ambassador.
        I do just have the overall concern about--the chairman made
    an insightful use of sarcasm about the confusion of two Congos.
    I have an overall concern with just America's attention and
    focus on the subcontinent as a whole, especially with the
    economic opportunities that are there, especially with the
    challenges that we have, everything from terrorism to how they
    are playing a role in other global dynamics. We have heard
    already about Israel and the like.
        I just wonder, for a guy who is new at this, you have been
    doing this for decades and focused at least on the subcontinent
    for some time now, do you have any wisdom that you would want
    to impart to myself and my colleagues here about ways to
    leverage U.S. influence in Africa for the good of humanity as
    well as American interests?
        Mr. Haskell. Thank you for that question. It is a great
    opportunity to talk about this.
        I will note, and I think sometimes something that gets lost
    a little bit in the headlines when we look at what is going on
    around Africa, is the extent to which Africa has dramatically
    transformed in a positive way over the last several decades.
        It was not that long ago where it was difficult to look at
    the continent and find too many democratic governments, or it
    was difficult to find economies that were thriving, to find
    places where innovation was occurring. Now we see it not
    everywhere on the continent but in a great many places where
    you have elections, where you have alteration of power between
    two different parties based on the results of elections, where
    you have economies, you have tech hubs in some places on the
    continent.
        I do think that the picture of the continent as a whole is
    sometimes much brighter than taking a quick glance at the
    headlines as they hit the paper. I suppose another good sign is
    the fact that occasionally Africa does make headlines in
    newspapers in a way that it really does not.
        I will echo what Ambassador Mushingi said. I spent most of
    my career as a public diplomacy officer. That means I have been
    working a great deal with civil society. I have done the
    traditional diplomacy and the rest of it. But I have worked
    with young people. I have worked with women's groups. I have
    worked with disadvantaged groups. I have worked with civil
    society, certainly.
        And I think that there is a lot to be said there for the
    advances that are occurring there, and we have made a
    tremendous difference. The United States has a role to play.
    And I think working with civil society, working with other
    international partners, working with like-minded governments, I
    think we can achieve even more moving forward.
        So I guess the one thing that I think is sort of not
    understood as well as it should be about Africa is the extent
    as to how far it has come and, frankly, how bright its future
    is.
        Senator Booker. Sir, thank you very much. And I look
    forward to continuing this conversation. I am concluding with
    my questions, but just yes or no question really quick. I think
    this is really important to Senator Flake and I.
        Did you bring your two sons to support you or to try to
    intimidate Senator Flake and I? Because they are big guys, so I
    just need to know what their role here is. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Haskell. I kind of knew you would be nice to me if they
    were here. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker.
        Senator Barrasso?
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Haskell, you keep using the words ``civil society.'' I
    want to ask you, because I appreciate the Congo's willingness
    to assist in promoting regional stability. I have concerns
    about the human rights abuses that have been committed by the
    troops.
        I was there with a number of Senators a couple years ago,
    including Cindy McCain, Senator John McCain's wife, who is
    really a ferocious advocate. I will tell you that the Republic
    of the Congo sent peacekeepers to the Central African Republic
    to serve in the African Union peacekeeping mission and in the
    United Nations peacekeeping mission. And the United Nations
    received allegations, as you know, of sexual exploitation and
    abuse against these Republic of the Congo peacekeepers in 2016.
        So in addition, as you know, a mass grave was discovered
    linking the Congolese peacekeepers to torture and murder of
    civilians in 2016. The Republic of the Congo troops killed at
    least 18 people that we know of, including women and children,
    between December 2013 and June 2015.
        On June 8 of last year, the Minister of Justice stated that
    the soldiers in question would face justice by the end of the
    year, and I want to ask you about that.
        Unfortunately, I understand the investigation into the
    killings as well as the sexual exploitation and abuses were
    still pending at the end of 2016.
        I think everyone in this room thinks it is unacceptable, it
    is outrageous, that the United Nations peacekeepers are
    inflicting such atrocities against the very people that they
    are sent to protect.
        So as the largest contributor to the United Nations
    peacekeeping missions, the United States, I believe, must take
    action to prevent future exploitation of these vulnerable
    populations in conflict zones and to ensure individuals are
    held accountable for these crimes.
        Under United Nations rules, the Government of the Congo is
    responsible for investigating and prosecuting the troops and
    the police that they contribute to the peace mission.
        So can you bring us up-to-date, If you would know, on the
    actions that the Government of the Republic of the Congo has
    taken to prosecute the criminal conduct of these troops and if
    these soldiers have been brought to justice?
        Mr. Haskell. Thank you for that question. I think it is a
    very important issue.
        I share your description of the things that have happened
    as outrageous and as unacceptable. It also has been a sentiment
    that has been echoed by our Embassy in Brazzaville over the
    years.
        As you noted, the Republic of the Congo has had
    peacekeepers in the Central African Republic for more than a
    decade now. There have been incidents over that period of time,
    more than one, several, that are at an unacceptable level.
        Since 2014, the U.S. has been providing training for troops
    before they go, through our ACOTA program. That training is
    filled with a human rights component. The effort is to make
    sure that soldiers understand these issues and the importance
    of them in moving forward.
        Nevertheless, and I say with great concern, since the time
    that training began, we still have had another series of
    incidents that occurred. So this is of deep concern to us. We
    have raised it with the Government of the Republic of the Congo
    repeatedly. The Government has condemned these incidents when
    they have occurred. They have withdrawn the soldiers back from
    the Central African Republic and brought them back to Congo.
    And they have moved to have charges pressed against them.
        But the truth is that action has not been taken. There can
    be several reasons for that.
        One is that the Government of Congo does not have a
    military justice system, so cases are funneled into the normal
    civilian court system. Frankly, the normal civilian court
    system lacks the capacity to function effectively and does not
    function well.
        But the second, frankly, and I have not been on the ground
    yet, but we have to wonder about the will in order to prosecute
    these cases. I can assure you that, if I am confirmed, this
    will be something very important to us. It is very difficult
    for us to continue to support peacekeeping operations to the
    extent that there is not any action taken on cases like this.
        So let me echo your concerns, and I do, indeed, share them.
        Senator Barrasso. I appreciate it, because it leads to the
    next question. If you are confirmed, and I am encouraging that,
    as the U.S. Ambassador, then what steps, when you are on the
    ground, could you take to ensure their government--their
    government--takes the crimes as seriously as we all do and
    holds the troops accountable?
        Mr. Haskell. Thank you, sir. I will say that, over the
    years, I have worked on a number of human rights issues. I find
    that different strategies work in different ways. I think it is
    important to get on the ground and figure out what is the most
    important approach.
        But I assure you that this will be a top priority for me,
    if confirmed.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        Ambassador, if I can visit with you for second about al
    Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and related groups, they have
    threatened to attack Senegal. You are well-aware of the threats
    that are out there.
        In February 2016, the chief of staff of Senegal's armed
    forces stated, ``Terrorism can hit anywhere, and so we must
    protect ourselves.''
        So how would you characterize, currently, the Government's
    ability to respond and confront terrorist threats, which we
    know exist?
        Ambassador Mushingi. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        That falls directly into what our priorities are in
    Senegal. In addition to economic growth that we are pursuing
    and private investment, one piece that we are involved in, we
    are continuing to invest in it, is peace and security, working
    with our DOD colleagues, especially AFRICOM.
        And as I said in my statement, in 2016, December 2016, we
    signed the defense cooperation agreement that gives us access
    to the law enforcement of Senegal, the security forces of
    Senegal, to work together and see how we can prevent, if not
    prevent, deter, if we do not deter, how we can respond, if it
    happens. So we are working in all those areas and strengthening
    the capabilities of the local security forces to respond to
    such acts.
        Of course, I was in Burkina Faso when we had the terrorist
    attack in January 2016. A few months later, I was in Cote
    d'Ivoire. So the talk was that next will be Senegal. So because
    of that, everybody, the locals and us, the partners, we are
    mobilized to do everything we can to be ready, if it happens.
        Of course, terrorism now is a global issue, and Senegal is
    aware, and we are aware of that as well.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        And thank you all. Again, we apologize for the shortened
    hearing. We just came under the time that we had for the
    Gorsuch hearings, I think, close to that. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. But we appreciate your service and the
    answers that you gave.
        One thing that is heartening, as Senator Booker will learn
    on this committee, we are able to travel as well to Africa and
    run into people in other capacities in our Embassies that are
    then nominated for an ambassadorship or move from ambassador
    from one country to another, like Ambassador Mushingi. I just
    have learned to appreciate the expertise and the
    professionalism that our diplomatic corps, particularly in sub-
    Saharan Africa, has.
        It is wonderful on this committee to deal mostly with
    career Foreign Service Officers that really know their stuff.
    That certainly is the case here.
        Again, thank you, and thank you to your family for the
    sacrifices that your families make for our country. Thank you.
        The hearing record will remain open until Friday. We ask
    the witnesses to respond promptly, if there are questions
    submitted, so that they can be part of the hearing record.
        Senator Flake. With the thanks of the committee, we stand
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 2:12 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
           Ambassador Tulinabo Mushingi by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting democracy, the rule of law, and human rights has
    been a central theme throughout my 27 year career at the Department of
    State. Most recently as the U.S. Ambassador to Burkina Faso, I
    witnessed the country transition from a dictatorship to a
    democratically-elected government. During my tenure as Ambassador in
    Burkina Faso, despite risks to my personal and professional life, I
    became the consistent lone and loud voice to publicly advise against a
    proposed constitutional amendment to presidential term limits, designed
    to extend the time in office of an already long-sitting president.
    Additionally, I pushed the Government of Transition of Burkina Faso for
    timely elections during a sensitive time when some voices were
    considering a delay. Finally, following the free and transparent
    presidential election, Burkina Faso and its people witnessed the first-
    ever peaceful transition of power from one civilian government to
    another.
        As the Deputy Chief of Mission in Ethiopia from 2009--2011, I
    encouraged the Ethiopian Government to allow civil society and
    opposition political parties to operate freely. Our Embassy efforts
    helped provide a path for opposition parties in Ethiopia to discuss
    their platforms, thus allowing a broader range of Ethiopian citizens to
    have a voice in their government, resulting in an increase in voter
    registration and participation. As the Management Counselor in Tanzania
    from 2006-2009, I participated in debates with Tanzanians, in which I
    promoted the rights of minorities, especially albinos. The debates were
    an important part of the Embassy's efforts to raise awareness of these
    vulnerable populations, which encouraged the Tanzanian Government to
    engage on minority rights issues. In Mozambique as the General Service
    Officer from 1994--1996, I participated as an international observer in
    the country's first-ever democratic elections and worked closely with
    the rest of the Embassy team to empower the Mozambican people as they
    freely elected their leaders for the first time.
        Based on my support for the democratic transition in Burkina Faso,
    I was honored to receive several awards from the people and the
    Government of Burkina Faso. Additionally, based on my dedication to
    promoting and supporting human rights and democracy during my career, I
    am honored to have been selected for the American Foreign Service
    Association's Mark Palmer Award for the Advancement of Democracy in
    2017. This award is given to members of the Foreign Service, by their
    peers, for the promotion of U.S. policies focused on advancing
    democracy, freedom and governance through bold, exemplary, imaginative
    and effective efforts during one or more assignments.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Senegal and Guinea-Bissau? What are the most important steps you expect
    to take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Senegal
    and Guinea-Bissau? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. Senegal generally has a strong record on protecting human
    rights and the trend is encouraging. However, as the Department of
    State has highlighted in its annual Country Reports on Human Rights
    Practices, human rights issues still exist, including harsh prison
    conditions, lengthy pretrial detention, discrimination and violence
    against women, the forced begging of young boys, and widespread
    discrimination against LGBTI individuals. The United States has
    programs in place to promote human rights in Senegal, and our Embassy
    in Dakar remains engaged on these important issues. If confirmed, I
    will strengthen efforts already in place and will look for any
    additional opportunities to promote human rights and tolerance in
    Senegal.
        Guinea-Bissau's human rights situation is adversely affected by the
    country's struggles with poverty and political instability. While the
    country does largely enjoy freedom of assembly, speech, and religion,
    many problems persist. Impunity and corruption, poor prison conditions,
    and violence, sexual exploitation, and discrimination against women and
    girls continue--as does the practice of female genital mutilation/
    cutting (FGM/C). If confirmed, I will focus on strengthening Guinea-
    Bissau's democratic institutions and respect for human rights. I will
    continue our work with the Government of Guinea-Bissau and other
    partners on security sector reform and will press the Government of
    Guinea-Bissau to undertake necessary political and economic reforms.
        I am optimistic that, by working closely with government and civil
    society in Senegal and Guinea-Bissau to advance human rights and
    democracy, the United States can make a meaningful impact and improve
    the lives of millions of people in the region.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Senegal and Guinea-
    Bissau in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. Senegal deserves praise for its longstanding tradition of
    democratic governance, including two peaceful transfers of power from
    the ruling party to the opposition since 2000. The country is home to a
    vibrant civil society that continues to operate freely.
        The Government of Senegal continues to take significant steps to
    advance human rights, but more work remains to be done, in particular
    on protecting the human rights of vulnerable populations, including
    prisoners, women, children, and LGBTI individuals. Challenges arise
    from weak institutional capacity and limited resources. Additionally,
    cultural practices or beliefs sometimes encourage discrimination
    against LGBTI individuals and society often ignores harsh conditions
    faced by many young boys forced to beg on the street. Civil society
    groups in Senegal work tirelessly to combat these cultural practices
    and beliefs, and a number of NGOs, both national and international,
    monitor human rights issues in Senegal. Our Embassy in Dakar works with
    many of these NGOs and civil society groups. If confirmed, I will
    continue this cooperation and, where possible, expand our engagement
    with our Senegalese partners to address human rights issues.
        In Guinea-Bissau, obstacles include corruption, lack of resources,
    training, and weak institutional capacity within the Government and the
    security forces. The prerequisite for improving the country's human
    rights situation is political stability and a shift in the culture of
    corruption and impunity that currently prevails. The United States and
    other donor nations support programs in place to assist in overcoming
    these impediments.
        Finally, I believe that education plays a key role in promoting
    tolerance and improving human rights conditions, and, if confirmed,
    will work with the team at our Embassy in Dakar on effective public
    diplomacy strategies to engage with wide audiences in both Senegal and
    Guinea-Bissau to inform and generate debate about human rights
    conditions.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Senegal and Guinea-Bissau? If confirmed,
    what steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and
    similar efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance
    and security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, one of my most important goals will be
    improving respect for human rights in Senegal and Guinea-Bissau, so
    that all Senegalese and Bissau-Guineans have the opportunity to
    exercise their fundamental freedoms and live their lives without fear.
    My efforts in Senegal will focus on improving prison conditions,
    reducing lengthy pretrial detention, and combating discrimination and
    violence against women, including rape and female genital mutilation/
    cutting (FGM/C), supporting the Senegalese Government's attempts to
    combat forced begging by children, and encouraging equal treatment
    under the law for all Senegalese, including LGBTI individuals. In
    Guinea-Bissau, I will focus on addressing issues of corruption and
    impunity in the Government, improving prison conditions and combating
    violence against women and girls, including rape, sexual exploitation
    and FGM/C. Human rights organizations and other NGOs are critical to
    this work, and, if confirmed, I look forward to engaging with them in
    both Senegal and Guinea-Bissau.
        The Department of State vets all assistance to security forces in
    Senegal and Guinea-Bissau in accordance with the Leahy Law, without
    exception. If confirmed, I will ensure that our vetting continues to be
    comprehensive, thorough, and in full compliance with the Leahy laws,
    and that those who violate human rights are restricted from receiving
    any U.S. training or other assistance until the responsible actors are
    brought to justice. Furthermore, I will strongly urge the Senegalese
    and Bissau-Guinean Governments to hold any violators accountable for
    their actions.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Senegal and Guinea-Bissau to address cases of key political prisoners
    or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Senegal and Guinea-Bissau?

        Answer. If confirmed, and if necessary, my staff and I will raise
    our concerns about political prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly
    targeted by the Governments of Senegal or Guinea-Bissau. Thankfully,
    there are no political prisoners in either Senegal or Guinea-Bissau at
    this time, but the respective oppositions in both countries allege that
    certain individuals have been unjustly targeted for prosecution by
    their government. Our Embassy in Dakar continues to monitor these
    cases. If confirmed, I and my team will actively engage with the
    Government, opposition, and civil society regarding any cases in which
    individuals are unjustly targeted.
        Question 6. Will you engage with Senegal and Guinea-Bissau on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Promoting human rights, civil rights and good governance is
    a task that I take extremely seriously and, if confirmed, I will engage
    with the respective governments of Senegal and Guinea-Bissau on these
    matters.

        Question 7. According to the Country Report for Human Rights
    Practices for this year, ``Police are mandated to fight corruption but
    were ineffective and received minimal external assistance or support.''

       What specific steps will you take to help police, and the
            Government more broadly to address corruption if confirmed as
            Ambassador? How will your actions to help combat bolster our
            efforts to address narcotics trafficking?

        Answer. Weak governance and corruption in Guinea-Bissau have
    threatened U.S. interests through the facilitation of the illegal drug
    trade from South America to Europe. Supporting the Government of
    Guinea-Bissau's efforts to combat drug trafficking is one of our main
    policy objectives. We work closely with the United Nations in Guinea-
    Bissau and have provided $780,000 to support a Bissau-Guinean
    interagency unit (the Trans-National Crime Unit), led by the Judicial
    Police, to investigate and combat drug trafficking and other organized
    crime, and to professionalize criminal justice services. The Drug
    Enforcement Administration has sent several Judicial Police officers
    for regional training at the International Law Enforcement Academy in
    Ghana.
        If confirmed, I will work to ensure the effectiveness of such
    programs in strengthening Bissau-Guinean institutions to address
    corruption and combat drug trafficking and organized crime.

        Question 8. According to the World Bank, ``A successful transition
    towards a less fragile and more prosperous future will depend on the
    Government's ability to regain popular legitimacy by restoring basic
    state functions and providing key public services, and creating the
    basic conditions for shared economic growth.''

       What steps has the United States taken to help in those areas since
            the restoration of democratic rule? What specific steps will
            you take if confirmed as Ambassador to further those goals?

        Answer. The United States provides a modest amount of assistance to
    Guinea-Bissau. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    arrived in 2014 when Ebola was present next door in Guinea. CDC has
    made a multi-year commitment of up to $5 million to build the
    capabilities of the country's health sector to fight infectious
    diseases. USAID also made a multi-year commitment of $3 million to
    strengthen and build the country's capacity to prevent, detect, and
    respond to infectious disease threats. The Department of State also
    provides security assistance through the International Military
    Education and Training (IMET) account, funded at approximately $150,000
    per year that includes a focus on civil-military relations. The United
    States, through its assessed contributions to the United Nations, also
    supports the efforts of the UN Integrated Peacebuilding Office in
    Guinea-Bissau (UNIOGBIS) to find a way to political stability and
    oversee a broad array of programs to support the Bissau-Guinean people.
        If confirmed, I intend to make the best use of U.S. taxpayer
    dollars in Guinea-Bissau by prioritizing resources that best advance
    America's interests, maximizing the effectiveness of our cooperation,
    and liaising with partner governments and the United Nations to ensure
    our assistance is well-coordinated.

        Question 9. How would you assess Senegal's commitment to anti-
    corruption efforts? What explains the pardon of Karim Wade, son of
    Senegal's former president Abdoulaye Wade, who was serving a six-year
    sentence for the illegal accumulation of approximately $200 million?
    Are there steps you will take if confirmed as Ambassador to enhance
    U.S. support for anti-corruption efforts?

        Answer. Senegal has made progress in the fight against corruption.
    In 2012, when President Sall took office, he initiated several steps to
    improve Senegal's anti-corruption efforts. Among these, he approved the
    creation of an independent anti-corruption agency known by its French
    acronym as OFNAC (Office National de la Lutte contre la Fraude et la
    Corruption).
        OFNAC has its own budget and seeks to promote transparency in
    government (by compiling and reviewing asset declarations of government
    officials), raise public awareness to report corruption, and initiate
    criminal investigations. Under the current head of OFNAC, who assumed
    her post last August, the anti-corruption body is focused on ensuring
    that the law is followed and that Senegal's anti-corruption efforts are
    durable, with an aim to prevent rather than react to corruption in
    Senegal.
        Senegal has not only created this anti-corruption body but also has
    laws that require banks to report suspicious transactions, and has a
    capable financial intelligence unit which conducts follow up analysis
    of these suspicious transactions.
        With regard to Karim Wade, former Minister of State and son of
    former President Abdoulaye Wade, as you noted, President Sall
    officially pardoned him on June 24, 2016. In total, he served half of
    his six year sentence. Immediately after Karim Wade's release,
    President Sall's office released a Communique confirming that Sall had
    pardoned Wade along with two co-conspirators--Alioune Samba Diasse and
    Ibrahim Aboukhalil (aka ``Bibo Bourgi''). According to the Communique,
    the pardon released them from the remainder of their prison sentence
    but did not have any impact on the millions of dollars' worth of Wade's
    assets that had been seized or frozen, and which would not be returned.
    Observers generally agree the pardon was an attempt on the part of
    President Sall to soothe divisions within the Senegalese body politic.
        If confirmed, I will continue U.S. efforts to promote the fight
    against corruption in Senegal and will leverage our bilateral
    relationship and assistance to press for enhanced transparency in
    government, increased public awareness of reporting mechanisms for
    corruption, and robust efforts to investigate and prosecute corruption.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Ambassador Tulinabo Mushingi by Senator Johnny Isakson

        Question 1. There have been numerous reports about budget cuts and
    reorganization at the State Department and USAID. This week, a budget
    document dated April 6 shows that the administration is considering
    reducing foreign assistance to Senegal by $57 million, which is a 50.5
    percent reduction. The leaked plans include the elimination of
    Senegal's funding for development assistance and PEPFAR, and a
    reduction in USAID's Global Health Programs funding for Senegal.
    However, it does show that the administration is considering a $20M
    increase to Senegal's Economic Support Fund account.

       What impact would such a proposal for funding have on the
            effectiveness of the U.S. Mission to Senegal? Does our progress
            in advancing U.S. strategic interests in Senegal merit a 50.5
            percent reduction in our assistance there? Please explain why
            or why not.

        Answer. The State Department and USAID support the President's goal
    of making government more efficient and accountable to U.S. taxpayers.
    If confirmed, I intend to make the best use of U.S. taxpayer dollars in
    Senegal by prioritizing resources that best advance America's
    interests, maximizing the effectiveness of our cooperation, and
    maintaining a robust diplomatic presence. We remain committed to a U.S.
    foreign policy in Senegal that advances the security and prosperity of
    the American people, as well as our most critical diplomatic and
    development objectives.
        As for the FY 2018 request, I cannot speak to unconfirmed numbers
    in the press. The FY 2018 Budget blueprint that was released in March
    included the overall funding level to be requested for the State
    Department and USAID programs. Beyond what is included in the Budget
    blueprint, we do not have additional details on what programs will be
    reduced as part of the FY 2018 request.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Todd P. Haskell by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democracy has been a key part of
    my work on Africa, both in the field and in the Department. During my
    first tour in Africa, as a Public Affairs Officer in Burkina Faso, I
    identified key leaders in civil society and the human rights community,
    selecting them for exchange trips to the United States and organizing
    joint programs with them. Many of these leaders went on to play an
    important role in promoting democracy in that country. As a Public
    Affairs Officer in South Africa, I partnered with civil society leaders
    in programming that focused attention on human rights issues affecting
    marginalized communities, such as victims of gender violence.
        Here in Washington, as the Office Director on Public Diplomacy, I
    emphasized exchanges on human rights and governance issues, bringing
    young Africans active in this sector to the United States. As Deputy
    Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of African Affairs, I co-chaired an
    extensive human rights dialogue with the Angolan Government, and later
    helped moderate a discussion of human rights in Angola with both a
    human rights activist and an Angolan Government representative. In
    Lesotho, I coordinated a strategy that has gone a long way toward re-
    asserting civilian control over the military. In Zimbabwe, I have
    supported efforts to support the human rights community.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Republic of Congo? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Republic
    of Congo? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most significant human rights problems include
    arbitrary arrests and the detention of political opponents and their
    supporters; and unlawful killings, arbitrary arrests, torture, and
    other degrading treatment of detainees by police. The welfare of
    internally displaced persons uprooted by the ongoing violence in the
    Pool region is also of serious concern.
        If confirmed, I will continue the work of our Embassy in
    Brazzaville which closely monitors and documents human rights issues in
    the Republic of Congo, and which regularly attends events organized by
    NGOs focusing on human rights to show public support for their efforts.
    If confirmed as Ambassador, I will also make human rights advocacy a
    top priority, and will regularly engage with the Congolese Government
    to urge adherence to fundamental principles guaranteed by their
    constitution of 2015, which include freedom of speech and assembly, and
    freedom from arbitrary arrest and unlawful detention. We look to see
    the Congolese Government adhere to the protections enshrined in their
    constitution and to respect human rights.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Republic of Congo
    in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The biggest potential obstacle to addressing human rights
    concerns is the climate of fear and the culture of official impunity
    perpetuated by the Government that intimidates civil society actors,
    political challengers, and independent media voices. The Government
    seldom takes steps to prosecute or punish officials who have committed
    abuses, whether in the security services or elsewhere in the
    Government.
        While the 2015 Constitution guarantees the basic rights of free
    speech and assembly, in practice these guarantees are ignored. The
    legislative and judicial branches of the Government and other nominally
    independent institutions, such as the electoral commission, are heavily
    politicized and do not play a counter-balancing role.
        These factors make advancement of human rights in the Congo
    difficult, but I intend to advocate as a priority for an improved human
    rights record.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Republic of Congo? If confirmed, what steps
    will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar
    efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and
    security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will meet with human rights,
    civil society, and other non-governmental organizations. I intend to
    ensure the Embassy will continue to advocate for the protection and
    defense of human rights, in concert with our local and international
    partners, and call for the Congolese Government to investigate and
    address credible allegations of abuse.
        As Ambassador, I would make certain the Embassy continues to
    implement Leahy vetting to ensure that all U.S. security assistance and
    security cooperation activities, including pre-deployment training to
    Congolese peacekeepers (PKO) in the Central African Republic (CAR)
    under the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA)
    program, ensures that troops receive specific human rights training to
    reduce the risk of human rights abuses in CAR. I will do the same for
    civilian-military training with junior leaders of the Armed Forces and
    members of civil society.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Republic of Congo to address cases of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Republic of Congo?

        Answer. In the ROC, several opposition leaders, including former
    presidential candidates and scores of their supporters, are currently
    imprisoned on serious charges that appear to be fabricated.
        Generally speaking, respect for prisoners' rights, especially for
    those affiliated with opposition political parties, has been
    inconsistent with Congolese law. Prison conditions are harsh. Trials,
    if and when they are eventually held, can be subject to political
    influence.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue our advocacy for the
    respect of fundamental human rights to include the freedom of speech
    and peaceful assembly, as well as freedom from arbitrary disappearance
    and protracted detention. I will strongly advocate that any person
    detained be afforded their full constitutional rights regardless of
    political affiliation.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Republic of Congo on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. I consider human rights advocacy to be a fundamental part
    of my job as Ambassador, if confirmed, and will certainly make human
    rights, civil rights, and good governance key elements of my engagement
    with the Congolese Government.

        Question 7. This year's Country Report for Human Rights Practices
    references a joint U.N.-Congolese Government report which ``cited
    indications that sexual violence toward women and teenage girls
    corresponded to the timing of security operations in the southern Pool
    region.'' The Country Report also says that ``Human rights NGOs
    reported multiple instances of rape and sexual abuse by police.''

       What specific steps can you take if confirmed as Ambassador to
            support accountability for security force abuses? What specific
            steps if confirmed as Ambassador can you take to more broadly
            to support efforts to combat gender based violence in Republic
            of Congo?

        Answer. The issue of sexual exploitation and abuse by police and
    security forces in the Republic of Congo is one that greatly concerns
    us all.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I will impress upon the Congolese
    Government the need to condemn sexual violence, whether perpetrated by
    security or police forces, or generally by Congolese individuals, and
    to promptly investigate and prosecute alleged perpetrators. I intend to
    ensure the Embassy also acts proactively by continuing to support the
    increased professionalism of the security sector through training and
    exchanges with Congolese military and law enforcement forces. This
    engagement should ultimately lead to improved professionalism, respect
    for the rule of law, respect for human rights, including gender rights,
    and civilian security. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will also advocate
    steps Congo can take to strengthen the capacity of civilian courts to
    hold accountable those who commit acts of gender based violence.

        Question 8. According to the Country Report for Human Rights
    Practices, while ``the law provides for criminal penalties for
    corruption by officials; however, the Government did not implement the
    law effectively, and many officials engaged in corrupt practices with
    impunity, despite the president's call for an end to corruption in his
    inauguration speech.

       What steps can you take if confirmed as Ambassador to encourage
            effective implementation of the law? Are there other steps you
            can take to support anticorruption efforts? What are they?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will ensure that the Embassy
    continues to support efforts to address the widespread corruption and
    lack of transparency that surrounds government financial practices and
    to encourage effective implementation of Congolese laws against
    corruption. I will continue the Embassy's work with existing Congolese
    anticorruption institutions to address, report and bring to justice
    those found guilty of corruption. These institutions include the
    National Agency for Financial Investigation, an anti-corruption unit
    that was initiated in 2008 under the auspices of the Central Africa
    Monetary Union, and the National Commission for the Fight against
    Corruption. I will consider appropriate ways we can help build the
    capacity of these institutions and the capacity of the judiciary
    through training and other opportunities.
        Transparency can be an important deterrent to corruption. The
    constitution mandates that senior elected or appointed officials
    disclose their financial interests and holdings both before taking
    office and upon leaving office. The constitution and law also provide
    for public access to government information for citizens, noncitizens,
    and the foreign media; however, authorities did not effectively
    implement the law. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will advocate with the
    Government for the enforcement of these important protections.

                                   __________

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                              TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Rubio, Flake,
    Gardner, Young, Barrasso, Portman, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen,
    Coons, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, Merkley, and Booker.

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

        The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        We are honored to have so many people here today. I do
    wonder what is happening back in Iowa with the Governor, two
    Senators, and so many distinguished individuals here. And we
    are glad to have all of you here in support of our nominee.
        Out of deep respect for Senator Grassley and Senator Ernst,
    the ranking member and I both will defer our opening comments
    so that you do not have to sit through those. I know that you
    would like to say wonderful and glowing things about our
    nominee, and we know that you have other business that you need
    to attend to. So what we will do is ask you to please go first.
    We will then begin the business in the normal way and move to
    testimony by Governor Branstad.
        But if you would begin, the most Honorable Senator
    Grassley, we would appreciate it. We thank you for honoring us
    with your presence here today, and we thank you for your
    service in so many ways. With that, we would love to hear your
    comments.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES GRASSLEY,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM IOWA

        Senator Grassley. Thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking
    Member Cardin and members of the Foreign Relations Committee.
    It is a privilege for me to be here to introduce the Governor
    of Iowa, the next ambassador to China.
        And I would say that this gentleman has been an ambassador
    all of his life for Iowa and will make a good ambassador to
    China. He has been an ambassador for Iowa within the United
    States of America as he has told other Americans about Iowa, a
    great place to create jobs, a great place to do business. And
    he has been an ambassador for Iowa around the world many, many
    times with many, many different countries, but especially with
    China being an ambassador for Iowa's exports.
        It is an honor to appear here with Senator Ernst, and it is
    even a greater privilege to introduce a person that I call a
    good friend way back when, Terry Branstad, at least to his
    first years in the Iowa legislature, 1973.
        As many of you know, Governor Branstad is the longest
    serving Governor in U.S. history. He is a lifelong Iowan who
    has devoted his life to public service, and even when he was
    not in public service as president of a university, he was
    still an ambassador for Iowa.
        After more than 22 years as my home State chief executive,
    I am proud to support Governor Branstad's nomination to serve
    our country as the next U.S. Ambassador to China. His
    nomination should come as no surprise to the people of Iowa. We
    have long known and benefited from the relationship Governor
    Branstad has with the people of China. A sister state
    relationship going way back to 1983 has grown into a successful
    trade partnership that has benefited Iowa farmers and
    businesses.
        Perhaps most notably, Governor Branstad enjoys a 30-year
    friendship with President Xi. Their first meeting took place in
    1985 when Xi was then a local provincial official who led an
    agricultural delegation to Iowa. President Xi visited Iowa
    again in 2012 when Governor Branstad was back at the helm for a
    fifth term as Governor of Iowa. Their relationship reflects a
    genuine good will and mutual respect.
        Governor Branstad has never stopped working to expand
    Iowa's trade, investment, and economic partnerships on the
    world stage most importantly, including China. He will bring
    Midwestern humility and level-headed leadership to this very
    important job representing the people of the United States and
    the President there in Beijing. He is a workhorse who is
    unafraid to get in the trenches to get the job done.
        If he is confirmed, I am confident that Governor Branstad
    will bring to bear his tireless commitment to solving problems
    and always move the ball forward. Although his heart will
    always be in Iowa and I know he will return to Iowa, I know
    that Governor Branstad will throw himself into this job of
    being an ambassador wholeheartedly.
        Governor Branstad is uniquely qualified to help strengthen
    the trade, economic, and cultural, as well as the geopolitical
    relationships between our two countries. I am pleased that he
    has now been called to serve as the ambassador. I am very
    confident that he will represent the United States well and
    excel just as he has throughout his lifelong career of public
    service, as well as his public sector leadership.
        Without reservations, I support this nomination. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much for that.
        And to Senator Ernst, who has brought her unique and
    distinctive background to the Senate and certainly has made a
    major impact already, we welcome you and look forward to your
    comments.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. JONI ERNST,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM IOWA

        Senator Ernst. Thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking
    Member Cardin and the members of the committee.
        It is my privilege to be here today, along with our
    longtime senior Senator, Senator Grassley, to introduce my
    Governor, my friend, and the longest serving Governor in U.S.
    history, Terry Branstad.
        A native Iowan, Governor Branstad served in the Iowa
    legislature before serving our State as Governor from 1983 to
    1999 and again from 2011 until what I hope will be his swift
    confirmation as U.S. Ambassador to China.
        Having worked alongside the Governor for many years, I know
    he will exemplify the same leadership, thoughtfulness, and
    dedication in his role as Ambassador to China on behalf of the
    United States as he did for the people of Iowa.
        Importantly, Governor Branstad also knows China and its
    leaders well. He first met President Xi Jinping while he was
    visiting Iowa on an agricultural research trip in 1985. They
    have kept in touch over the years, and Governor Branstad has
    since visited China a number of times on behalf of the State of
    Iowa.
        Iowa's extensive trade relationship with China has given
    Governor Branstad a front seat view of the complexities of our
    country's broader trade and economic relationship with China
    and will provide him with the foundation to effectively
    advocate for U.S. interests.
        While our bilateral economic relationship with China is
    certainly important, I do not have to tell you that our list of
    bilateral issues with China is long and expands beyond trade
    and investment, to include issues like North Korea, the South
    China Sea, human rights, and more. Accordingly, the position of
    U.S. Ambassador to China is one of the most important
    ambassadorial positions in the world, and I am confident that
    President Trump has made an excellent choice in nominating Iowa
    Governor Terry Branstad for this role. I look forward to him
    being confirmed by the Senate and bringing the Iowa way to
    Beijing.
        I also want to extend my thanks to the support that has
    been given to Governor Branstad by his wonderful family, and I
    know he will introduce Chris and the rest of his family soon.
    They are truly an asset to Iowa. I know that they are going to
    be a greater asset for the United States of America.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you both. I know our ranking member
    would love to thank you for your comments.
        Senator Cardin. Yes.
        Governor Branstad, let me just point out that your two
    Senators are very much respected in this institution and having
    both of them here to speak on your behalf is impressive. And we
    thank both of our colleagues for sharing their comments about
    you.
        The Chairman. Thank you both very much.
        We will now return to our opening comments. Governor
    Branstad, it is a pleasure to welcome you here today as our
    nominee to be the next Ambassador to China. I am glad to see
    members of your family here today as well. I wish you all the
    best as you embark on this exciting new venture.
        Beijing is not Des Moines. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. But I know that your relationship with
    President Xi spans decades, and I am confident that you fully
    understand the breadth and depth of the challenges awaiting you
    in China.
        When we met in my office, I appreciated your honesty and
    candor about managing the complexities and relations with
    China, and I look forward to expanding on that conversation
    here today.
        As I have said previously, the U.S.-China is one of the
    most consequential relationships for U.S. national interests.
    The nature of relations between Washington and Beijing will
    have a profound impact on the security, prosperity, and
    stability in the region for the coming years. You will have a
    unique opportunity to help shape that relationship and move it
    in a direction that is beneficial for both countries.
        But it certainly will be a difficult task as U.S. relations
    with China have been trending in the wrong direction for
    several years. China's militarization of the South China Sea,
    cyber theft of intellectual property, which again--I was at a
    meeting last night on this very topic. It is just outright
    theft--outright theft. And it is something that has to end. The
    discriminatory trade and investment practices in addition are
    just a few of the areas of rising tension in the relationship
    between the United States and them.
        We can no longer afford to simply manage our differences
    with China as Beijing continues to challenge U.S. power and
    disregard international norms. However, we should always seek
    cooperation in areas where we can work together, including
    reducing the threat posed by North Korea.
        I also believe that we must be clear-eyed about China's
    long-term goals, which are not necessarily aligned with U.S.
    national interests. Short-term gains should not come at the
    expense of long-term U.S. national interests, values, rule of
    law, international norms, and our alliance commitments, of
    which we have many in the region.
        We must be direct and willing to use our leverage when
    China challenges U.S. political, security, and economic
    interests.
        Governor Branstad, I look forward to hearing from you about
    your vision for relations with China and plans to serve as an
    effective advocate for U.S. national interests.
        Again, thank you for being here. I look forward to our
    ranking member's comments and then your testimony. We
    appreciate you and your family all being here.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Governor Branstad, once again welcome to our
    committee, and thank you very much for your career of public
    service and your willingness to continue to serve our country
    in a very important position as Ambassador to China.
        I also want to share thanks to your family because this is
    a family sacrifice, and we appreciate the willingness of your
    family to allow your service to our country.
        You have a very distinguished background, a very impressive
    background. A confirmation hearing gives us an opportunity not
    only to look at your qualifications but also to review the
    scope and trajectory of the U.S. relationship with the country
    that you have been nominated to represent the United States,
    China. Indeed, as we contemplate how to address the situation
    in North Korea, we recognize that China plays a critical role
    in that regard. So as we look at so many of the circumstances
    around the world, China comes up in our view.
        30 years ago, we were debating whether or not China would
    be a major power. That debate is now settled. But the question
    of what sort of power China will be remains. Will China help to
    support peace and stability in Asia or seek to overturn the
    regular order? Will China become a trade partner committed to
    the enforcement of international laws, or will we continue to
    see the flouting of international norms, as Chairman Corker has
    mentioned? Will China open space for its citizens to express
    their own views and ideas, or will it continue to brutally
    repress its own people?
        These are questions that you will confront, if confirmed,
    and while we may not yet know all the answers, I am concerned
    by some of what we are seeing. For example, we have seen an
    increasing provocative China in the maritime domains, coercing
    and intimidating neighbors in the East China Sea and South
    China Sea and attempting to use the threat of military force to
    address territorial and regional disputes. And as you and I
    discussed when we sat together recently in my office, I am
    deeply concerned by the deterioration of human rights in China
    and the environment for civil society and independent voices in
    that country.
        When I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on
    East Asia, President Xi became the President of China. At that
    time, many of us hoped that China was on the verge of a more
    progressive or reformist era and that along with growing
    interaction with the outside world and significant economic
    development, human rights would, indeed, improve. Yet, the
    opposite has proven true. President Xi's administration has
    adopted a slew of laws that violate the most basic human rights
    of the Chinese people and that presents challenges to U.S.
    interests and values as well. The community of civil activists
    in China that thrived in the 1990s and 2000s, partly as a
    result of the U.S. engagement both diplomatically and
    economically, have come under assault as never before. When I
    joined the subcommittee, it was unthinkable that people in the
    United States or EU would be detained by Chinese authorities
    inside and outside mainland China. Yet, that is the current
    reality.
        And all the while, we still do not know if the Dalai Lama
    will be allowed to return to Tibet. We do not know the
    whereabouts of Panchen Lama. We do not know whether authorities
    will release the Nobel Laureate, Liu Xiaobo, in 2020, and we do
    not know if the people of Hong Kong will be able to continue to
    exercise genuine autonomy. But we do know that President Xi is
    set to remain in power for at least the next 5 years.
        So I am very interested in hearing your thoughts on how, if
    confirmed, you will stand with civil society and with the
    Chinese people, including when it comes to labor rights where I
    must say your record as Governor in Iowa has raised some
    concerns, and assure that human rights and universal values are
    at the heart of U.S. policy with China.
        I am also interested in your thoughts as to what we may see
    by way of cooperation with China on North Korea going forward.
    I understand what the President has asked of China, but I
    remain concerned that we have seen this movie before and we
    really have not seen any change in China's position as it
    relates to North Korea. Many of us are concerned that they will
    only go so far, but they are concerned about the stability of
    the current regime will prevent them from taking the necessary
    steps to change the equation for North Korea. We welcome your
    thoughts on that matter.
        So let me lastly mention one additional issue. You will
    take, if confirmed, the oath of office to protect and defend
    the Constitution of the United States. Before President Trump
    took the oath of office, many of us urged him to take steps to
    avoid a constitutional conflict with the Emolument Clause. And
    he is the only President that has not divested or set up blind
    trusts for his financial institutions. That is not your doing.
    Your doing is to represent our country, if confirmed, in China
    and must take steps to make sure that our Constitution is not
    violated, that is, that the Trump enterprises are not given
    favors by the China regime that would violate the Emolument
    Clause. So we are interested in learning how you intend to make
    sure that you defend the Constitution and protect against that
    particular challenge.
        So I look forward to your thoughts on how you can elevate
    the current state of play between the United States and China,
    your thoughts on how to move the relationship forward
    especially on human rights, and what you hope to achieve, if
    confirmed, as our Ambassador to the People's Republic of China.
    Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cardin.
        With that, your entire written testimony, without
    objection, will be entered into the record. So do not feel that
    you have to go through all of it. If you could summarize some
    comments in about 5 minutes, that would be great. We welcome
    you here. We thank you for your willingness to serve in this
    capacity and look forward to your comments.

      STATEMENT OF HON. TERRY BRANSTAD OF IOWA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
               AMERICA TO THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

        Governor Branstad. Thank you. I would like to begin by
    thanking Iowa's two outstanding Senators, Senator Grassley and
    Senator Ernst. They are very conscientious, hardworking, and
    outstanding public servants, and I am proud to have them as
    friends. And I appreciate their support.
        And, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the
    committee, it is indeed an honor to appear before you today as
    President Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to
    the People's Republic of China. Never in my wildest dreams
    would I have thought that a farm boy from a small town of
    Leland, Iowa would one day have the opportunity to become, with
    your consent, the ambassador to one of the world's most
    influential countries and one of America's leading trading
    partners. I am thankful to President Trump for his confidence
    and his trust in me to take this important diplomatic role.
        I would not be where I am today if it were not for the
    people sitting right behind me. My wife of almost 45 years
    Chris is my constant support and the most understanding person
    that I know. Thank you, honey. Also, I want to introduce my
    sons, Eric and Marcus, who have joined me today. I know that my
    daughter Allison, who is a third grade teacher, and my
    children's spouses, Adrienne, Jerry, and Nicole, and our seven
    grandchildren are watching from afar. They have already wished
    me good luck this morning. Pursuing this opportunity was a
    family decision, and I am very thankful for their guidance,
    encouragement, and support especially over the last several
    months.
        If confirmed as ambassador, I will work every day to
    represent American values to the leadership of China and the
    Chinese people at large, values that include upholding human
    rights for all and a free and open market, a rules-based order
    in the oceans surrounding China, and the importance of a free
    press.
        I look forward to joining the impressive and committed team
    of public servants and their families from the U.S. State
    Department and many other U.S. agencies at our embassy in
    Beijing and the consulates across China. Leading this team of
    dedicated professionals, who are working as we speak to promote
    America's interests in China, would be a great honor and
    responsibility that I would not take lightly.
        My relationship with the President of China, Xi Jinping,
    goes way back, as you have heard, to 1985. As a first-term
    Governor, I had the opportunity to welcome an agriculture
    delegation from the Hebei Province of China, Iowa's sister
    state, to the State of Iowa. Leading that delegation was a
    young man whose business card read Xi Jinping, Feed Association
    of Shijiazhuang. During the trip, our sister state director
    Luca Baroni took our one Chinese visitors on tours of farms and
    factories and to receptions and dinners with our sister state
    volunteers. They attended a birthday party, a Mississippi River
    cruise, and we showed them true Iowa life and hospitality. I
    even hosted the delegation in the Governor's formal office. A
    connection was made and a friendship was founded. To this day,
    President Xi still speaks fondly of Iowa and the hospitality he
    enjoyed there so many years ago.
        If confirmed, I hope to use my unique position as an old
    friend of President Xi and a trusted confidant of President
    Trump to positively influence the U.S.-China relationship. As
    the Governor of Iowa, I saw firsthand the importance of a
    positive and healthy trade relationship between our two
    countries. Nearly one out of every two rows of Iowa soybeans
    last year were sent to China, as well as $33.5 million worth of
    pork in 2016. The importance of trade extends beyond
    agriculture as well. Aviation products, manufactured goods,
    chemicals, electronics, and many other products and services
    are exported to China daily and help support and sustain the
    American economy.
        As ambassador, I will continue the work that I have started
    as Governor to open up the Chinese markets to American
    businesses of all sorts. This will be good for the American
    people as it will create more jobs and good for the Chinese
    people as they will have more access to the best-made products
    that the world has to offer. In keeping with President Trump's
    mission, I am committed to making sure that the trade
    relationship between the United States and China puts the
    American worker first.
        Our relationship with China is multifaceted, not solely
    focused on trade. And I am aware of the critical national
    security issues that our two countries must work together on as
    well. As President Trump made clear when he met with President
    Xi at Mar-a-Largo a few weeks ago, China could play a critical
    role in convincing North Korea to dismantle its nuclear and
    missile programs, a strategic policy that would boost the
    security of America, China, and the entire world.
        As Governor, I had the opportunity to visit Taiwan as well.
    As ambassador, I will be committed to communicating the United
    States' continued support for our One China policy expressed in
    the three joint communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act. We
    remain committed to our goal to see that this cross-strait
    issue is peacefully resolved in a manner that is acceptable to
    both sides of the strait.
        I saw firsthand many of the cybersecurity concerns that the
    United States has in regard to China during my time as Governor
    when I received a monthly security briefing. The protection of
    intellectual property and technology security is of utmost
    importance to our country, and I will continue to make that
    clear in frank discussions with the Chinese Government.
        On the South China Sea, China cannot be allowed to use its
    artificial islands to coerce its neighbors or limit freedom of
    navigation or overflight. The United States will uphold freedom
    of navigation and overflight by continuing to fly, sail, and
    operate wherever international law allows.
        As Governor, I had the opportunity to travel to all of
    Iowa's 99 counties every year, a feat that is affectionately
    named for your esteemed colleague as ``the full Grassley.'' As
    ambassador, I hope to continue this tradition by visiting every
    province in China. With a country as large and expansive as
    China, I know there is much life and activity outside of
    Beijing. I look forward to connecting with the Chinese people
    and continuing a vibrant exchange of culture and ideas that we
    began back in 1983 when I signed the sister state proclamation
    with Governor Jon Xu Wang.
        If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to represent America
    and her citizens to the best of my ability. I will champion
    American interests in China with as much fervor and dedication
    as I have championed Iowa's interests during my more than 22
    years as Governor. I am humbled to be considered for this
    position.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, members of the committee,
    thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. I
    welcome your comments, questions, and continued dialogue. Thank
    you.
        [Governor Branstad's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Hon. Terry E. Branstad

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
    committee, It is an honor to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the People's
    Republic of China. Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought that
    a boy from a small farm in Leland, Iowa, would one day have the
    opportunity to become, with your consent, the ambassador to one of the
    world's most influential countries and one of America's largest trading
    partners. I am thankful to President Trump for his confidence and trust
    in me to take on this important diplomatic role.
        I would not be where I am today if it were not for the people
    sitting right behind me. My wife of almost 45 years, Chris, is my
    constant support and the most understanding person I know. I would also
    like to introduce you to my two sons, Eric and Marcus, who have joined
    me today. I know my daughter Allison and my children's spouses,
    Adrienne, Jerry, and Nicole, and our seven grandchildren, are watching
    from afar. Pursuing this opportunity was a family decision, and I am
    thankful for their guidance, encouragement, and support, especially
    over the past few months.
        If confirmed, as ambassador, I will work every day to represent
    American values to the leadership of China and the Chinese people at
    large; values that include upholding human rights for all, a free and
    open market, a rules-based order in the oceans surrounding China, and
    the importance of a free press.
        I look forward to joining the impressive and committed team of
    public servants and their families from the U.S. State Department and
    many other U.S. Government agencies at our embassy in Beijing and
    consulates across China. Leading this team of dedicated professionals,
    who are working as we speak to promote America's interests in China,
    would be a great honor and a responsibility that I would not take
    lightly.
        My relationship with the President of China, Xi Jinping, goes all
    of the way back to 1985. As a first term Governor, I had the
    opportunity to welcome an agriculture delegation from the Hebei
    Province of China, Iowa's sister state, to Iowa. Leading that
    delegation was a young man whose business card read Xi Jinping, Feed
    Association of Shijiazhuang. During the trip, our sister state director
    Luca Baroni took our new Chinese visitors on tours of farms and
    factories, and to receptions and dinners with the sister state
    volunteers. They attended a birthday party, a Mississippi River cruise,
    and we showed them a true taste of Iowa life. I even hosted the
    delegation in the Governor's office. A connection was made and a
    friendship was founded. To this day, President Xi still speaks fondly
    of Iowa and the hospitality he enjoyed there so many years ago.
        If confirmed, I hope to use my unique position as an ``old friend''
    of President Xi and a trusted confidant of President Trump to
    positively influence the U.S.-China relationship. As the Governor of
    Iowa, I saw first-hand the importance of a positive and healthy trade
    relationship between our two countries. Nearly, one out of every two
    rows of Iowa soybeans is sent to China, as well as $33.5 million in
    pork in 2016. The importance of trade extends well beyond agriculture
    too. Aviation products, manufactured goods, chemicals, electronics, and
    many other products and services are exported to China daily and help
    support and sustain the American economy.
        As ambassador, I will continue the work I started while Governor to
    open up the Chinese markets to American businesses of all sorts. This
    will be good for the American people as it will create more jobs, and
    good for the Chinese people as they will have more access to the best-
    made products this world has to offer. In keeping with the President's
    mission, I am also committed to making sure that the trade relationship
    between the United States and China puts the American worker first.
        Our relationship with China is multi-faceted and not solely focused
    on trade. I am well aware of the critical national security issues our
    two countries must work together on as well. As President Trump made
    clear when he met with President Xi at Mar-a-Lago a few weeks ago,
    China could play a critical role in convincing North Korea to dismantle
    its nuclear and missile programs, a strategic policy that boosts the
    security of America, China, and the entire world.
        As Governor, I had the opportunity to visit Taiwan. As ambassador,
    I will be committed to communicating the United States' continued
    support of our one China Policy, expressed in the Three Joint
    Communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act. We remain committed to our
    goal to see this cross-Strait issue peacefully resolved in a manner
    that is acceptable to both sides of the Strait.
        I saw first-hand many of the cybersecurity concerns the United
    States has in regards to China during my time as Governor, when I
    received my monthly security briefings. The protection of intellectual
    property and technology security is of the utmost importance to our
    country, and I will continue to make that clear in frank conversations
    with the Chinese Government.
        On the South China Sea, China cannot be allowed to use its
    artificial islands to coerce its neighbors or limit freedom of
    navigation or overflight. The United States will uphold freedom of
    navigation and overflight by continuing to fly, sail, and operate
    wherever international law allows.
        As Governor, I had the opportunity to travel to all 99 counties in
    Iowa every year--a feat affectionately named for your esteemed
    colleague as ``the full Grassley.'' As ambassador, I hope to continue
    this tradition by visiting every province in China. With a country as
    large and expansive as China, I know there is much life and activity
    outside of Beijing. I look forward to connecting with the Chinese
    people and continuing a vibrant exchange of culture and ideas that we
    began in 1983.
        If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to represent America and Her
    citizens to the best of my ability. I will champion American interests
    in China with as much fervor and dedication as I have championed Iowa's
    interests during my more than 22 years as Governor. I am humbled to be
    considered for this position.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I welcome
    your comments, questions, and continued dialogue.

        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        I will defer my questions to the ranking member and reserve
    my time. Senator Cardin?
        Senator Cardin. Well, Governor, let me compliment you on
    your opening statement. In a very few minutes, you have covered
    most of the important issues between the U.S.-China relations.
    And I must tell you the way that you have expressed it I
    believe expresses what I would hope to hear from our
    Ambassador-to-be to China. And I think you will find there is
    strong bipartisan support for the way that you have expressed
    U.S. interests in these areas.
        I particularly appreciate that in the opening part of your
    statement, you mentioned that you would represent American
    values and that would include upholding human rights for all.
    You and I have talked about that. I have made it a practice to
    ask all nominees for ambassadors representing the United States
    questions related to their commitment to human rights. But for
    China, it is particularly important.
        We have found that China is moving in the wrong direction,
    and you pointed that out in some of your comments and in our
    private discussions. How you conduct your affairs, where you
    travel, who you allow access to in our embassies, your reaching
    out to NGOs that have been declared by China to be unwelcome is
    a real statement about not only our values but universal
    values.
        So can you drill down a little bit more for me how you
    intend to advance our values on human rights, if confirmed as
    ambassador?
        Governor Branstad. Senator Cardin, thank you very much.
        Human rights is very important. It is a bedrock of
    America's value system. As Governor, I have always tried to go
    not only everywhere in the State of Iowa but throughout the
    world. I went to the old Soviet Union 6 weeks after Chernobyl.
    I was one of the early Governors to go to China. And yet, I
    have always tried to recognize my responsibility as an American
    to represent our values and to espouse those. And it would be
    my intention as ambassador to bring in and to bring up these
    difficult issues that the Chinese leadership may not
    particularly want to talk about but are important.
        Consequently, I am not afraid to do that. I have done that
    throughout my career. I recognize as ambassador it is an even
    bigger responsibility because I will be representing the whole
    United States of America, and when Americans or anyone else in
    the world is not treated fairly, I think I as ambassador need
    to bring that issue up to the people in power in Beijing.
        Senator Cardin. So if I understand, you would be welcoming
    to our embassy those who may disagree with the Government of
    China on their policies on human rights----
        Governor Branstad. Yes.
        Senator Cardin [continuing]. Or their political dissent?
        Governor Branstad. I would not only be willing to welcome
    people of all backgrounds to the embassy, but also to travel to
    other parts of the country to meet with them as well.
        So I think it is important. I learned this as Governor, and
    that is you do not want to just be surrounded by your staff.
    You want to get out and see the real people in your State and
    in the country. And as ambassador, I want to get out and see
    the people in China. I want to learn from those people that do
    not feel they are being treated fairly as well.
        Senator Cardin. Senator Rubio and I sent a letter to
    Secretary Tillerson requesting that he place a high priority on
    human rights in our bilateral relationship with China,
    mentioning the problems of religious minorities, including the
    people of Tibet. Would you be willing to take advice from
    Members of Congress on individual cases and championing them
    and work with us as we try to raise these issues?
        Governor Branstad. Yes, Senator. In fact, as I have gone
    around and met individually with members of the Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee, a number of those have been brought to my
    attention. And it would be my intent to work with all the
    members of this committee and others in the Senate on these
    issues. I believe that is part of the responsibility of the
    ambassador is to be there on the ground in China and to be an
    advocate for our interests.
        Senator Cardin. And my last request would be that I have
    asked staff to keep in touch with our embassies. I appreciate
    the fact that you mentioned in your opening statement the
    professionalism of the people that serve in the mission that
    are critically important. They take direction from the
    ambassador. I would ask that you respond to our staff, both
    staffs, as to steps being taken to advance the human rights
    agenda so that we can work together in regards to elevating the
    importance of that part of our relationship.
        Governor Branstad. I certainly intend to do that. And I do
    understand that we have a very dedicated professional staff,
    both the State Department and other agencies, and it is a very
    large staff that is available at the embassy and the
    consulates. I intend to work with them. I want to learn from
    them as much as I can, but I also want to work directly with
    you and other Members of the United States Senate and your
    staff.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Governor, thanks so much for your
    willingness to serve. I thank your family for their years of
    service as well to the State of Iowa. We are fortunate to have
    someone who has a personal relationship with the President of
    China who has put themselves forward as well.
        I enjoyed our visit together. One of the things we talked
    about was North Korea. And you have also touched on this very
    important topic in your prepared statement indicating that
    China could play a critical role in convincing North Korea to
    dismantle its nuclear missile programs.
        What more specifically do you think that China could or
    should do to push North Korea to take the necessary steps with
    respect to its missile and nuclear programs?
        Governor Branstad. China, as you know, is a neighbor of
    North Korea. They are a major trading partner with North Korea.
    They have recently put some restrictions on importing coal from
    North Korea. I think there are other things they can do
    diplomatically and economically to send a clear signal that
    they, as well as the United States and other countries in the
    world, do not tolerate the expansion of nuclear technology and
    missiles by the North Korean leadership. It is a threat to all
    of humankind, and I think it is critically important that we
    look at all opportunities to work together. I know that this
    has been discussed by President Trump and President Xi. I would
    want to do all I can to serve as a key go-between as we explore
    how we can work together with other nations also in Asia to
    address this critical situation.
        Senator Young. So I am curious whether there is a menu of
    particular economic or diplomatic things we can do to heighten
    the pressure as this pressure campaign continues. Perhaps from
    a process standpoint, you can speak to how you might try and
    collaborate regionally with the regional bureau there.
        Our Secretary of State said publicly within the last couple
    of days that he does not think that our State Department is
    doing a good job connecting its State level objectives and
    initiatives to the broader regional concerns. As ambassador to
    China, could you speak to that as you talk to some specifics on
    North Korea, please?
        Governor Branstad. Well, I think we need to always look at
    how we can do better and how we can improve, recognizing that
    the world is facing a very critical threat from North Korea at
    this time. And I want to make sure that we are not leaving any
    stone unturned in trying to look at all the different avenues
    that are available, both working with China and working with
    other nations especially in that part of the world.
        Senator Young. Well, I will look forward to working with
    you. If you see a lack of coordination, of course, you would be
    communicating that, I presume, to the Secretary of State.
    Hopefully you know you have individuals on this committee which
    would like to work with you to improve that level of
    coordination.
        Governor Branstad. I recently met with Secretary Tillerson.
    We had a very constructive meeting. And I intend to work very
    closely with him and with the other State Department personnel,
    of which there are some very experienced and capable people at
    the embassy in Beijing right now.
        Senator Young. I will pivot very quickly to the protection
    of intellectual property. In your prepared statement, you
    indicated it is of the utmost importance to our country. I
    think all of us here agree with that. The U.S. leads the world
    in biomedical research and discovery. However, weak IP
    protections and a growing array of localization barriers abroad
    are threatening innovative medicine exports and the many jobs
    they support here at home, including in my home State of
    Indiana.
        China, in particular, is a serious offender. Beijing has
    not lived up to the intellectual property commitments that it
    made to the U.S. and others through the World Trade
    Organization.
        If confirmed, in order to protect America's innovation and
    jobs, what will you do to push the Chinese to respect IP
    protections, including in the area of biomedical research?
        Governor Branstad. The point you raise is very critical.
    And we have had some experience with that with regard to plant
    breeding, and we actually even had Chinese that were stealing
    knowledge from American companies. And I think a few years ago,
    we saw a criminal prosecution of that, and it occurred in my
    State. But I recognize, especially because of our world
    leadership in medical technology, that is a critical area. But
    I have heard from many other manufacturers and other businesses
    about the stealing of intellectual property. That is why we
    have patents, and that is why we go so far to protect
    intellectual property rights. In the meetings I have had with
    business people, not only in my State but as we have done trade
    missions, this is a critical issue.
        And I think as the Chinese have advanced, hopefully they
    are going to see that there is a danger to them as well in
    having their intellectual property stolen by other countries.
    So I think it is critically important that they abide by and
    support intellectual property rights and that it is not only
    right for America and protecting our businesses, but it is
    right for them as well. And I hope that I can convince them
    that they need to change their policies and they need to be
    more vigilant and serious about protecting intellectual
    property rights.
        The Chairman. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Corker.
        I will simply follow up on what Senator Young and Chairman
    Corker both said previously.
        When we had a chance to meet in my office, Governor, I was
    clear with you that intellectual property is also a significant
    concern of mine. I am from a State that has a long and proud
    history of invention and innovation. I was just at the Hagley
    Museum yesterday, which has the records of the DuPont Company
    and all of its early inventions. They have a remarkable
    collection of patent models, which they are actually exploring
    sharing with the Chinese people across a dozen sites in China.
        I would be interested in hearing just some more insight
    into how you will use your important and long and trusting
    friendship with President Xi and what I expect will be your
    growing knowledge of China as you visit every province to
    really make intellectual property and stopping the theft of
    America's inventions a key priority in your role as Governor,
    if confirmed.
        Governor Branstad. Well, Senator Coons, the incident that I
    was mentioned a few minutes ago actually involved DuPont
    Pioneer. As you know, we share DuPont Pioneer. They have been a
    wonderful American company, and we think it is critically
    important that the rights--and I am aware of the fact that they
    are doing some important business in China.
        We also have the World Food Prize in Iowa. And one of the
    recipients of the World Food Prize is a Chinese gentleman that
    was involved in rice. And there is an opportunity for DuPont
    Pioneer--and they are also going through a potential merger
    right now. There are opportunities for them to work together
    for the benefit of not only these great American companies but
    also Chinese businesses as well.
        And I want to do what I can from the background and
    experience I have had working especially in the agricultural
    area. And as you have heard, Xi Jinping's first visit to
    America was an ag delegation, and they were there during spring
    planting time. They visited the farm of the President of the
    Iowa Corn Growers, and they visited a turkey farm and they
    visited others and the Sukup Manufacturing Company that makes
    bins, grain bins.
        But I hope, because of that background and experience and
    because of the very good way that we treated Xi Jinping and his
    delegation, hopefully to convince him that we need his
    collaboration and cooperation in dealing with some of these
    critical issues where China has not adequately addressed the
    protection of these important intellectual property rights.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Governor.
        I have two other quick questions for you, if I might.
        Let me offer that I look forward to working with you and
    with the Senators from Iowa, as well as my senior Senator from
    Delaware, to strengthen some of these ties between China and
    the United States with the goal of relentlessly pressing the
    importance of a shared commitment to protecting patents and
    trade secrets and other IP.
        You grow a great deal of corn and soybeans. We do too. And
    we feed them to our chickens, and we would like our chickens to
    go to China. [Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad. And Senator Perdue told me that he may
    be from Georgia, but he also raises corn and soybeans. So I was
    encouraged to hear that as well.
        Senator Coons. And as long as those corn and soybeans go to
    chickens and the chickens go to China, we are all going to be
    happy. [Laughter.]
        Senator Coons. I will tell you that we filed a complaint
    against China in the WTO I think successfully asserting that
    China is unfairly restricting U.S. chicken imports. More than
    10 percent of all chicken grown in the United States is
    exported. We have not been sustainably successfully able to
    access one of the most promising markets in the world, which is
    China. If they are going to join the world community through
    things like the WTO, they need to play by the rules. And I hope
    that you will prioritize opening the Chinese market for
    poultry, whether it is from Georgia, Iowa, or Delaware.
        Governor Branstad. Well, first of all, I agree with you
    wholeheartedly that we need to have a fair and open market for
    these products just as they have an opportunity to market a lot
    of products in our country. Poultry is really important. We do
    sell them a lot of pork, but beef is presently restricted as
    well. I have also visited with Tom Vilsack who, as you know,
    has gone now from being Secretary of Agriculture, former
    Governor of Iowa, to working with the Dairy Export Council. And
    I think there is opportunity to get more opportunity for dairy
    there as well.
        This is an area, especially when it comes to agriculture
    products, that I have had a lot of experience in, and I hope
    that because Xi Jinping has some experience and that background
    too, that it is an area maybe we can make some connection. I
    have also had some very frank discussions with Minister Han,
    who is their ag minister, on these issues.
        Senator Coons. I agree. I hope you make great progress on
    that.
        In closing, I will just reference the last topic we
    discussed, which is Africa. China has become the dominant
    investor and player in Africa, eclipsing even the United
    States. And I urge you to compliment them on their significant
    leadership and pledging to shut down their illegal ivory
    markets, but also to find ways that we can explore cooperation
    on the continent of Africa before we completely lose our
    foothold as a main player, and that you will continue to
    advocate for our values in China and in how we both engage in
    Africa.
        Governor Branstad. I appreciate your bringing that issue
    up, and I think they have made a commitment now to stop this
    illegal trade in ivory. And I think that is critically
    important.
        Before I came back as Governor, I was president of a
    medical school. And I actually went to Africa. We have a number
    of doctors and medical people that volunteer and even our
    medial students from Des Moines University to provide health
    care in Africa. I think it is critically important that we work
    together. I will be glad to compliment them on what they are
    doing in Africa. I think we need to look at opportunities to
    collaborate wherever we can.
        I am appreciative of the Americans that donate their
    services and time to help improve drinking water and to help
    improve conditions for people in Africa.
        Senator Coons. Thank you very much for your testimony,
    Governor. I look forward to supporting your nomination.
        Governor Branstad. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Governor, I expected you to be able to talk
    fluently about pork and chicken and soybeans. I did not know
    our city fellow from Delaware could do that. So I have learned
    a lot today. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. Senator Gardner?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Governor, for your time today. And while
    Chris counts his chickens, I would like to end China's beef on
    U.S. beef. [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        Governor Branstad. I am with you.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you for that. I think we are close,
    but we obviously need a little bit more help to make sure that
    this market is open freely and fairly to U.S. agriculture,
    particularly beef producers.
        You and I had great conversations about North Korea. I know
    with Mr. Young and Mr. Cardin and others, you have talked about
    North Korea and the role that China plays, the particularly
    important role that China plays as it relates to North Korea's
    nuclear behavior.
        This Congress worked to change the doctrine of strategic
    patience which had allowed the North Korean regime to
    proliferate, to launch a number of missiles, to test a number
    of nuclear weapons. And I think it is important that we look at
    the North Korea Sanctions Act that this Congress passed
    unanimously as a way forward to make sure that we are deterring
    aggression and, indeed, inducing behavior with North Korea and
    others around the region to put more pressure on the Kim Jong-
    un regime to denuclearize peacefully the North Korean
    Government and North Korean regime.
        In those conversations, though, I think one thing that we
    have to consider is whether or not China is going to, in full
    faith, carry out its commitment under United Nations
    resolutions 2270 and 2321. While right now we see them taking
    actions that they have not taken in recent years. Will that
    continue or will they slip back into what China does and that
    is a policy of its own doctrine of patience as it relates to
    North Korea?
        What do you plan to do if China fails to uphold either the
    United Nations resolutions or indeed to fails to use its
    influence over North Korea's regime?
        Governor Branstad. Well, Senator Gardner, as you have
    pointed out, they have not abided by these United Nations
    resolutions. And I think what is happening right now with North
    Korea is an example of why that needs to change. This is a very
    serious situation, and I do not think China wants to have a
    flood of refugees from North Korea going into their country. I
    also think that they recognize, as other nations in Asia
    recognize, that this nuclear obsession that the leadership of
    North Korea has with guided missiles and everything is a very
    serious threat to humankind and that we need to all look at
    ways we can work together. I hope that my longtime relationship
    with the leader of China--and I can convey to him that we
    sincerely want to work with them and we want to work with other
    nations as well because this is one of the most important and
    serious threats facing us all at this time.
        Senator Gardner. Do you believe there is a role for U.S.
    secondary sanctions on Chinese entities should China fail to
    live up to its commitments?
        Governor Branstad. I think there may well be. Obviously,
    that decision will be made by the administration and by the
    leadership here in Washington, D.C. But I think just as
    recently I think the Secretary of Commerce--they recently
    levied a big fine on some Chinese entities that illegally
    provided national security information to rogue nations. And
    that was I think the largest penalty of that sort that has
    happened to date. So I am hopeful that is an indication that we
    are taking these threats real seriously and that we intend to
    hold companies, whether they are government-owned or controlled
    entities or otherwise, accountable.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        And I think even when it comes to cybersecurity issues and
    cyber attacks against the United States, many of the North
    Korean efforts against U.S.-based companies have gone through
    China or traveled through China. And so we have a number of
    cyber sanctions at our disposal as well, and I would encourage
    the usage of those sanctions as necessary.
        When it comes to cybersecurity, I appreciate your statement
    when you talked about the protection of intellectual property
    rights. There is a company in Colorado who did business with
    China, sold a particular type of pump to a company in China.
    Months later, the company from China wrote back to this company
    in Colorado with an email asking some questions about the
    engineering schematics of the pump, but the new name of the
    company in China was exactly the same name as the company in
    Colorado.
        So in those conversations you are having with the Chinese
    Government, some experts believe that over 10 percent of
    China's GDP can be attributed to the theft of intellectual
    property. How will you assert both cybersecurity issues, as
    well as intellectual property rights, and make sure that they
    are living up to their obligations?
        Governor Branstad. The example you cite of the Colorado
    company--I have heard that from Iowa companies as well of where
    they have worked in cooperation with a Chinese company and then
    they see their product being exactly copied. And this is a
    clear violation of intellectual property rights. And this is
    the kind of thing that I think we have to very vigorously
    object to and do everything we can to stop. And we also need to
    convince the Chinese that with their economy, frankly this
    theft of property will also come back to bite them as well and
    that the sooner that they get serious about this, the better it
    is going to be not just for improving the relationship with the
    United States and other countries, but also for them in
    protecting their own intellectual property rights in the
    future.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Governor. And I know my time
    has expired, but we will continue our conversations on
    important issues like the South China Sea as well and Taiwan
    and the important relationship with our ally Taiwan.
        But I just want to end with this. I hope that this
    position, upon your confirmation--you will use it to really
    work with Congress in a way that I think has been neglected
    over the past several years, that you will have a relationship
    with members of this committee and the Congress in a way that
    really builds upon this critically important relationship with
    China and the United States. And I think there is an
    opportunity here to do things as ambassador that truly do need
    to be done between one of the most consequential relationships
    that the world has to offer. Thank you.
        Governor Branstad. Well, thank you. I intend to do that. As
    Governor, I had been co-chair at the Governors Council.
        The Chairman. We know you are going to work with us.
        Governor Branstad. Okay. Thank you. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Welcome, Governor.
        You and I had a good conversation about fentanyl in my
    office. If people were dying from fentanyl across the country
    at the same rate that they are in the United States--in the
    State of Massachusetts, 75,000 people would have died from a
    fentanyl overdose in 2016. 75,000 people.
        The precursor chemicals for fentanyl come from China, and
    they come from China into Mexico for the most part and then
    they are transported up into the United States.
        So this is still relatively early in this epidemic because
    people are dying at a very small fraction right now in the
    country as they are in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and
    other States. But it is coming. It is a preview of coming
    attractions.
        So could you talk a little bit about your commitment to
    raise the profile of this issue at the very highest level to
    make sure that the Chinese Government understands that we
    expect them to crack down hard on these fentanyl exporters?
        Governor Branstad. Well, Senator Markey, for the last 2
    years, the National Governors Association has been actively
    discussing these issues. And I agree with you. This is a
    dangerous poison. Basically it is a less costly narcotic than
    heroin, and it is becoming a huge problem in many States, not
    just in your State but I think in Ohio, as well in other States
    in New England. It is going our direction as well. So we are
    concerned about it.
        If we can stop it at its source in China, we need to do
    that. And that is an issue that I intend to pursue very
    aggressively because it is human lives that are being lost
    needlessly, and this is a poison that needs to be prevented
    from going onto the world marketplace.
        Senator Markey. Thank you. And again, this has to be
    elevated to the same level as nuclear nonproliferation,
    copyright, trade. It has to be the same exact level because
    people are dying at the same level.
        Governor Branstad. There has not been enough public
    attention about this yet.
        Senator Markey. This is just absolutely a crisis in our
    country. We would be losing two Korean War levels of Americans
    every single year to fentanyl. Two Korean War levels. So we
    cannot allow that to happen. We have to put the protections in
    place. And the Chinese can be key in the same way that the
    Chinese are the key in any negotiations with North Korea.
        The President says if China is not going to solve North
    Korea, we will. Well, we have very few options beyond
    preemptive military strikes without China. And so it is going
    to require China to play a big role.
        But over the last year from the first quarter of 2016 to
    the first quarter of 2017, there has been a 37 percent increase
    in trade between North Korea and China, notwithstanding U.N.
    resolutions and their commitments to have tougher sanctions.
        So can you talk about what you believe has to be the
    conversation that goes on between the United States and China
    for them to drastically increase the implementations of the
    enforcement of the sanctions which would bring the North
    Koreans to the table? The Chinese have wanted us to have direct
    talks with the North Koreans for years. I agree with that. But
    it has to be partnered with crippling economic sanctions by
    China on the North Koreans, and that is not happening. So can
    you talk about your view of that?
        Governor Branstad. I would hope that recent events have
    convinced China that they need to take this much more
    seriously. It happens to be that the leader of North Korea's
    half brother was living in China when he was brutally murdered
    at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. So if nothing else is
    a signal, that sure ought to be.
        The other thing is, obviously, the threatening actions, and
    I think recently the China Daily kind of sent a message to the
    North Koreans that this nuclear mission and missiles that they
    are shooting off is counterproductive. And I hope that they
    will use that as a reason to tighten down on sanctions and get
    serious about working with us and other countries in dealing
    with this. This is a very important and critical time to deal
    with that in light of the actions of just the last few months.
        Senator Markey. Yes. We do not need a second Korean War for
    sure.
        Governor Branstad. No, we do not. We need their help. And I
    do not think they want a world with this either. They do not
    want a bunch of refugees from North Korea pouring into China. I
    have been to Harbin, which is north of North Korea. It is an
    agriculture region of China. And we need their cooperation. We
    need their assistance in peacefully dealing with this and
    changing this dangerous direction of North Korea at this time.
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Governor.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Portman?
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Governor, good to see you. Thanks for coming by to
    visit. 24 years as Governor----
        Governor Branstad. I probably will not serve out the full
    24 years if you confirm me. [Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad. Twenty-three sessions.
        Senator Portman. You are doing a great job, and you have
    shown today that you have got a grasp of what is going on over
    in China and I appreciate that. It is a tough job. You know, I
    knew Sandy Rand pretty well and was over there with him a
    number of times, and he was kind of a China expert. I know you
    are going into this with your eyes wide open.
        But despite your relationship with President Xi going back
    to his days as head of a livestock association, they are tough
    negotiators. When I was U.S. Trade Representative, I had the
    opportunity to negotiate with them quite a bit. We do have a
    better relationship now at the presidential level I believe
    than we have had in a long time. But we have got so many
    issues.
        I was over there on a congressional delegation a couple
    weeks ago and had the opportunity to meet with Premier Li, as
    well as Chairman of the National People's Congress Jong, and
    talked about the issues that have been raised today, including
    North Korea, including the South China Sea, including a level
    playing field on trade, IP, intellectual property issues, as
    well as their overcapacity and their dumping in the United
    States.
        We also talked about an issue that my colleague from
    Massachusetts, Ed Markey, just raised which is fentanyl. And
    one point I made to them is there is information that fentanyl
    is also leaking into their society. In other words, it is not
    just a question of stopping the laboratories in China where
    some evil scientist is creating poison that is coming into our
    communities.
        And by the way, the new push is directly fentanyl, 90
    percent pure, being mailed to America to Des Moines and to
    Cincinnati and to Columbus, and it comes by the mail and people
    are ordering it over the Web.
        It is killing more people this year by far than it killed
    last year. So this is getting worse, not better. And
    Massachusetts has been hit hard. So has Ohio. But I really
    believe from talking to experts around the country this is the
    new wave. It is a synthetic form of heroin, as you know. But it
    is 30 to 50 times more powerful than heroin. And not only are
    there more overdoses, but there are more deaths as a percent of
    every overdose because it is so deadly.
        So they have a responsibility to work with us on this. We
    need to do more here obviously on the demand side, and we need
    to do more in terms of stopping it through the mail, which many
    members of this committee are on our legislation called the
    STOP Act. But I would like today to hear from you on this just
    to assure us that you are going to press on this issue.
        They have 170,000 chemical plants in China, and these are
    legitimate plants. I understand that. But they got a lot of
    pharmaceutical and chemical plants that are illegitimate. And
    with their control over their economy, I believe they can do
    much more to be able to stop this poison from coming into our
    country. And again, as you said with regard to intellectual
    property--and this relates to some of the other issues,
    including Korea--they should have an interest in this.
        So could you just confirm to us today that you will press
    on this issue and specifically talk to them about not just
    shutting down some of these plants, which they have to do, but
    actually make sure they schedule more of these precursors so
    that they become illegal and that they do more to shut down the
    fentanyl production in China?
        Governor Branstad. Senator, I want to do everything I can
    to work with you and Senator Markey and others that are very
    concerned about this issue. I think it is really a life and
    death issue. I also think, in addition to shutting down the
    plants, they need to punish the people that are doing this. And
    I want to press that because it is such an important thing to
    saving human lives and preventing this poison from--and as you
    say, it is a danger in their country as well. We know it is a
    very severe, growing danger here, but it is something that has
    no place. And I want to do everything I can. I will be looking
    for advice and counsel on what can be the most effective way.
        But I am not bashful about bringing up tough issues in
    negotiations. You have had great experience in negotiating
    trade deals, and I, at a much lower level, have worked on that
    for decades. But this is an issue that really comes to
    protecting human life. And it is something that we have got to
    take very seriously, and I intend to raise this as a top issue,
    along with the others that we have talked about here today.
        Senator Portman. Well, thanks for that commitment.
        By the way, most of it is coming from China according to
    the experts. So this is obviously that they can be much more
    responsible about.
        With regard to trade, there are so many issues. Let me just
    touch on one quickly. Back in 2000, Chinese production of steel
    was roughly the same as the United States, and that is 100
    million tons a year. Since 2000, they have gone to 1.2 billion
    tons per year of steel production. So a net importer of steel
    became the biggest exporter of steel in the world. And in that
    process through this overcapacity that they have developed,
    they have been selling steel below its cost in the United
    States of America. It is one of the reasons we have lost over
    12,000 steel jobs here in this country during that time period.
    12,000. And I raised it with them, of course, when I was over
    there.
        More importantly, I think we need to have an ambassador who
    understands this issue and will be sure that with regard to
    their dumping or their subsidization, which is also going on,
    they understand that we are not going to put up with it
    anymore. There is an absolute necessity to have trade that is
    level. And as you said, I have negotiated with them in the past
    on trade. You know, this is one of their responsibilities as a
    member of the WTO and a responsible, mature trading partner
    now, obviously.
        So any thoughts quickly on steel and the dumping of steel
    and your commitment to press on that issue?
        Governor Branstad. Back in 1993, I helped to track a steel
    company to Iowa called IPSCO Steel from Canada. And they have
    been sold to SSAB. And I have been working with SSAB. I have
    been active among the Governors on pressing for action on
    dealing with the dumping issue and the unfair competition in
    steel. So this is a critical issue, one that I am familiar with
    because we have got a company SSAB in Montpelier, Iowa between
    Davenport and Muscatine that has been negatively affected by
    this. So I want to do everything I can to make sure that we
    stop the unfair and illegal activities that we have seen from
    China in the steel industry.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Governor.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        I do want to highlight that I doubt there is any country in
    the world with which we have so many issues. It is most
    important for our two countries to manage the relationship
    properly. But I am uplifted by the fact that you have had so
    many personal experiences with many of these issues as a
    Governor, and you know how important they are to rural people.
    All of us have had family or friends who have died, I am sure,
    from fentanyl. We know of the job losses that have taken place.
    We know of the outright theft. I mean, it is just like going
    and robbing a bank directly with what they do with intellectual
    property. And I do hope with the relationship you have, you
    will be a constant force for dealing with the multiple
    violations of international norms that take place with China.
        Governor Branstad. Well, Senator, I appreciate your counsel
    on this important issue. This is one thing about being the
    chief executive, being the Governor. The buck stops with you. I
    was Governor during the farm crisis in the 1980s. I have gone
    on trade missions all over the world. I have dealt with a lot
    of issues. And I think that background and experience is going
    to be helpful to me in this role. I know I have a lot to learn
    about foreign policy on a lot of these issues, and I have been
    trying to get up to speed as best I can.
        But I am not bashful about bringing these issues up. And
    just the fact that the leader of China calls us an old friend
    does not mean that I am going to be at all reluctant or bashful
    about bringing up issues where we think they have not been fair
    and where Americans or anybody has been treated unfairly, be it
    human rights or intellectual property rights.
        The Chairman. Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Governor, thank you for your service and congratulations on
    your nomination.
        Governor Branstad. Thank you.
        Senator Menendez. China is probably one of the most complex
    posts that anybody could ever be offered.
        So I am still in the process of trying to understand the
    President's world view and understand how he determines
    alliances and partnerships. So since obviously you have had
    some discussion with him about this role, do you believe China
    is an adversary or an ally of the United States?
        Governor Branstad. That is a tough question. I think both
    are potential. But I think we need to do everything we can to
    try to make them an ally, and we need to look at ways that we
    can work together.
        I know from the food perspective, the Chinese are very
    concerned about food security, and they have had some real
    issues on food security. And I have been in China and talked to
    them about how we--our country--that are blessed with a safe,
    secure food supply--and it is not only great quality, but it is
    among the cheapest in the world. --
        Senator Menendez. So our aspiration is for them to be an
    ally. But if you were to describe our relationship with them
    now, what would you say that is?
        Governor Branstad. It is mixed. I think that there are a
    lot of areas of--but I think we have got to always strive to
    try to break the barriers. I was one of the first Governors to
    go there after they began to open up and move to a more market-
    driven economy. And I think what I want to do is try to stress
    on them because of the change that has taken place over the
    last 30-some years, they have benefited greatly. But they also
    have an obligation as a growing power now to also play by the
    rules and do the things that are expected of countries that are
    world leaders.
        Senator Menendez. I appreciate that.
        Now, for months, before taking office, the President
    excoriated China for manipulating its currency to the detriment
    of American workers, insisting that he would put American
    workers and the labor force first. But things seem to have
    changed. Can you clarify for me? Do you believe that China
    manipulated its currency in the past?
        Governor Branstad. I think they have. I think that has
    changed somewhat in recent months or in the last year or so.
    But I think that is obviously a great concern because if they
    are able to manipulate their currency and make their goods
    cheaper to export and ours more expensive to import, that is
    one of the challenges that we are facing. So, yes, that is an
    issue that we need to continue to monitor, and that is one of
    many things that I think we need to continue to be vigilant in
    terms of reviewing the situation and seeing if indeed that has
    changed or not.
        Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate your directness on
    that because I too believe they have been a currency
    manipulator. They are not right now. And the question is how do
    we avoid them--get them to understand that that is not a good
    proposition for China or certainly for the United States and
    workers. So I hope that you will spend some time and attention
    to that as you unfold your issues there.
        I am concerned, as is the President, about North Korea, and
    some of my colleagues have talked about that. But despite some
    strong rhetoric from China because of its deep economic ties
    and its border, China from my perspective continues to enable
    North Korea's leaders to pursue destabilizing nuclear weapons.
        So the question is we seem to have a lot of hope in
    President Xi as it relates to helping us with North Korea, and
    I do hope that that unfolds. But the question is, if it does
    not, should we not consider giving China greater consequences
    so that they understand their calculus is wrong? For example,
    the sanctions that Senator Gardner and I authored would permit
    sanctions against Chinese banks for which North Korea operates
    a great deal. Should we not consider that as a possibility if
    we cannot get China to do diplomatically what we hope for them
    to do in North Korea to change their calculus?
        Governor Branstad. I think we should keep all these options
    open. Obviously, as ambassador, I will not be decision-maker on
    them.
        Senator Menendez. You will be a key adviser to the
    President.
        Governor Branstad. Well, that is right. And I will not
    hesitate to give my advice and what I am able to learn on the
    ground over there. And I do think all options should be open
    and that we ought to do everything we can to convince them to
    be much more aggressive in dealing with the threats from North
    Korea. If that does not happen, then I think we need to look at
    what can we do to try to apply more pressure to convince them
    that it is in their interests, and there will be consequences
    if they do not.
        Senator Menendez. I appreciate that.
        Finally, as the co-chair of the Taiwan Caucus with Senator
    Inhofe, I do hope that we will continue to promote the Taiwan
    Relations Act as the law of the land, as the essence of our
    relationship with Taiwan. I understand the One China policy,
    but Taiwan is also very important to us, and I hope that you
    will keep the perspective of the Taiwan Relations Act as a
    focus in your engagement with China as it relates to Taiwan.
        Governor Branstad. Senator Menendez, I want to assure you I
    will. I also have been to Taiwan. The State of Iowa does have a
    sister state with Taiwan. And I recognize the importance of
    both the One China policy but of also supporting and enforcing
    the Taiwan Relations Act.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you. I appreciate your directness.
        Governor Branstad. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso?
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Governor, congratulations on the nomination. Thanks for
    coming to visit with me in my office. I saw you right before
    the break, and I was heading to China and wanted to just tell
    you that people are looking forward to you as our ambassador.
        Governor Branstad. Well, the Chinese people have been very
    nice to me and have taken a lot of pictures of me for what that
    is worth. [Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad. But I would be interested in finding out
    how your trip went. And I think you were intending to go to
    Tibet as well?
        Senator Barrasso. As well, yes. It was very productive,
    very fruitful, talked about some of the issues that have just
    been raised but also issues of trade. Senator Portman, who is
    our former U.S. Trade Rep, brought up a number of issues. I
    brought up a number as well.
        One was on soda ash. Many U.S. industries experience a wide
    variety of concerns surrounding China's trade policies and
    practices. As we have discussed in this committee, soda ash
    continues to face unfair trade practices from China, from other
    countries. The United States is the most competitive supplier
    of soda ash in the world due to the abundance of a raw material
    called trona in the United States. And Wyoming, specifically
    the Green River Basin, is the world's largest area for
    naturally occurring trona. So soda ash is a key manufacturing
    component of glass, detergents, soaps, chemicals. China is
    seeking to capture the global market share from the United
    States soda ash producers, and they do it through unfair trade
    practices. China has given its own synthetic soda ash producers
    a significant rebate on the China's value-added tax.
        So if confirmed, will you continue to work to highlight and
    eliminate market distorting subsidies like the value-added tax
    rebate on soda ash exports that harm U.S. workers and U.S.
    producers?
        Governor Branstad. The answer is yes. I look at this very
    much like the steel issue where they are being unfair and where
    they are providing unfair subsidies. This is the kind of thing
    that we have to strenuously object to and do everything we can
    to try to correct.
        Senator Barrasso. I appreciate it. And we did raise it with
    the Premier when we were there in Beijing.
        And then with regard to beef--and I know Senator Gardner
    asked a bit about that--the United States produces the highest
    quality beef in the world. While China lifted its ban on U.S.
    beef last September, some technical barriers have prevented the
    U.S. beef from actually gaining access to the Chinese market.
        In April, I signed a letter on this critical issue to
    President Trump, along with 38 other Senators, including
    members of this committee, bipartisan members of this
    committee. Senator Kaine signed it, as well as Senators Risch
    and Gardner and Young and Paul and Portman. The letter urged
    the administration to discuss opening the Chinese market to
    U.S. beef with the President of China during his visit to the
    United States. And it is vital that we work to ensure that U.S.
    beef is traded fairly and trade barriers are eliminated there
    as well.
        Governor Branstad. I agree wholeheartedly. I want to be
    able to serve beef, American beef, specifically Iowa premium
    beef--[Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad:--at the embassy and at the ambassador's
    residence. I do not think it is fair that right now we have to
    serve Australian beef or Argentinean beef.
        And this issue goes back to mad cow disease 13 years ago.
    And as you have said, they have announced they are going to do
    it, but it has still not been done. And that is one of the
    areas that I feel very strongly about. In fact, the trade
    mission I went on in November to both China and Japan, we did
    have a great press conference and beef tasting in Tokyo. I was
    on the early stages of opening that Japanese market many years
    ago to American beef. And that now is really flourishing, and
    we need the same access in China. Mad cow disease has not been
    in this country for, I think, 13 years. And besides that, the
    mad cow came from Canada.
        Senator Barrasso. One final question and it has to do with
    human rights and economic issues, Governor. China is the United
    States' largest trading partner, in terms of great potential
    economic opportunities for businesses in the United States, but
    China continues to engage in what I believe are serious human
    rights abuses, including political and religious repression. So
    as Ambassador to China, can you just spend a little bit of time
    discussing how you are going to balance engaging China on the
    economic front while also demonstrating our Nation's concerns
    about China's human rights violations?
        Governor Branstad. We are a Nation that has always stood
    for human rights for all people in the world, and I think it is
    critically important the Ambassador for the United States of
    America make that point and make that along with the other
    issues that we deal with in China. I am Catholic. I want to go
    to a Catholic church in China. I respect other people's
    religions as well, and I do not think religious people should
    be persecuted. So I think it is very important that we protect
    all human rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of
    religion.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Governor.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        I reserved some time on the front end. I did not ask any
    questions.
        I was just thinking about all the myriad of questions you
    have been asked about China that affect all of our lives on a
    daily basis. But between human rights violations, non-freedom
    of press, what they do with U.S. journalists and others, the
    monopoly laws they have there which are intended to hurt U.S.
    companies--and they do--the national security laws that do the
    same, the cyber theft that we have hit on several times,
    violation of international norms in the South China Sea,
    redrawing thousands of years of history there, their knowingly
    not complying with the U.N. Security Council resolutions on
    North Korea, allowing companies to violate that and doing so
    themselves, the dumping that takes place with China's
    manufactured goods, the subsidizing that takes place, if that
    is not occurring, and just what we talked about with fentanyl
    and other kinds of things--can you share with us some things
    that give you hope about the Premier's sincerity, if you will,
    in really wanting to reform the country so that it comes into
    more universal and international norms? I mean, what are the
    things that give you hope of China's willingness to actually do
    so? And additionally, in Africa and in other places, they
    basically cause countries there to be debt-laden by doing
    things with all Chinese workers that solely benefit China,
    please give me some optimism based on your relationship.
        Governor Branstad. Well, my relationship goes way back to
    1983 and 1984. Here is the thing. China, as you know, is a very
    closed communist system. It started when Henry Kissinger and
    then President Nixon went there and it began to open up. My
    predecessor, Robert Ray, went to China and kind of laid the
    groundwork. I signed the sister state. I went there in 1984. I
    have seen a big change. And we were hopeful that when they
    adopted these economic reforms, it would lead to more political
    reforms.
        I think our disappointment in recent years is--and frankly
    my disappointment since President Xi became the leader of
    China--and he has done some things to crack down on corruption
    and to try to clean up some of the bad practices of some of the
    members of his party. But he has not done what I had hoped
    would happen and that is become more open and more willing to
    accept freedom of press and stop the repression of minorities.
    Those are the kind of issues that I hope to bring up with him.
        We go back a long ways. We are considered old friends. But
    I think he has got to recognize that some of the things that
    are being done in China today are very much against what I
    think is the right policies for a world leader. And I think he
    aspires to be a great leader for his country, but I want to--as
    an old friend, I would tell him where I think they are falling
    short and the kind of things that need to be addressed,
    including these human rights, intellectual property rights, and
    other things. So I hope that I can be an effective spokesman
    for America and for challenging some of the policies that we
    think are really going in the wrong direction.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That was a good
    question. I have been wondering the same thing.
        And I appreciate, Governor Branstad, your service, and I am
    very happy to support you in this position. As we described, I
    have got good Democratic friends in Iowa that give you high
    marks, at least as high as they are going to give somebody on
    the other side of the aisle.
        Governor Branstad. Well, they keep reelecting me.
        Senator Kaine. And I am struck by that too. You know, I
    come from the only State where they just give you one term. I
    am the only State where they call the Governor Your
    Excellency.'' So they talk about you nice, but they want you to
    leave pretty quickly. [Laughter.]
        Senator Kaine. So 22 years is remarkable.
        And you have had a pretty amazing track record. As I think
    about Iowa from having visited my friends, there are many
    things that I think about, but the thing I think about the
    most--ag and forestry is the number one part of the Virginia
    economy, and you guys lead with that.
        What you have done over the years of your tenure with
    others to improve the lot of family farms through the creation
    of alternative energy options for farmers so that together with
    farming for food, they could grow corn and use it to produce
    ethanol or have a wind tower that they could use to supplement
    income, I mean, I would just love to hear from 1983 to today,
    that has just been revolutionary.
        Governor Branstad. Well, thank you for bringing that up
    because I am very proud of where we have come from. In 1983, we
    were almost totally dependent on imported energy, fuel, oil
    that came from the Middle East, and most of our electricity was
    generated by coal. Today Iowa leads the Nation. And my very
    first year as Governor, we signed a renewable electric
    portfolio law that has been copied, I think, by 23 other
    States, and we now produce 35.8 percent of our electricity by
    wind. We have two big projects that have been announced. Mid-
    American Energy is investing another $3.6 billion in wind
    turbines, and Alliant--those are our two big utilities--another
    billion dollars. We will be over 40 percent--the first State to
    do that--by the year 2020.
        And, of course, we lead the Nation in ethanol. We produce
    more ethanol than we consume in gasoline. We are moving from
    E10 to E15. We also have a number of E85 pumps in the State. We
    also lead the Nation in biodiesel.
        Senator Kaine. But not corn-based biodiesel.
        Governor Branstad. Soybean-based biodiesel. It is almost
    all from soybeans. Some of it comes from animal fat. But it is
    either animal fat or soybeans.
        Senator Kaine. If there is one place in the United States
    that demonstrates that fighting greenhouse gas emissions and
    promoting economic growth are not inconsistent goals, it is
    Iowa.
        Governor Branstad. And it has created a lot of jobs, and it
    has also created income, as you mentioned, for farmers. So this
    is another alternative to farmers. If you have a wind turbine
    on your farm, that generates income. It also generates property
    tax for that local government.
        Senator Kaine. I was looking at the website for the Iowa
    Corn Growers Association, and they talk about the four E's.
    They talk about economy, environment, energy security, without
    sacrificing engine performance.
        Governor Branstad. The new high performance engines--they
    should use 30 or 40 percent ethanol. And we can clearly produce
    enough corn to do that and still keep the price of food
    relatively low.
        Senator Kaine. Then here is an area of hope that I see,
    kind of to follow up on Senator Corker's question. And the
    United States and China are the largest emitters of greenhouse
    gas in the world, and they were the first two nations to sign
    the Paris Climate Accord. And as Governor of Iowa, you go there
    with a story. They are dealing with major environmental
    challenges. You go there with a story which is we can battle
    greenhouse gas and do it in a way that does not hobble the
    economy. If we are smart, if we are careful, if we are
    strategic about it, we can do it in a way that is good for the
    environment and good for the economy.
        The one thing I would just ask--and this is kind of in line
    with some of your earlier testimony. This is not your decision
    to make, but it would be your advice to give. I think it would
    be a massive mistake for the United States to pull out of the
    Paris Climate Accord. The U.S. and China were first in, and
    they are setting leadership for the rest of the world. And if
    the U.S. were to pull out of it, the effect on the world, the
    effect on what China might do I think could be significant. And
    you are the best person in the United States with a story to
    tell about how you can battle greenhouse gas emissions and also
    promote the environment at the same time.
        The Iowa Corn Growers Association website lists how ethanol
    was so much better with respect to both greenhouse gas
    emissions and use of water than production of gasoline. You are
    an ambassador of the United States to China, but I also think
    you can be an ambassador for the clean energy economy of
    tomorrow to the Nation and the world that most needs that
    advice right now.
        Governor Branstad. Well, Senator Kaine, thank you for your
    advice. My oldest son Eric actually chaired the bipartisan
    Renewable Energy Coalition that worked with all the candidates
    of both parties before the Iowa caucuses to educate them on
    renewable energy. In fact, he brought then candidate Trump to
    one of the ethanol plants at Gowrie, Iowa. And we got
    tremendous response from both parties and I think did a lot to
    educate the presidential candidates on the importance of
    renewable energy.
        So I think we still have more work to do especially on wind
    energy. When candidate Trump came to the Iowa State Fair, I
    pointed out we have a wind turbine right there at the Iowa
    State Fair. Also, Secretary Perry, who is the former Governor
    of Texas--they are also a big wind energy State.
        Senator Kaine. Absolutely. They had the renewable energy
    portfolio early.
        Governor Branstad. That is right.
        Senator Kaine. When President Bush was Governor.
        Governor Branstad. They followed our lead. They are one of
    the, I think, 23 States that copied basically a law I signed in
    1983. So I agree with you.
        Also, I would say there is a company called HZ. It is a
    Chinese company that has a couple of wind turbines near Nevada,
    Iowa. They are a subsidiary of Chem China. I have called on
    them, and frankly we think there is, as you pointed out,
    opportunity for collaboration on this in a way that can benefit
    air quality and the whole world.
        Senator Kaine. Excellent. I look forward to working with
    you. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        The Chairman. Senator Rubio?
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Thank you, Governor. Congratulations.
        As you know, I spent some time in Iowa over the last year
    and a half, and we too went to the fair and my kids enjoyed it
    very much. They wanted to know why we did not go this year.
    [Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad. You are always welcome. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. Well, I asked them what did you learn at the
    fair, and the one thing that one of my kids said is we learned
    that you can fry anything. [Laughter.]
        Governor Branstad. Even butter. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. So anyway, I appreciate it.
        And I appreciate your acknowledgement today that an
    economic opening towards a totalitarian state in and of itself
    will not guarantee a political opening. It will allow them to
    control the pace and the scope of that opening for economic
    purposes, but it does not translate to political opening. I
    think China is a perfect example of it.
        As I shared with you, I think this is the most--you know,
    when they write the book about the 21st century, there will be
    a chapter in there about Russia. There will be a chapter or two
    there about Islamic terrorism. But I think that book is going
    to be dominated by chapter after chapter documenting the
    relationship between the United States and China. And how that
    relationship goes in very many ways is going to determine the
    direction of the 21st century.
        There is a sense I think among the Chinese people and many
    in their government that our goal is to contain them or to keep
    them down. And that certainly is not the case. On the contrary,
    I think we would love to have a partner on the global stage of
    their scope and magnitude to confront some of these challenges
    that we face. What we are not going to do, I believe--and it is
    important to communicate this--is we are not going to accept
    some sort of sphere of influence where they dominate the region
    at the expense of our allies and alliances in the region.
        And we are also going to continue to raise the human rights
    issue because it does play out, as we have seen in
    international forums. China is a consistent vetoer of anything
    at the Security Council that takes on the issue of human
    rights. And I think that reflects the way that government
    operates at home. And it is always important to have a
    distinction between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese
    people. They are not the same thing.
        One of the things that we have talked about--what is very
    important both in their culture and in their politics--is the
    ability to save face, in essence, to not be publicly
    embarrassed on a topic. And therefore, as you have expressed
    and others, the best way to raise issues with the Russian
    leadership is in a private forum.
        And I would ask, given your time and interaction with the
    current President of China, can you tell us of any instance
    where you raised a difficult issue or pressed him on something,
    on an issue that perhaps was not aligned with the interests of
    the Chinese Communist Party. Is there such an instance that you
    know where you raised an issue?
        Governor Branstad. That is a good question. And I think
    your observation is absolutely right on about how we need to
    try to find ways to partner with them.
        Obviously, my role as Governor is different than my role is
    going to be as ambassador. As Governor, I was not as aggressive
    at bringing up the human rights issues and things like that
    because I felt----
        Senator Rubio. You were dealing with economic issues.
        Governor Branstad [continuing]. Yes. It was economic
    issues.
        But certainly we made great progress over the years in
    opening China for things like soybeans. I mean, we are at the
    point where last year--when my staff told me it was 48 percent
    of our soybeans went to China--it had been one-third that had
    gone to China, and now it is up to 48 percent last year. But
    there are also things that have gone the other way. DDGs, which
    is a byproduct from ethanol--they have now put a tariff on that
    that has really dramatically reduced our exports of that. So I
    have seen areas where we have made progress. I have also seen
    areas where we have lost ground.
        I think I just have to be vigilant in going after those
    things where we think they are being unfair.
        I think there have been some good things that Xi Jinping
    has done to crack down on corruption within his own party and
    his own government. Some people say, well, part of that is just
    about getting rid of his enemies. But I think some of it has
    really been about addressing the severe problem they do have
    with corruption.
        Senator Rubio. And, Governor, I guess my point, because my
    time is about to expire, is there is no shortage of human
    rights abuses. You mentioned your Catholic faith as I have as
    well. Bishop Su, an 85-year-old Catholic bishop who has
    disappeared and we presume imprisoned by the Government there.
        What I hope to acquire from you today is a commitment that
    on these cases, whether it is publicly or privately, that these
    are issues that you will raise with the Government of China,
    whether it is an American or some other case, because this is
    really important for the human rights community to feel like
    their Ambassador to China is someone who is going to raise
    these issues even if it makes our host, in this case the
    Chinese Communist Party, uncomfortable.
        And in light of that, to meet with them in China when they
    are willing to meet with you, the willingness to meet with some
    of their exiles that are here in the United States to hear
    their concerns, this is a very important commitment. It is a
    very important part of this job, and I think it is really
    important for those interested in human rights globally and in
    China to know that they are going to have an ambassador willing
    to raise these issues both in those private forums and meet
    with them publicly as opposed to allow them to be marginalized.
        Governor Branstad. Well, I will do that. Just to assure
    you, my first trip to the old Soviet Union was in 1986. It was
    just shortly after Chernobyl. And I actually smuggled Natan
    Sharansky's book in to the American embassy to give to his
    mother.
        My wife and I met with a group of refuseniks. I am sure
    that the woman that they had as our escort, the Soviet person,
    was a KGB agent. We slipped out of her presence, and we met
    with a group of refuseniks to find out what was really
    happening in what was called Leningrad at the time, now St.
    Petersburg.
        So I am not bashful about meeting with dissidents or people
    that feel they are being discriminated or treated unfairly. I
    have a history of being willing to do that in my previous role.
    As ambassador, I think it is even more important because of our
    country's commitment to human rights. And I look forward to
    working with you and ideas that you and others have about
    people that are not being treated fairly and being able to at
    least bring those issues up in a private setting because, as
    you said, saving face is important in their culture. But it is
    also I think important that we confront them with those areas
    where we feel that they are not abiding by basic human dignity.
        The Chairman. Senator Cardin?
        Senator Cardin. Well, Governor, first I want to applaud
    your participation here today. You have done very well in
    giving us the confidence of your knowledge of the areas and the
    way that you go about trying to reach strategic decisions as to
    how to advance U.S. interests. So I thank you for that.
        I want to put a dose of reality on North Korea for one
    moment because I am concerned with some of the exchanges not
    necessarily your response but the realities of the
    circumstances in North Korea as it relates to American values
    and as it relates to North Korea's continued desire to violate
    international commitments on nuclear proliferation and missile
    proliferation.
        The challenge is that there really is not a military option
    for a first strike by the United States. Unlike the
    circumstances we found in Iran with their nuclear
    proliferation, a military option would have been terrible but
    it was doable. In North Korea, a military option would involve
    the risks of millions of lives. That is the reality. So we
    really are faced with changing the calculation in North Korea
    so that they take action to eliminate this threat, which
    requires China.
        So that then brings us to the point that China and the
    United States have some common interests. China does not want
    to see this blow up as you point out. They do not want all
    those immigrants or migrants coming in from North Korea. That
    is absolutely correct. But they also do not want to see a
    democratic country on their border. North Korea looks at
    nuclear weapons as their ability for maintaining their regime
    because it would be difficult for us to take them out.
        So how do you deal with China that is not interested in
    bringing down the North Korean regime, wants to maintain a
    communist country on their border? How do we work with them and
    the fear that they have that America's interest is to try to
    bring down the North Korean regime? How do you balance all that
    and get North Korea to understand that they can maintain their
    regime security without nuclear weapons?
        Governor Branstad. That is a very perceptive question that
    you have asked, Senator Cardin. And that is right. There is no
    way that China is going to want to see a regime change that has
    a democratic united Korea under South Korean rule on their
    border.
        By the same token, I think we also recognize that Seoul is
    very close. I mean, I have been to Seoul several times, South
    Korea. I have been to the DMZ. There is, I think, 20 million
    people in Seoul whose lives are in jeopardy if we were to try
    to attack North Korea. That is certainly not something we want
    to put those people's lives in jeopardy.
        So that is why working with the Chinese and convincing the
    Chinese that they are the ones that have the potential to
    really influence the regime in North Korea more than anyone
    else and that the change that needs to take place there does
    not need to be a threat to the system, but needs to stop this
    nuclear proliferation and the building of a guidance system for
    missiles to attack the United States and Japan and other
    countries in the world.
        It is probably the most pressing issue that we have right
    now. And I want to do whatever I can to try to be a go-between
    between our two countries that can help convince the leadership
    in China that it is in their interest and our interest to work
    together to stop this dangerous direction that is coming out of
    North Korea. Their leadership is critically important to doing
    that, and it needs to be done in a way that they do not feel it
    threatens them but also that it will provide security to the
    other nations in that part of the world.
        Senator Cardin. We want to give you the strongest possible
    hand in making that case. So please feel comfortable to give us
    advice as to how the Congress can weigh in to make your case
    the strongest possible for China to help us in changing the
    calculations in North Korea.
        Governor Branstad. I want to do anything and everything
    that I can. I am open to listening to suggestions or ideas that
    any member of this committee or any Member of the Senate has. I
    want to work closely with the administration and everybody
    else. But I see this as probably the biggest challenge that I
    have ever had in my entire life, and I want to do anything and
    everything that I can to try to find an acceptable solution for
    the benefit of the entire human race.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Just to follow up before we close out, I
    think most people believe that no amount of economic pressure--
    no amount of economic pressure--will keep North Korea from
    developing a deliverable nuclear weapon to the United States.
    Kim Jong-un views that as his ticket to die as an old man in
    his bed down the road, his ticket to not being taken out. So it
    is a strategy that most people believe has problems because of
    a strong desire to have the weapon.
        But at the same time, China's lack of willingness to play
    the role that has to be played has got to change. At least we
    have to attempt as a world community to put severe economic
    pressures on his country to stop it. I do hope that China is
    willing to step up to that. I think they do a lot of head fakes
    and act as if they are going to do things and then never follow
    through. But I do think something severe is going to happen in
    the region if they do not. And I think it is totally dependent
    upon them.
        We would love to work with you. You know, the
    administration is trying to do what they can to bring the world
    community in to help bear pressure to raise the level of
    concern and awareness. But I do hope that you will work with us
    in whatever way you deem appropriate to help bring pressure to
    bear. I do hope that the pendulum has swung and that China now
    views North Korea as a liability and not an asset. I hope that
    you are going to do everything you can to ensure that that is
    the case.
        But I do believe that from the standpoint of global
    encounters that can get out of control and millions of people
    be ravaged in the process, this is the one that is most evident
    to us today. So I hope none of that happens. I hope as a world
    community, we will come together. But I do think that in many
    ways is your most important responsibility as you take on this
    post.
        You have had an outstanding hearing. I think your on-the-
    ground experiences with China will serve our Nation well. I
    think your understanding of what drives the thinking within
    China will serve our Nation well. I thank you for your
    willingness to give up a very comfortable place--apparently
    issues of reelection are not a problem. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. And go to a post that is much more temporary
    and yet in many ways far more meaningful from the standpoint of
    our security and the world's security. So thank you.
        We will leave the record open until the close of business
    Thursday. I am sure you will want to answer those questions
    promptly and will.
        Governor Branstad. Will do.
        Senator Cardin. I thank your family for their willingness
    for you to be so far away for so many years.
        And we look forward to your confirmation and working with
    you. Thank you so much.
        Governor Branstad. Well, thank you, Chairman Corker,
    Ranking Member Cardin, all the members of your committee. It
    has been an honor and a privilege to get the benefit of your
    counsel and advice, and I look forward to continuing to work
    with you, if I get the confirmation and the opportunity to
    serve our country as the Ambassador to China. Thank you very
    much.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        The meeting is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Hon. Terry Branstad by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. Will you commit to periodically appearing at hearings
    of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China? Will you commit to
    encouraging administration officials who serve as executive branch
    commissioners to attend CECC hearings?

        Answer. The Congressional-Executive Commission on China serves as a
    valuable platform for experts, activists, and civil society leaders to
    provide unfiltered information on China's human rights environment. If
    confirmed, I look forward to engaging with the CECC, and invite its
    members to travel to China to investigate conditions on the ground.

        Question 2. Will you commit to urging all visiting Cabinet members
    and Members of Congress to raise individual human rights cases or
    issues in China-with specific and meaningful asks-with their Chinese
    counterparts?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed as ambassador, I will work tirelessly to
    press the Chinese Government on human rights cases and will encourage
    others to do so as well.

        Question 3. Will you commit to meeting monthly or quarterly with
    civil society groups in China to show support for their work? Will you
    also push back on the Chinese Government's efforts to limit U.S.
    Government contact with these civil society groups and will you
    challenge senior Chinese leaders and parts of the security apparatus,
    particularly China's Public Security Bureau (PSB), on the harassment or
    denied registration of U.S.-based NGOs?

        Answer. As I said during my hearing I hope not only to meet with
    civil society while in Beijing, but also as I travel throughout China.

        Question 4. Will you commit to meeting in the United States with
    exiled dissidents and exiled critics of the Chinese Government who
    cannot travel to China to ensure you have fullest possible perspective
    on both the human rights situation in China, and on what the U.S.
    Government can do to effect positive change? If confirmed, will you
    commit to having the first of such meetings prior to departing for
    post?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting and meeting with
    civil society organizations and rights activists both in the United
    States and China.

        Question 5. Will you commit to using existing authority in the
    International Religious Freedom Act to communicate to U.S. State
    Department the names of Chinese Government officials who are involved
    and complicit in egregious violations of religious freedom, and who
    should also be denied entry to the U.S. given that China has been
    designated a Country of Particular Concern since 1999?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will commit to raising our serious concerns
    over China's repression of religious freedom. I will remain in close
    contact with relevant bureaus in the State Department on this important
    issue and I appreciate Congress having provided the tools in the
    International Religious Freedom Act to use, as appropriate, in order to
    promote religious freedom for all in China.

        Question 6. Will you commit to robust engagement on implementation
    of the Global Magnitsky Act? Specifically, if confirmed, would you
    dedicate embassy staff resources to compiling names and information
    regarding Chinese Government officials who should be denied visas under
    the Global Magnitsky Act as a result of their involvement in grave
    human rights violations?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that embassy and consular staff
    devote adequate resources and take appropriate action to implement the
    Act.

        Question 7. Will you commit to visibly marking the Tiananmen
    anniversary each year, using the occasion to assess the human rights
    situation in China and reminding the authorities of the need for
    accountability for abuses committed in 1989?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure we do not fail to commemorate
    the Tiananmen anniversary.

        Question 8. Earlier this year, I met the wives of Jiang Tianyong
    and Tang Jingling, two human rights lawyers who were disbarred for
    their work to defend human rights, and who are now being unjustly held
    by Chinese authorities. In the case of Mr. Jiang, his exact whereabouts
    remain unknown. The wives of Mr. Jiang and Mr. Tang have asked U.S.
    officials to raise the cases of their husbands with the Chinese
    Government the cases of their husbands in the hopes that they can see
    them again. I've publicly urged Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to
    advocate on their behalf. Would you be willing to meet with the wives
    of these two men? Do you commit to raising their cases at the highest
    levels of the Chinese Government?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to raising human rights cases
    and issues regularly with senior Chinese officials. I also commit to
    meeting with the family members of activists. I am troubled by the
    human rights environment in China, including the crackdown on lawyers
    such as Jiang Tianyong and Tang Jingling, and the harassment of their
    family members.

        Question 9. What do you believe is America's role in ensuring that
    Beijing honors the promises it made at the time of the handover and
    what do you intend to do to limit mainland interference in Hong Kong
    especially as we approach the 20th anniversary of the handover?

       Would you support visa bans on Chinese or Hong Kong officials found
            to be involved in the recent and future abductions,
            disappearances, and detentions of booksellers or other Hong
            Kong residents?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will firmly support the principle of ``one
    country, two systems,'' as well as the goal of achieving universal
    suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law and the
    aspirations of the Hong Kong people. I will seek to support Hong Kong's
    highly developed rule of law, independent judiciary, and respect for
    individual rights, which have been keys to its continued success,
    stability, and global competitiveness.
        If confirmed, I also will speak out on the value of Hong Kong's
    high degree of autonomy in my engagements with the Chinese Government,
    and support reinforcing that autonomy through government-to-government
    cooperation that treats Hong Kong as a special and distinct entity.The
    disappearances and detentions of booksellers and other Hong Kong
    residents raise serious questions about China's commitment to ``one
    country, two systems'' and its respect for the protection of universal
    human rights and fundamental freedoms. If confirmed, I will raise this
    issue with the Chinese Government.

        Question 10. Global health, international aviation security, and
    transnational crime are all matters of global importance that requires
    cooperation from stakeholders from all around the world. Congress has
    passed bills requiring the State Department to support Taiwan's
    meaningful participation in international organizations, such as the
    World Health Organization (WHO), the International Civil Aviation
    Organization (ICAO), and the International Criminal Police Organization
    (INTERPOL).

       If confirmed as Ambassador to China, would you support Taiwan's
            meaningful participation in international organizations? How
            so?
       How do you see the Trump administration's approach to the one-China
            policy?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Taiwan's membership in
    international organizations that do not require statehood. In
    organizations that require statehood for membership, I will support
    Taiwan's meaningful participation. This includes ICAO, INTERPOL, WHO,
    and the more than 60 international organizations in which Taiwan
    participates.
        I am committed to supporting Taiwan as it seeks to expand its
    already significant contributions to addressing global challenges.I
    believe the United States has a deep and abiding interest in cross-
    Strait peace and stability. The benefits that stable cross-Strait ties
    have brought to China and Taiwan, the United States, and the region
    have been important. China and Taiwan should understand the value of
    stable cross-Strait ties and work to establish a basis for continued
    peace and stability.

        Question 11. 11: Will you commit to explaining to Chinese
    authorities that the United States will recognize and freely interact
    with the person chosen independently by Tibetans to succeed the current
    Dalai Lama, as a way of showing now that the U.S. will not accept a
    Chinese Government-controlled selection process, and of encouraging
    Tibetans to pursue reincarnation in accordance with traditional
    practices?

       It has long been the policy of the U.S. Government, provided by the
            Tibetan Policy Act, to promote a dialogue between the envoys of
            the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Government toward a solution on
            the Tibet issue that guarantees the respect of the ``distinct
            identity'' of the Tibetan people, who continue to suffer under
            China's oppressive rule. The dialogue is now at a standstill
            and, as we have seen, the lack of substantive progress toward a
            genuine resolution continues to be a thorny issue in U.S.-China
            relations. Would you personally commit to pressing the Chinese
            leadership for a resolution of the Tibetan issue through a
            speedy resumption of dialogue with the Tibetan side, without
            preconditions?
       China requires American visitors to get a special permit to visit
            much of Tibet. American diplomats, journalists and NGOs have a
            difficult time visiting the region as do Tibetan Americans.
            Will you commit to ensuring that the Chinese authorities
            provide access to Tibet for American officials, journalists and
            citizens, just as Chinese citizens get access to the United
            States? Will you commit to pressing the Chinese authorities to
            allow for the opening of a U.S. consulate in Lhasa?

        Answer. I share your concerns about the lack of respect for human
    rights and rule of law in Tibet. If confirmed, I will urge Chinese
    authorities to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue with the Dalai
    Lama and his representatives without preconditions to lower tensions
    and resolve differences. I will also call on China to provide
    meaningful autonomy for Tibetans and cease restrictions on Tibetan
    religious, linguistic, and cultural practices. I will engage the
    Chinese Government regarding interference in Tibetan religious matters,
    particularly the selection and education of the reincarnate lamas who
    lead the faith.
        If confirmed, I will continue to raise concerns about the lack of
    regular access to the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) for Mission China
    personnel, journalists, academics, and others. China's refusal to grant
    regular consular access to Americans in the Tibetan Autonomous Region
    represents a failure by the Chinese Government to live up to their
    international obligations. If confirmed, I will also continue to press
    the Chinese Government to allow for the option to open a U.S. Consulate
    in Lhasa.

        Question 12. Human rights groups have raised concerns that China's
    Counterterrorism Law, adopted in December 2015, has further empowered
    Chinese officials to punish peaceful activities and target ethnic
    minorities, including Uyghurs, who are predominantly Muslim. Chinese
    authorities have long conflated Uyghurs' ordinary religious activities
    as extremism and terrorism. In addition, rights advocates have raised
    concerns that new Xinjiang Party chief Chen Quanguo is applying
    repressive security mechanisms in the region that he previously used in
    Tibet.

       How will you seek to reiterate the United States' commitment to
            preventing restrictions on peaceful religious activities and
            other fundamental freedoms in the name of counterterrorism?
            What are your thoughts U.S. cooperation with Chinese law
            enforcement on counterterrorism given that many of these same
            entities routinely engage in grave human rights standards?

        Answer. I am concerned by the human rights situation in Xinjiang,
    in particular the systematic human rights abuses committed against
    Uyghurs there and the imposition of conditions akin to martial law. If
    confirmed, I will engage the Chinese Government regarding universal
    human rights and fundamental freedoms, including religious freedom and
    the rights of individuals who belong to ethnic minority groups to
    maintain their indigenous languages, customs, and religious traditions.
        I fully support the U.S. efforts to increase coordination with
    other countries in the common fight against international terrorism.
    However, we must be careful to focus on true terrorist threats. The
    United States should not support human rights abuses in any event,
    including when conducted in the name of ``internal security.'' If
    confirmed, I will press China to understand the differences between
    human rights abuses and countering terrorism.

        Question 13. Reports from media and rights advocates in recent
    years have documented the Chinese state's use of threats against family
    members of Uyghur-American citizens and residents to prevent them from
    raising awareness about Uyghur rights issues. Chinese security
    personnel often treat China-based relatives of vocal Uyghur-Americans
    as hostages who may be jailed or released depending on how willing
    Uyghur-Americans are to stop speaking out. This has been true of Rebiya
    Kadeer. It is also true of the parents of Nury Turkel, who are eligible
    to come to the U.S. but are reportedly being held under house arrest,
    harassed, denied essential medical access, and denied the ability to
    leave China.

       Will you prioritize their immediate departure, including if
            necessary traveling to Xinjiang to escort them to Guangzhou,
            where they can acquire their U.S paperwork, and on to a plane
            to ensure their safe departure? What steps would you take to
            urge China to adhere to Article 12 of the ICCPR, which protects
            the right to liberty of movement, which China has signed but
            not ratified?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will press China to cease harassment of
    Chinese human rights defenders' family members. I will also push for
    the prompt lifting of the travel ban in effect for Nury Turkel's
    parents and the relatives of Rebiya Kadeer. If confirmed, I will also
    encourage China to honor its international human rights obligations and
    commitments.

        Question 14. Will you also raise the case of Falun Gong
    practitioner Deng Cuiping (the mother of a Florida constituent) who in
    February was sentenced to six years in prisoner after having been
    charged with ``organizing and using a cult to undermine the
    implementation of the law?''

        Answer. Yes. I am concerned about growing restrictions on the
    exercise of religious freedom in China and the targeted harassment of
    religious practitioners, including those that practice Falun Gong. If
    confirmed, I commit to raising these and other cases with senior
    Chinese officials.

        Question 15. Would you consider seeking revisions to the U.S.-China
    Consular Convention to clarify that Americans detained in China should
    be allowed to meet with a lawyer and discuss details of their case with
    U.S. consular officials?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will press the Chinese to adhere to their
    international obligations under the Vienna Convention for Consular
    Relations and the 1980 U.S.-China Consular Convention. These agreements
    represent the foundation of consular engagement and outline protections
    for U.S. citizens overseas. I will fully support the efforts of the
    Bureau of Consular Affairs and their work to protect our citizens in
    China.

        Question 16. Will you consistently raise with the Chinese
    Government its obligation to protect North Korean asylum seekers
    crossing its borders, allow the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to
    assist them, and stop forcibly repatriating them to North Korea?

        Answer. Yes. In light of the documented mistreatment that refouled
    refugees face at the hands of the North Korean authorities, if
    confirmed, I will urge Chinese authorities to cease the practice of
    deportation. I will also urge authorities to accept that China's
    deportation practices are inconsistent with its obligations under
    Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture and China's obligations
    under the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.

        Question 17. Job creators in America's innovation economy have
    ongoing concerns about the Chinese Government's consideration and
    adoption of cybersecurity and technology policies that are
    counterproductive to U.S. security and economic interests. As China
    moves toward implementation of its Cybersecurity Law, will you commit
    to soliciting input from industry stakeholders on harmful effects that
    need to be corrected? Will you support a delay in the law's
    implementation?

        Answer. The prosperity and cybersecurity of the United States
    depend on the ability of our businesses and innovators to develop
    pioneering products that are interoperable while protecting the
    legitimate security and privacy needs of consumers.
        I share your concerns that China's Cybersecurity Law and other
    technology-related policies are making it difficult for companies to
    provide secure, globally competitive products and services to their
    clients in China.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with other U.S. agencies, consult
    with industry stakeholders, to press China to retract or mitigate any
    laws and regulations that adversely affect the ability of U.S. business
    to enter and operate in China and U.S. national security and economic
    interests.

        Question 18. Some have called China's Internet Firewall the Berlin
    Wall of the 21st Century. What priority would you place on Internet
    freedom programs in a country like China? In your view did the Obama
    administration give this issue sufficient attention given its
    geopolitical implications?

        Answer. An open and interoperable internet fosters free expression
    and innovation. The Chinese Government's censorship of Internet
    content, including social media and online news, and restrictive
    regulation of network providers hinders the use of the Internet as an
    open platform where individuals are free to share information and
    express their beliefs. This essential character of the Internet is
    central to driving innovation and supporting modern economies around
    the world that provide tremendous benefits for their people. If
    confirmed, I will promote the free flow of information online in China
    and advocate for a free and open Internet in China. I will urge China
    to respect its international obligations and commitments regarding
    human rights and fundamental freedoms, including to the freedoms of
    expression, association, and assembly, both on and offline.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
         Submitted to Hon. Tery Branstad by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The hallmark of American leadership in the world has been
    our vigilant advocacy for human rights and democracy. As governor of
    Iowa, my role internationally was not focused on the direction or
    implementation of foreign policy around democratic norms or human
    rights. However, I have always tried to recognize my responsibility as
    an American representing our values. In the 1980s, shortly after the
    Chernobyl incident, I visited the Soviet Union. While there, my wife
    and I met with Refuseniks in what was then Leningrad, now known as St.
    Petersburg. These people were seeking democracy. I was not bashful
    about meeting with dissidents then and I am not hesitant now to meet
    with people who feel they are being discriminated against or are being
    treated unfairly.
        Over the course of my six terms as governor, I have always valued
    upholding human rights for all. Treating all people with respect and
    dignity has been a guiding principle for me throughout time in public
    service. Our Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    adopted by the United Nations sets out the right to freedom of
    religion. In Iowa, I have long worked to promote and uphold all
    freedoms guaranteed to Iowans and especially the freedom of religion in
    our state.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    China? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in China? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. As I said in my testimony, as an old friend, I think I can
    tell President Xi where they are falling short and the kinds of things
    that need to be addressed, including human rights. I'm Catholic. I want
    to go to a Catholic church in China. I want to welcome people of all
    backgrounds to the U.S. Embassy. I want to travel to other parts of
    China to meet with them as well. I will represent American values--
    including human rights--every day of my service.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in China in advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. China's growing restrictions on media and access to
    information make it difficult for Chinese citizens to exercise their
    rights to freedom of expression. I will uphold the U.S. commitment to
    be firm in representing our core democratic values and advocating for
    the human rights of all people.

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

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to continuing to support those
    organizations and rights activists in China, and look forward to
    meeting with them both in the U.S. and China.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    China to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by China?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to raising individual cases
    with senior Chinese officials. I will also work with like-minded
    countries to deliver a consistent message to China on human rights
    issues of mutual concern.

        Question 6. Will you engage with China on matters of human rights,
    civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed I will consistently raise our serious
    concerns about China's human rights record with senior Chinese
    officials.

        Question 7. If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring that a human
    rights case or issue is raised in every senior meeting, particularly by
    visiting Cabinet members, during your tenure?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to regularly raising human rights
    cases and issues with Chinese authorities. I will not shy away from
    raising these issues, and will encourage visitors to do so as well.

        Question 8. Will you discourage closer cooperation on
    counterterrorism or law enforcement with China until Beijing's policies
    and practices are in conformity with international human rights
    standards?

        Answer. The U.S. cooperates with China, including in the area of
    law enforcement and counterterrorism, only in strict accordance with
    our laws and values. Our engagement with China's law enforcement
    agencies provides a venue for us to raise our human rights concern
    while we still advance cooperation on common interests. However, we
    have serious differences with the Chinese on many aspects of their law
    enforcement and counterterrorism policies and if confirmed I will raise
    these differences with senior Chinese leadership as well.

    Emoluments
        Question 9.  The American people have a right to know whether
    decision-making is being conducted in the public interest or in
    President Trump's private financial interest. As I have raised
    publicly, the decision by China to grant the Trump Organization
    valuable trademarks just after the president's election is hard to view
    as anything other than an effort to provide a valuable gift to the
    president--consistent with the sort of corruption we see throughout the
    Communist Party in China.
        If confirmed, please rest assured that we will be watching closely
    whether the U.S. Ambassador is put in the position of giving favorable
    treatment to the Trump Organization or members of the Trump family, or
    lobbying the Chinese Government on their behalf.

       Given the president's decision not to divest himself or to fully
            disclose his financial interests, how do you plan, if confirmed
            as ambassador, to assure that you do not unwittingly support
            the president in violating the Constitution's Emoluments
            clause?

        Answer. If confirmed, I pledge, as do all U.S. officials, to uphold
    and defend the Constitution of the United States. I will comply with
    and seek to uphold all U.S. laws.

        Question 10. Do you commit to providing the Congress with
    information you become aware of that may relate to violations of the
    Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 11. As you know, shortly after President Trump won
    election, China granted the Trump Organization a number of valuable
    trademarks that they had been seeking for years. More recently, China
    granted three trademarks to Ivanka Trump, on the very day that
    President Xi met with the President.

       What is your understanding of the role of the political leadership
            of China in influencing bureaucratic decision-making?

        Answer. As a private U.S. citizen, I am unable to judge accurately
    the portion of Chinese decisions that are subject to political
    considerations rather than merit.

        Question 12. Given what we know about how the Chinese Government
    functions, can it credibly be argued that the timing of these trademark
    grants was mere coincidence?

        Answer. As a private U.S. citizen, I have no direct knowledge of
    the decision-making process the Chinese Government followed in this
    instance. I cannot accurately speculate on the motivations of the
    Chinese Government in this instance.

        Question 13. As ambassador, how will you assure that American
    trademark filers are treated fairly and with integrity, and their
    applications judged by Chinese officials properly and on the merits?

        Answer. If confirmed as ambassador, I will seek a fair and
    equitable treatment of Americans seeking intellectual-property
    protections from the Chinese Government and for the general protection
    and respect of U.S. intellectual property. I will seek for relevant
    applications by U.S. citizens and organizations be judged on their
    legal merits.

    North Korea
        Question 14. China has always been concerned that strong economic
    pressure on North Korea over its nuclear and missile activities could
    destabilize Pyongyang and potentially unleash refugee and migrant flows
    into China or even lead to the collapse of the regime. Yet central to
    President Trump's approach to North Korea is additional Chinese
    pressure on Pyongyang.

       What additional steps do you believe China should be taking to put
            pressure on North Korea?

        Answer. As a neighbor of North Korea, China is a major trading
    partner and they have recently placed some restrictions on coal
    imports. If confirmed, I will work with the Trump administration to
    pursue various other diplomatically and economically acceptable avenues
    to send a clear signal that the world does not tolerate this expansion
    of nuclear technology and missiles. It is a threat to all mankind and
    we must look at all opportunities to work together.

        Question 15. What are the metrics that the U.S. should use to judge
    whether China is doing enough?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will convey to the Chinese that the United
    States expects them to use their leverage to compel North Korea to
    return to serious talks. I am hopeful that China is starting to do more
    to exercise its leverage on the North Korean regime. For a start, the
    Chinese Government announced this past February that it will impose an
    absolute ban on North Korean coal imports through the end of the year.
    The real test, however, will be implementation.
        On April 28, the Secretary asked all UN member nations, including
    China, to increase North Korea's isolation--through sanctions severing
    trade relationships that fund weapons programs including coal, and by
    suspending the flow of North Korean guest workers. If confirmed I will
    press China to respond positively to these requests.

        Question 16. Should we be sanctioning Chinese companies that do
    business with North Korea?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with my interagency team at the
    Embassy and in our Consulates, as well as with colleagues back in
    Washington, to utilize all tools at our disposal to choke off resources
    that fund the DPRK's proscribed nuclear and missile programs, including
    sanctioning Chinese entities if appropriate.

        Question 17. Should we press China to cut off energy and food aid
    to North Korea?

        Answer. While the North Korean people have legitimate humanitarian
    needs, I understand that a significant portion of China's purported aid
    to North Korea is funneled to support the North Korean's ballistic
    missile and nuclear weapon development program. If confirmed, I will
    address this problem with China directly to ensure that any assistance
    that China and our international partners provide for humanitarian
    purposes is directed to the North Korean people.

        Question 18. The President has suggested that he'd be willing to
    pull his punches on issues like trade and currency concerns if China
    helped us on North Korea. Do you agree these issues should be linked?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Secretary Tillerson and
    other U.S. agencies to support his commitment to expand economic
    opportunities for American businesses by candidly addressing areas of
    economic friction between our two countries. China shares our goal of a
    denuclearized Korean peninsula and has been working with the U.S. on UN
    sanctions and other diplomatic actions to realize this goal.

        Question 19. There is a growing concern among our allies that our
    recent statements on North Korea reify that ``all roads lead to and
    through Beijing.'' Are you concerned that by elevating China's role in
    the North Korea situation you are, perhaps inadvertently, sending a
    message that East Asia is China's sphere of influence?

        Answer. China holds significant influence over North Korea,We need
    to convince the leadership in China that it is in their best interest
    and our interest to work together to stop this dangerous direction that
    is coming out of North Korea. That said, if China is not willing or is
    unable to achieve that goal, then the United States can and will handle
    this matter on our own with the backing of our strong regional allies
    in Northeast Asia.

        Question 20. ``The Trump administration's policy on China appears
    to be highly ``transactional.'' Making policy via twitter and one-
    liners, the President has hinted at being willing to trade the One
    China Policy for a trade deal with China, or that we wouldn't press
    them so hard on trade if they performed on North Korea, and even that
    the US-Taiwan relationship might be subject to bargain with Beijing.''

       Would you agree with this characterization?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would support the administration's
    reaffirmation to China that the United States remains committed to our
    One China policy based on the Three Joint Communiques and the Taiwan
    Relations Act.
        China has a unique role to play in our efforts to push the DPRK to
    denuclearize, and this administration has made coordination on the DPRK
    a key aspect of its engagement with China. If confirmed, I would
    support the administration's efforts to correct long-standing
    imbalances in our trade relationship with China, so that the peoples of
    both our countries can benefit from that trade.
        The U.S. has many interests with China and we will pursue all of
    them.

        Question 21. What should be the underlying interests that guide the
    U.S.-China relationship and how do you plan on prioritize them?

        Answer. The last several decades of political and economic reforms
    have brought monumental changes to the way in which China interacts
    with the outside world. Rather than opposing China's rise, if
    confirmed, I would echo the administration's overarching goal of
    bringing China's behavior in line with internationally accepted rules
    and order.
        If confirmed, I would work to improve the relationship the United
    States has with China, seeking to make positive progress in areas such
    as economics and trade, law enforcement, and counterterrorism, while at
    the same time promoting and safeguarding American interests and values.

        Question 22. What are the elements of the Trump administration's
    affirmative agenda for China? Would you agree with the characterization
    of the U.S.-China policy that Secretary Tillerson presented during his
    visit to Beijing, namely that ours is a ``very positive relationship
    built on non-confrontation, no conflict, mutual respect, and always
    searching for win-win solutions?''

        Answer. The Trump administration wishes to have a constructive,
    results-oriented relationship with China. As part of that, the Trump
    administration wishes to put America first by ensuring that American
    interests are safeguarded in all aspects of our relationship with
    China.
        If confirmed, I would seek to make progress with China in areas
    where such progress is possible, while engaging frankly and
    constructively on areas of disagreement.

        Question 23. What do you believe should be the U.S. position on
    President Xi's proposal that the United States and China should seek to
    build a ``new model of major country relations'' based on the
    principles of ``non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and
    win-win cooperation? ''

        Answer. The United States wishes to have a constructive, results-
    oriented relationship with China, but will continue to defend U.S.
    interests and raise areas of concern with China where appropriate. If
    confirmed, I would support these efforts.

    South China Sea
        Question 24. China claims all the islands, reefs, and rocks in the
    South China Sea. So does Taiwan. Vietnam claims the Spratlys. Malaysia,
    the Philippines and Brunei claim some features.

       What should be the U.S. policy toward the South China Sea? Should
            we get involved in recognition or adjudication of claims?

        Answer. The United States has a national interest in freedom of
    navigation and overflight, respect for international law, unimpeded
    lawful commerce, and the peaceful resolution of disputes in the South
    China Sea.
        Should I be confirmed, I would uphold the United States' position
    that competing sovereignty claims should be resolved peacefully without
    coercion.
        Should I be confirmed, I would support the position that maritime
    claims should be made and pursued in accordance with international law.
    All maritime claims in the South China Sea should be derived from land
    features.

        Question 25. What should be the US response to China's
    militarization of the South China Sea? What can the US do to deter
    further Chinese militarization?

        Answer. China's construction of military facilities, coupled with
    its efforts to enforce sweeping and unlawful maritime claims, raises
    legitimate concerns about its intentions in the South China Sea.
        I support the position that all claimants, including China, must
    refrain from new construction on, and militarization of, disputed
    features, and to commit to managing and resolving disputes peacefully.
        Should I be confirmed, I look forward to working with the
    administration to look closely at all of the tools at our disposal to
    shape China's troubling behavior in the South China Sea.
        Should I be confirmed, I would communicate that the United States
    will continue to demonstrate that it will fly, sail, and operate
    wherever international law allows, including in the South China Sea.

        Question 26. In the past, U.S.-Chinese cooperation on climate
    change has been a bright spot in the trans-Pacific relationship between
    two global powers. What is your understanding of how China's domestic
    and global economic plan for clean energy development and how do you
    intend to maintain or build the constructive U.S.-China dialogue on
    these issues?

        Answer. China has pledged to generate 20 percent of its total
    energy from non-fossil sources by 2030. China will need to add around
    900 GW of non-fossil capacity between 2015 and 2030, an amount nearly
    as large as the current total electricity generation capacity in the
    United States. To meet these goals, China will need to invest heavily
    in non-fossil fuel energy sources such as renewable and nuclear energy,
    and they have set wind, solar, nuclear, and hydro installed capacity
    targets.
        American businesses have some of the best advanced energy and
    energy efficiency technology and can help China achieve their goals.
    American businesses are at the forefront of innovation in the clean
    energy and energy efficiency technologies, and American workers are the
    best trained in the world. If confirmed, I will support collaboration
    with China on clean energy and traditional energy projects, including
    areas like biofuels and carbon capture and sequestration, that promotes
    U.S. business interests and opportunities.

        Question 27. Do you believe climate change is real?

        Answer. The risk of climate change does exist. Responses to climate
    change will require action from everyone, including both the United
    States and China.

        Question 28 Can you explain how you intend to continue a build the
    credibility of U.S. energy and climate change diplomacy with China, in
    light of the President's action to eliminate all federal regulation on
    climate change and to eliminate all U.S. assistance that has nexus
    whatsoever to climate change or clean energy?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will act to protect and advance U.S.
    national interests in all matters, including climate change and clean
    energy.

        Question 29. How do you intend to project and demonstrate
    leadership in an area that China wants to work with the U.S. but is
    also poised to usurp total control and dominance from the U.S?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to act to protect and advance U.S.
    national interests in all matters, including climate change and clean
    energy, regardless of the actions of other nations, including China.
        America, as a leader in global energy, is a critical force in
    advancing energy efficiency and clean energy efforts around the world.
    American businesses are at the forefront of innovation in the clean
    energy and energy efficiency technologies, and American workers are the
    best trained in the world. If confirmed, I will support collaboration
    with China on clean energy and traditional energy projects, including
    areas like biofuels and carbon capture and sequestration, that promotes
    U.S. business interests and opportunities.

        Question 30. What is your understanding of the link between Chinese
    foreign investment in energy resources and development and Chinese
    projection of their vision of global governance and diplomatic
    influence?

        Answer. Should I be confirmed, I plan to stress the importance of
    China adhering to existing internationally-accepted best practices in
    infrastructure development and financing, and to adopting an open and
    inclusive approach to its overseas infrastructure projects.

    Taiwan
        Question 31. The United States supports Taiwan's meaningful
    participation in international organizations. Recognizing Taiwan's
    capacity and willingness to contribute to important global issues,
    Congress has passed legislation requiring the State Department to
    support Taiwan's participation in the World Health Organization (WHO),
    the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and the
    International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL).

       If confirmed, are you committed to implementing this policy? If the
            Chinese Government tries to block Taiwan's international
            participation, how do you plan to engage Beijing on this issue?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Taiwan's membership in
    international organizations that do not require statehood. In
    organizations that require statehood for membership, I will support
    Taiwan's meaningful participation. This includes ICAO, INTERPOL, WHO,
    and the more than 60 international organizations in which Taiwan
    participates.
        I am committed to supporting Taiwan as it seeks to expand its
    already significant contributions to addressing global challenges.
        I believe the United States has a deep and abiding interest in
    cross-Strait peace and stability. The benefits that stable cross-Strait
    ties have brought to China and Taiwan, the United States, and the
    region have been important. China and Taiwan should understand the
    value of stable cross-Strait ties and work to establish a basis for
    continued peace and stability.
    Labor
        Question 32. When the State Department assesses the human rights
    records of countries each year, it uses seven key measurements, one of
    which is labor rights. Over the past 3 years, there have been over
    5,000 labor strikes in China and China has correctly been criticized
    for deplorable working conditions.
        One way we press other nations on human rights is to set an
    example. On labor rights, you have not set a good example. As Governor
    of Iowa, you recently signed legislation that essentially denies public
    workers in your state collective bargaining rights that they have
    enjoyed for 45 years.

       What are your views about the role of labor in achieving more
            democracy? Do you think that you can hold China accountable for
            its workers' rights record when your own record with respect to
            collective bargaining is poor? If and when you engage with
            Chinese officials around their lack of free and independent
            unions, low wages due to lack of collective bargaining, unsafe
            working conditions, and failure to meet international labor
            standards, how will you address their questions around your
            work to weaken unions in Iowa?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue pushing China to adopt
    robust, common sense protections for its workers. I will engage with
    China on ending practices such as forced labor and labor trafficking,
    and on updating its laws to conform to international obligations and
    best practices in labor standards and workplace safety.

        Question 33. Are you aware of any organization group or individual
    supporting the changes to the public sector labor law (Iowa Chapter
    20), who has committed or implied financial or political support to
    Iowa legislators or the Governor? If so, which individual, group or
    organization pledged or implied such support? What was the nature of
    the pledged or implied support?

        Answer. No.

        Question 34. Why was a representative of Americans for Prosperity,
    a conservative political group that is funded by the billionaire Koch
    and DeVos families, the only member of the public who joined you for
    the signing of the bill that undermined public employee bargaining
    rights?

        Answer. In February, I signed House File 291 into law during a bill
    signing ceremony with members of the Iowa Legislature, staff, and the
    public.

    Trade
        Question 35. I hear from U.S. companies across sectors about
    problems regarding doing business in China. And it's not just American
    companies that have reported access issues--it's companies around the
    world. A 2016 European Union Chamber of Commerce in China business
    confidence survey stated that the business environment in China was
    becoming ``increasingly hostile'' and ``perpetually tilted in favor of
    domestic enterprises.'' These biased policies not only make it hard for
    our companies to compete within China. They also have the potential to
    put American workers and companies at a disadvantage to Chinese firms
    that receive unfair domestic support or subsidies. We need to level
    this playing field for our workers and our businesses.

       If confirmed, how would you work with your counterparts, including
            other ambassadors based in Beijing, to address these issues?

        Answer. U.S. and other foreign companies continue to report an
    increasing number of challenges they encounter when doing business in
    China. If confirmed, I will support efforts by the administration to
    seek freer and fairer trade with our trading partners, particularly
    with those such as China with which we have trade deficits. If
    confirmed, I will also support the administration's desire to see China
    remove the discriminatory restrictions that it places on U.S. firms
    already operating in China or seeking access to the Chinese market.
        If confirmed, I will work with my counterparts, including other
    ambassadors based in Beijing, to support efforts to ensure fairness and
    balance in the business environment in China.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Hon. Terry Branstad by Senator Robert Menendez

    South and East China Seas

        Question 1. It is a longstanding US policy to not recognize Chinese
    claims of sovereignty over the South or East China Sea and or any
    islands therein. Yet we see the country taking aggressive steps to
    expand its influence and control, even to the point of militarizing the
    islands and outrageously seizing a U.S. Navy vessel in international
    waters.

       Would you support a targeted sanctions regime against firms and
            individuals that facilitate certain investments in the South
            China Sea or East China Sea, including land reclamation,
            island-making, construction, supply facilities or civil
            infrastructure projects in any land that is currently disputed
            territory between any other nations?

        Answer. The United States has a national interest in freedom of
    navigation and overflight, respect for international law, unimpeded
    lawful commerce, and the peaceful resolution of disputes in the South
    China Sea.
        If confirmed, I will encourage the administration to look closely
    at all of the tools at its disposal to shape China's troubling behavior
    in the South China Sea.

        Question 2. Likewise, would you work to build support to prohibit
    official recognition of the South China Sea or East China Sea as part
    of China, and to limit certain kinds of assistance to countries that
    recognize Chinese sovereignty over either Sea?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would work to make clear to China that we
    believe that maritime claims should be made and pursued in accordance
    with the international law of the sea, as reflected in the Law of the
    Sea Convention. In accordance with international law, all maritime
    claims in the South China Sea must be derived from land features.
        If confirmed, I would urge China to refrain from new construction
    on, and militarization of, disputed features, to avoid other actions
    that would complicate or escalate the disputes, and to commit to
    managing and resolving disputes peacefully and in accordance with
    international law.

        Question 3. How will you convey these views to your interlocutors
    in the Chinese Government?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will make use of the full array of
    communications channels available to the ambassador to ensure that the
    U.S. views reach different levels of the Chinese Government.

    North Korea
        Question 4. I recognize that some analysts are skeptical about the
    effect of sanctions on a corrupt country like North Korea. However, as
    the leading sponsor of legislation that was overwhelmingly passed to
    impose and tighten sanctions on North Korea, I believe they can have a
    meaningful impact if rigorously enforced.

       Do you believe China is in fact in compliance with UNSC
            resolutions?

        Answer. The Chinese Government announced this past February that it
    will impose an absolute ban on North Korean coal imports through the
    end of the year. The real test, however, will be implementation. If
    confirmed, I will encourage China to fulfill its obligations under
    successive U.N. Security Council resolutions. I will reiterate to the
    Chinese leadership that their willingness to work with us to solve the
    Asia-Pacific's most acute threat to peace and security will be a
    benchmark of their commitment to pursue a constructive results-oriented
    relationship with the United States.

        Question 5. What measures can we take to enlist greater PRC support
    of the existing sanctions regime?

        Answer. We need to convince the Chinese that they are the ones that
    have the potential to really influence the regime, more than anyone
    else. The change that needs to take place does not need to be a threat
    to the system, but needs to stop nuclear proliferation. We need to
    convince the leadership in China that it is in their interest to work
    with us to stop this dangerous direction that is coming out of North
    Korea.

        Question 6. Will you work to get Chinese support should the UNSC
    consider imposing additional sanctions on DPRK if needed?

        Answer. On April 28, the Secretary asked all U.N. member nations,
    including China, to increase North Korea's financial isolation-
    including through new sanctions, severing trade relationships,
    suspending the flow of guest workers, and banning imports from North
    Korea, including coal. If confirmed, I will press China to respond
    positively to these requests.
        If confirmed, I will work with my interagency team at the Embassy
    and in our Consulates, as well as colleagues back in Washington, to
    utilize all tools at our disposal to choke off revenues that fund the
    DPRK's proscribed nuclear and missile programs, including sanctioning
    Chinese entities if appropriate.

        Question 7. In the past, then President-elect Trump suggested that
    the United States would no longer be bound by the One China policy--a
    policy that is in our national security interests. Moreover, Taiwan's
    successful democratic experiment is a significant accomplishment for
    American foreign policy; the country remains a strategic partner of the
    U.S.

       Are you committed to maintaining the One China policy?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to maintain support for our
    One China Policy, which is based on the three joint communiques and the
    Taiwan Relations Act. I remain committed to our desire to see this
    cross-Strait issue peacefully resolved.

        Question 8. Where does Taiwan stand in your calculus?

        Answer. I believe that our long-standing friendship with the people
    of Taiwan remains a key element of our Asia policy. Our enduring
    relationship under the Taiwan Relations Act represents a unique asset
    for the United States and is an important multiplier of our influence
    in the region. This friendship is grounded in history, shared values,
    and our common commitment to democracy, free markets, rule of law, and
    human rights. As one of Taiwan's strongest partners, I support working
    side-by-side to increase our mutual economic prosperity, tackle global
    challenges and ensure effective security to support continued stability
    and dynamism for Taiwan and the region.
        I believe that the United States has a deep and abiding interest in
    cross-Strait peace and stability. It is important that China and Taiwan
    understand the importance of these benefits and work to establish a
    basis for continued peace and stability. The benefits that stable
    cross-Strait ties have brought to China and Taiwan, the United States,
    and the region have been enormous.

        Question 9 Are you committed to an alliance and partnership we
    maintained with Taiwan since 1949?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to maintain support for our
    One China Policy, which is based on the three joint communiques and the
    Taiwan Relations Act. The Taiwan Relations Act spells out that it is
    the policy of the United States, among other things: to preserve and
    promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other
    relations between the people of the United States and the people of
    Taiwan, as well as the people on the China mainland and all other
    peoples of the Western Pacific area; and to declare that peace and
    stability in the area are in the political, security, and economic
    interests of the United States, and are matters of international
    concern.
        Our long-standing friendship with the people of Taiwan remains a
    key element of our Asia policy. Our enduring relationship under the
    Taiwan Relations Act represents a unique asset for the United States
    and is an important multiplier of our influence in the region. This
    friendship is grounded in history, shared values, and our common
    commitment to democracy, free markets, rule of law, and human rights.
    As one of Taiwan's strongest partners, I support the United States
    working side-by-side to increase our mutual economic prosperity, tackle
    global challenges and ensure effective security to support continued
    stability and dynamism for Taiwan and the region.

        Question 10. I was extremely disappointed by the decision of the
    International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) not to issue an
    invitation to Taiwan to attend the 2016 ICAO Assembly that was held in
    Montreal, Canada. A similar situation continues with regards to
    sensible Taiwanese participation in INTERPOL. The vagaries of cross-
    strait relations should not be allowed to prevent the prudent
    participation of Taiwan in international bodies, assemblies, and
    agencies, even if only as an observer.

       What will you do to actively discourage imprudent Chinese efforts
            to isolate Taiwan even when common sense, international
            security and safety imperatives argues for Taiwanese
            engagement?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Taiwan's membership in
    international organizations that do not require statehood. In
    organizations that require statehood for membership, I will support
    Taiwan's meaningful participation. This includes ICAO, INTERPOL, WHO,
    and the more than 60 international organizations in which Taiwan
    participates.
        I am committed to supporting Taiwan as it seeks to expand its
    already significant contributions to addressing global challenges.
        I believe the United States has a deep and abiding interest in
    cross-Strait peace and stability. The benefits that stable cross-Strait
    ties have brought to China and Taiwan, the United States, and the
    region have been important. China and Taiwan should understand the
    value of stable cross-Strait ties and work to establish a basis for
    continued peace and stability.

        Question 11. What can you do to put pressure on the Chinese to
    reconsider their opposition to Taiwanese participation in future such
    gatherings and to demonstrate leadership, fairness, and courage by
    allowing the needful participation of Taiwan in such conferences?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Taiwan's membership in
    international organizations that do not require statehood. In
    organizations that require statehood for membership, I will support
    Taiwan's meaningful participation. We remain committed to supporting
    Taiwan as it seeks to expand its already significant contributions to
    addressing global challenges.
        I believe the United States has a deep and abiding interest in
    cross-Strait peace and stability. The benefits that stable cross-Strait
    ties have brought to China and Taiwan, the United States, and the
    region have been important. China and Taiwan should understand the
    value of stable cross-Strait ties and work to establish a basis for
    continued peace and stability. If confirmed, I will encourage
    authorities in Beijing and Taipei to engage in constructive dialogue
    that seeks a peaceful resolution of differences acceptable to the
    people of China and Taiwan.

        Question 12. I'm the co-chair of the Taiwan Caucus. In that
    capacity, I've years of experience following the cross-strait relations
    between the People's Republic of China and Taiwan; this past April
    marked the 38th anniversary of the enactment of Taiwan Relations Act
    (TRA), a pivotal event in our shared history and emblematic of our
    strong bilateral relations. Unfortunately, China is increasingly taking
    an aggressive approach with its neighbors, including Taiwan. Given
    these geopolitical developments, it would make sense to ensure that
    Taiwan can adequately defend itself and possess the means to resist new
    and increased military threats, from where ever source.
        Would you be supportive of being an advocate within the Trump
    administration to return to a process of regular and normalized arms
    sales for Taiwan as opposed to the "package" approach that the past
    couple of administrations have taken?

        Answer. I am fully committed to fulfilling our responsibilities
    under the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). In accordance with the TRA, we
    will continue to make available to Taiwan such defense articles and
    services in such quantity as may be necessary for Taiwan to maintain a
    sufficient self-defense capability.

        Question 13. During the U.S.-China Summit held on April 6-7,
    President Trump did not publicly raise the question of the lack of
    respect for human rights and the rule of law in China and in Tibet.
    Since 1997, all U.S. Presidents have publicly challenged the sitting
    Chinese President to negotiate with the Dalai Lama or his
    representative to find a lasting solution to the Tibetan issue.

       If appointed would you commit to publicly raising with Chinese
            leaders the grievances of the Tibetan people and the need for
            them to resume dialogue with the Dalai Lama?
       Do you plan to raise the issue of human rights in Tibet?

        Answer. Yes. I remain deeply concerned about the lack of respect
    for human rights and rule of law in Tibet. If confirmed, I will urge
    Chinese authorities to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue with
    the Dalai Lama and his representatives to lower tensions and resolve
    differences. I will also call on China to provide meaningful autonomy
    for Tibetans and cease restrictions on Tibetan religious, linguistic,
    and cultural practices. I will engage the Chinese Government regarding
    interference in Tibetan religious matters, particularly the selection
    and education of the reincarnate lamas who lead the faith.

        Question 14. How can China contribute more effectively to building
    international consensus that will hold Russian officials accountable
    for gross human rights abuses and for violating the territorial
    integrity of Ukraine?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will urge China to condemn Russia's
    violations of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity,
    specifically, Russia's occupation and attempted annexation of Crimea
    and its aggression in eastern Ukraine.

        Question 15. What steps will you take to encourage China's positive
    engagement on the Syrian conflict?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with China to coordinate greater
    cooperation with the United States and the international community
    towards the defeat of ISIS. If confirmed, I will also continue to urge
    China to take meaningful steps at the U.N. Security Council and through
    its bilateral channels to Damascus to facilitate a political process to
    resolve Syria's future, which will ultimately lead to a resolution of
    Assad's departure. Last year, China pledged a commitment of $300
    million in new humanitarian assistance--including via the U.N., Red
    Cross, and other international organizations--to mitigate the
    humanitarian suffering emanating from Syria and other countries. If
    confirmed, I will continue to urge China to follow through on that
    commitment and to continue to increase its support through coordinated,
    transparent, and multilateral channels in the future.

        Question 16. Many foreign countries do not see the U.S. as a leader
    on climate change and are concerned about the Trump administration's
    commitment to climate change mitigation. President Xi has appeared to
    be eager to step into this leadership vacuum. Do you believe the United
    States risks ceding to China this important mantle?

        Answer. Responses to climate change will require action from
    everyone, including the United States and China.

        Question 17. Would you advocate within the administration for
    renewed commitment to demonstrating American leadership in this area
    and the need confront the issue of climate change with determination
    and clearheaded global effort?

        Answer. The U.S. international climate change policy is currently
    under review, including bilateral climate and energy cooperation with
    countries like China.

        Question 18. In the previous administration the United States and
    China entered into a joint agreement that would see China halt
    increases in its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, with a stated goal
    of peaking earlier than that. However, the Trump administration is
    taking a different approach. China appears to wish to take a global
    leadership role on climate change. Do you think that it is in the U.S.
    interest to see Canada and China uphold their sides of these
    agreements?

        Answer. The U.S. international climate change policy is currently
    under review, including bilateral climate and energy cooperation with
    countries like China and Canada. Responses to climate change will
    require action from everyone, including the United States, Canada, and
    China.

        Question 19. If meeting their obligations is contingent upon us
    meeting our own commitments, is it in our interest to uphold our side
    of the agreements?

        Answer. The U.S. international climate change policy is currently
    under review, including bilateral climate and energy cooperation with
    other countries. Responses to climate change will require action from
    everyone, including the United States.
        The use of the veto power by Russia at the United Nations Security
    Council has contributed to the UNSC's ineffectual responses to some
    serious humanitarian and security challenges, Syria and South Sudan
    come to mind.

        Question 20. Do you see China taking a more helpful role in these
    matters?

        Answer. As a permanent member of the Security Council, China has an
    important role to play in maintaining international peace and security.
    If confirmed, I will continue to urge China to take meaningful steps at
    the U.N. Security Council to facilitate a political process to resolve
    Syria's future which will ultimately lead to the resolution of Assad's
    departure.
        With respect to South Sudan, China and the United States share an
    interest in political stability and prosperity in that country, and the
    two countries have engaged in regular diplomatic dialogue for several
    years. If confirmed, I will continue to engage China constructively on
    South Sudan to encourage all parties in South Sudan to cease
    hostilities and engage in a credible, inclusive political process.

        Question 21. What will you do to encourage China to contribute more
    to the mitigation of serious global humanitarian challenges?

        Answer. Last year, China pledged a commitment of $300 million in
    new humanitarian assistance--including via the U.N., Red Cross, and
    other international organizations--to mitigate the humanitarian
    suffering emanating from global hot spots. This is a positive
    development. If confirmed, I will urge China to follow through on that
    commitment and to continue to increase its support through coordinated,
    transparent, and multilateral channels in the future.

        Question 22. Counterfeit imports are increasingly threatening the
    viability of New Jersey and other businesses around the country.
    Globally, this is a half-trillion dollar problem, and the OECD notes
    that the United States is world's biggest victim of counterfeit and
    pirated goods--precisely because our country is the world leader in
    innovation and branding--the very sources of value that counterfeiters
    exploit. I sought to draw Customs and Border Protection's attention to
    this growing issue, recognizing that the agency needs to better screen
    small packages sent from international business to U.S. consumers,
    often illegally marked as "gifts" to evade customs duties and
    detection. As you might imagine, China is the overwhelming source of
    these counterfeit goods.

       Will you commit to raising this issue with the Chinese Government?

        Answer. One of the top trade priorities for the Trump
    administration is to use all possible sources of leverage to encourage
    other countries to open their markets to U.S. exports of goods and
    services, and provide adequate and effective protection and enforcement
    of U.S. intellectual property (IP) rights. Toward this end, if I am
    confirmed a key objective for the administration's trade policy will be
    ensuring that U.S. owners of IP have a full and fair opportunity to use
    and profit from their IP around the globe.
        The Special 301 report issued on April 28 reaffirmed China's place
    on the Priority Watch List due to widespread infringing activity,
    including trade secret theft, rampant online piracy, and high volume
    exports of counterfeit goods to markets around the globe.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the entire U.S. Government,
    including the U.S. Trade Representative, Departments of Commerce,
    Treasury, and Homeland Security as well as with international partners
    to use our available tools to curb illegal IPR-infringing actions in
    and coming from China protect American jobs, innovation, and U.S.
    economic prosperity.

        Question 23. Weak intellectual property protections and a growing
    array of localization barriers abroad are threatening innovative
    exports and the many jobs they support here at home. China in
    particular is a serious offender, and it has never lived up to many of
    the intellectual property commitments it made to the United States and
    other WTO members 15 years ago. IP is a competitiveness and jobs issue
    for America, and it should be for China if it wants to be a world-class
    innovator.

       If confirmed, what will you do to ensure that American innovations
            and jobs receive a level playing field with the Chinese?

        Answer. The United States has been a leader in promoting the rule
    of law, including in the area of intellectual property, which is vital
    to promoting competition and innovation and benefits all of us as
    consumers.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the U.S. Trade
    Representative, Departments of Commerce, Treasury, and Homeland
    Security as well as with international partners to press China to stop
    using legal proceedings to disadvantage American companies or gain
    access to their intellectual property.

        Question 24. How we can develop a more comprehensive and results
    oriented trade strategy, as opposed to lurching forward with a meeting
    by meeting strategy that only provides limited results?

        Answer. As President Trump highlighted in his Trade Policy Agenda
    earlier this year, the overarching purpose of our trade policy will be
    to expand trade in a way that is freer and fairer for all Americans. At
    Mar-A-Lago, Presidents Trump and Xi agreed to create a Comprehensive
    Economic Dialogue that will provide high-level engagement on economic
    issue between our two countries.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the co-leads of this
    dialogue, Secretaries of Commerce and Treasury, as well as with the
    Secretary of State and USTR, and with other economic departments and
    agencies on the U.S.-China 100-day economic plan and beyond to correct
    the imbalances in our economic relationship.

        Question 25. Should we be looking at additional areas where the USG
    can self-initiate investigations, particularly on IP, where China is
    already found to be a leading infringer?

        Answer. The United States continues to engage China on a
    comprehensive set of IP infringement concerns catalogued in the Special
    301 Report.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the U.S. Trade
    Representative, Departments of Commerce, Treasury, and Homeland
    Security as well as with international partners to use our available
    tools to curb illegal IPR-infringing actions in and coming from China
    actions in order to protect American jobs, innovation, and U.S.
    economic prosperity

        Question 26. In 2016, China was placed on Tier 2 Watch List in the
    State Department's Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report for the third
    consecutive year. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act requires a
    country that is ranked Tier 2 Watch List for two consecutive years to
    be downgraded to Tier 3 in the third year, unless the President waives
    the downgrade based on credible evidence the country has a plan that,
    if implemented, would constitute making significant efforts to bring
    itself into compliance with the minimum standards for the elimination
    of trafficking

       This year's TIP Report is due in June. What factors will you be
            looking at when making your recommendation on a ranking to the
            Secretary?
       How do you think the Report should be used with respect to China in
            order to encourage them to take human trafficking more
            seriously, and clamp down on exports made with forced labor,
            some of which come to the U.S. market?

        Answer. The State Department is currently assessing China's efforts
    over the previous reporting period (April 2016--March 2017) to combat
    trafficking in persons for the 2017 TIP Report. China received a waiver
    in 2016 from an otherwise required downgrade to Tier 3 because China
    devoted sufficient resources to a written plan that, if implemented,
    would constitute significant efforts to meet the minimum standards for
    the elimination of trafficking. The United States continues to work
    with China to encourage improvements in their efforts to combat
    trafficking in persons. If confirmed, I will continue these efforts.
        The 2016 TIP report identified several priority areas that China
    should focus on to be upgraded. The first is increasing efforts to
    address forced labor, both by ending the use of forced labor in
    government facilities, such as drug rehabilitation facilities or
    detention centers. Second, China needs vigorously to investigate and
    prosecute human traffickers, including officials complicit in
    trafficking crimes. Third, China should update its legal definition of
    trafficking so that it is consistent with international law. Fourth,
    China needs to institute formal procedures systematically to identify
    and to expand victim protection services. Again, if confirmed, I will
    encourage China to make progress on all four areas.

        Question 27. Some press reports state that China has lent Venezuela
    over $60 billion over the past several years, most of it in exchange
    for future oil production. If Venezuela defaults on its international
    debts and a new regime takes power and seeks assistance from
    institutions that serve to help countries rebuild their economies--such
    as the IMF, World Bank, or Inter-American Development Bank--China, as a
    major creditor, would have to be part of any solution that would put
    Venezuela back on a path to economic growth. As you know, the
    Venezuelan economy is already collapsing, and further deterioration
    risks sparking even greater flows of refugees toward the United States
    and could also present a humanitarian crisis.

       What role do you think you will play in serving as an interlocutor
            with the Chinese to address the looming crisis in Venezuela, a
            crisis which could have profound security and economic
            implications for the United States and the entire Western
            Hemisphere?

        Answer. China has significant economic ties with Venezuela, and has
    lent Venezuela tens of billions of dollars under an oil-for-loans
    arrangement since 2007. Both countries are important to one other, for
    oil, financial, and commercial reasons. The United States and China
    should share an interest in a stable and prosperous Venezuela. If
    confirmed, I will urge Beijing to apply its substantial economic
    leverage to work with all parties to achieve the political and economic
    reforms necessary to bring about a more stable outcome in accordance
    with the Venezuelan constitution.

        Question 28. President Trump promised to fight for American workers
    in the face of China's unfair trade advantages, including its
    deplorable record on labor standards. The ambassador to China should be
    someone who will advocate for the American worker and endeavor to lift
    labor standards worldwide. As Governor you recently signed two bills,
    one that sharply curtailed collective bargaining rights and another
    that reversed the ability of counties to implement minimum wage and
    paid family leave requirements. Some groups have therefore argued that
    you cannot be an effective advocate for worker rights in China when you
    have supported legislation to strip worker rights at home.

       How do you plan to present yourself as a credible advocate for
            worker rights given your record of supporting efforts to
            curtail workers' rights to collectively bargain?

        Answer. Protections for workers are an integral part of a society
    based on the rule of law. The United States has repeatedly engaged with
    China on ending practices such as forced labor and labor trafficking,
    and on updating Chinese laws to conform to international obligations
    and best practices in labor standards and workplace safety. If
    confirmed, I will continue pushing China to adopt robust, common sense
    protections for its workers.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
        Submitted to Hon. Terry Branstad by Senator Christopher A. Coons

        Question 1. As you know, your fellow Iowan--Tom Vilsack--
    established the Strategic Agricultural Innovation Dialogue (SAID) as a
    bilateral forum to resolve China's trade barriers to U.S. biotech
    traits. He worked hard to secure China's approval of U.S. biotech
    applications, and he thought he had secured a commitment from China to
    reform its regulatory system. Unfortunately, China didn't follow
    through. Last November, I signed a Senate letter--along with 36 of my
    colleagues, including Senators Portman, Gardner, and Isakson--to
    President Obama asking him to prioritize biotech approvals in the
    December meeting of the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT).
    Once again, these efforts proved fruitless.

       Will you make approval of these overdue applications a priority in
            the new 100-day plan the administration is negotiating with
            China?

        Answer. I have a keen understanding of the important role biotech
    plays to our farmers.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with Secretary Perdue as well as
    other U.S. agencies to press China to expeditiously approve long-
    standing permits for U.S. biotechnology products. I will also continue
    to push China for shorter and more efficient timelines for scientific
    review and approval of biotech products. Biotech approvals are a
    priority for me, and one I will press hard to resolve, including
    through mechanisms like the 100-day plan.

        Question 2. What will you do to make sure China finally follows
    through on its commitments? In particular, China has sat on a few U.S.
    biotech applications, and approval of those applications is long
    overdue.

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with Secretary Perdue as
    well as other U.S. agencies to press China to expeditiously approve
    these long-standing permits for U.S. biotechnology products. I will
    push China for shorter and more efficient timelines for scientific
    review and approval of biotech products. Through the Comprehensive
    Economic Dialogue, multilateral engagement, and my own meetings, I will
    make it my priority to engage intensively with China at the highest
    levels on this and other pressing economic issues.

        Question 3. The former Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack worked
    tirelessly to press China on commitments it made two years ago on
    approving new biotechnology traits for import. He expressed
    disappointment at the lack of progress last November, after the US-
    China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) meeting, when there
    was still no real commitment to approving any of the nine traits then
    awaiting approval or to improving their general biotechnology trait
    import approval process.

       Will you and your colleagues in the new administration pick up
            where Secretary Vilsack and President Obama left off on this
            important trade issue?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with Secretary Perdue as
    well as other U.S. agencies to press China to expeditiously approve
    these long-standing permits for U.S. biotechnology products. If
    confirmed, I will push China for shorter and more efficient timelines
    for scientific review and approval of biotech products. Through the
    Comprehensive Economic Dialogue, multilateral engagement, and my own
    meetings, I will make it my priority to engage intensively with China
    at the highest levels to approve all the pending applications and adopt
    a transparent and predictable approval process for biotechnology
    imports.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Hon Terry Branstad by Senator Cory A. Booker

    China in Africa
        Question 1. As you know, China has become a major economic player
    in Africa over the past two decades. Sino-African trade has grown
    exponentially, and China has become a key provider of contracted
    services in Africa, notably in the construction and infrastructure
    sectors. Chinese firms are also directly investing in African firms,
    property, and other assets, and view Africa as an emergent consumer
    market with high growth potential.
        Meanwhile, the U.S. has conditioned aid on governance or economic
    reform and human rights performance. How would you compare the
    approaches of the United States and China to addressing these issues
    areas and challenges in Africa?

       To what degree do you view China and the United States as rivals in
            Africa, or as playing complementary, and potentially
            collaborative roles in Africa?

        Answer. China is increasing its engagement in Africa reflecting its
    growing economic interests. U.S. companies and U.S. corporate culture
    have a good story to tell in Africa, and when given the choice, African
    countries prefer American companies because of the values we bring. A
    number of U.S. initiatives in Africa, such as the President's Emergency
    Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), Power Africa, and peacekeeping training
    programs provide critical assistance to the region while enhancing U.S.
    soft power.
        That said, engagement in the region is not a zero-sum game and
    there is a place for multiple players as long as they are promoting
    sustainable economic development and political stability. U.S.
    cooperation with China helps protect the interests of our African
    partners. The United States and China, for example, supported African
    Union efforts to establish the Africa Center for Disease Control to
    strengthen health systems across the continent and address health
    crises like the 2014 West Africa Ebola crisis.

        Question 2. What, if any, scope is there for U.S.-Chinese-African
    trilateral cooperation with respect to security challenges, socio-
    economic development, and business and trade in Africa? Should the
    United States view--and potentially respond to--China's extensive trade
    and comparatively more limited assistance efforts in Africa, as well as
    its political outreach efforts in the region?

        Answer. There are abundant economic and infrastructure needs in
    Africa, and China can play a constructive role. If confirmed, I will
    work to encourage China to engage on the basis of internationally
    accepted standards and time-tested safeguards for infrastructure
    investment. The United States and China have enjoyed limited
    cooperation in areas including promoting peace and security, enhancing
    African peacekeeping, strengthening health systems, encouraging
    improved regulatory and investment climates, and combatting wildlife
    trafficking. If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for U.S.-China
    cooperation in Africa.

    President's Personal Business Interests in China
        Question 3. As you know, shortly after President Trump won election
    China granted the Trump Organization a number of valuable trademarks
    that they had been seeking for years. More recently, China granted
    three trademarks to Ivanka Trump, on the very day that President Xi met
    with the President.

       What is your understanding of the role of the political leadership
            of China in influencing bureaucratic decision-making?

        Answer. As a private U.S. citizen, I am unable to judge accurately
    the portion of Chinese decisions that are subject to political
    considerations rather than merit.

        Question 4. Given that Chinese courts and bureaucracy serve the
    will of the ruling Communist Party, can it credibly be argued that the
    timing of these trademark grants was mere coincidence?

        Answer. As a private U.S. citizen, I have no direct knowledge of
    the decision-making process the Chinese Government followed in this
    instance. I cannot accurately speculate on the motivations of the
    Chinese Government in this instance.

        Question 5. As ambassador, how will you assure that American
    trademark filers are treated fairly and with integrity, and their
    applications judged by Chinese officials properly and on the merits?

        Answer. If confirmed as ambassador, I will seek a fair and
    equitable treatment of Americans seeking intellectual-property
    protections from the Chinese Government and for the general protection
    and respect of U.S. intellectual property. I will seek for relevant
    applications by U.S. citizens and organizations be judged on their
    legal merits.

        Question 6. President Trump has signed an executive order to
    dismantle President Obama's climate change regulations, potentially
    undermining the ability of the U.S. to meet its commitments under the
    Paris climate change agreement.
        Meanwhile, the Chinese Foreign Ministry recently renewed China's
    commitment to the Paris deal, saying it was a landmark agreement that
    became reality through the hard work of the international community and
    that no matter how other countries' climate policies change, China's
    resolve to deal with climate change will not change.
        I believe that we risk losing our leadership position in the
    international community if the Trump administration continues moving in
    the wrong direction on climate policy and defaulting on our promises
    under the Paris Agreement.

       Will you use your position as ambassador to advocate for working
            with China to aggressively reduce carbon emissions?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will act to protect and advance U.S.
    national interests in all matters, including climate change, in China.

        Question 7. As ambassador to China, will you commit to pushing
    Chinese leadership to address these serious issues with their
    international fishing fleet, including by cracking down on illegal,
    unreported and unregulated fishing by Chinese vessels and by lowering
    government subsidies to the fishing industry that are driving
    unsustainable fishing practices?

        Answer. I recognize that combatting illegal, unreported, and
    unregulated (IUU) fishing is an enormous challenge, and one the United
    States remains committed to addressing. Should I be confirmed, I will
    work to strengthen cooperation on measures to combat IUU fishing under
    bilateral frameworks and in regional fisheries management organizations
    and relevant international organizations.
        The United States and China hold regular bilateral consultations on
    fisheries management issues, and plan to do so again this year. The
    United States and China also have a longstanding shiprider agreement
    under the auspices of the U.S. Coast Guard for IUU patrols in the North
    Pacific Ocean. These are two examples of effective cooperation between
    our two countries, and should I be confirmed as ambassador, I would
    work to assist and accelerate Chinese efforts to combat IUU fishing
    both domestically and abroad.
        The United States and China are working with several other fishing
    nations to complete negotiation of a legally binding measure to prevent
    unregulated commercial fishing in the high seas portion of the central
    Arctic Ocean, and I will continue to push for this important agreement.

                                   __________

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                              TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Rubio, Flake,
    Gardner, Young, Barrasso, Paul, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen,
    Coons, Udall, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, Merkley, and Booker.
        Also Present: Senator Sullivan.

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

        The Chairman. Thank you for appearing before the committee
    today, Mr. Sullivan, and your willingness to serve our country
    once again.
        The confirmation of a Deputy Secretary of State is one of
    the most important appointments this committee will consider.
    The person who occupies this position will serve as the chief
    adviser to Secretary Tillerson, as Secretary in his absence,
    and as a principal officer for management of personnel and
    resources at the State Department.
        Given recent management, budgetary, and information
    technology challenges, this is no small task. Fortunately, the
    President has nominated someone who has an extensive background
    in Federal service. Having served at the Department of Justice,
    the Department of Defense, and as Deputy Secretary of Commerce,
    I believe Mr. Sullivan has the knowledge base necessary to
    understand the inner workings of a large Federal bureaucracy
    and the capacity to manage multiple priorities at the deputy
    level. Mr. Sullivan also has developed a reputation in the
    legal field as an authority on trade and national security
    issues.
        If confirmed, Mr. Sullivan will be reentering government
    service at a highly precarious time in world history. From
    Europe to the Middle East to East Asia, we are witnessing a
    number of major threats to global security and stability.
        These events give rise to a common question: What will
    America's role be? We are at a crucial point where we can
    decide to lead from the front with bold action or simply
    observe what happens from the sidelines and hope for the best.
        It is my hope that we will choose to appropriately engage
    on the hard problems, that we will restore U.S. credibility,
    and that we will provide strong pragmatic leadership on the
    world stage.
        It is also mandatory that the person who fills this
    position understands not only the importance of this office to
    the day-to-day operations of the department, but also the
    responsibility of keeping this committee fully informed of the
    department's operations, plans, and policy objectives as we
    exercise our oversight authority.
        I have spoken with Mr. Sullivan in private about the need
    for us to have candid responses to our questions, both today
    and in the future, if he is confirmed by the Senate.
        We are here today to examine Mr. Sullivan's nomination, and
    I look forward to hearing from him about this exceptionally
    important position.
        Typically, we would allow visiting Senators to go ahead and
    speak, but do you want to go ahead?
        Senator Cardin. I am more than willing to yield, if it is
    all right with you, Senator Sullivan? It is a little confusing
    there, with the Sullivans. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. They are not related, I understand.
        Senator Cardin. I am willing to yield to Senator Sullivan.
        The Chairman. So we are honored to have Senator Sullivan
    who has served, I think, in the past with Secretary Sullivan.
    Thank you for being here and spending a few moments. Go ahead.
    As a courtesy, we will let you start right now.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
    Cardin, members of the committee. It is an honor for me to come
    before the Foreign Relations Committee on behalf of my friend,
    a former colleague, a great American, Mr. John Sullivan.
        And despite what his last name would suggest, we are not
    related, although, as I mentioned to Senator Markey, probably
    somewhere back in the history of Ireland, maybe we were all
    related.
        Senator Markey. My mother is a Sullivan, too. [Laughter.]
        Senator Sullivan. That is why he is the biggest supporter.
        I met John when we first served in the administration of
    George W. Bush, myself as an Assistant Secretary of State
    working on economic, energy, trade, finance issues, and John as
    the Deputy Secretary of Commerce, and we worked on a number of
    foreign policy issues, particularly in the economic realm,
    together.
        You have all had an opportunity to see his resume, but I
    just wanted to highlight a few elements of his personal
    background and experience.
        John started out in public service as a law clerk for Judge
    John Wisdom on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and then
    later as a law clerk for Justice Souter on the U.S. Supreme
    Court. In 2004, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld appointed John as
    deputy general counsel at the Department of Defense. He then
    moved to the Department of Commerce, where he served as general
    counsel, and then as Deputy Secretary.
        In the private sector, John currently co-chairs Mayer
    Brown's national security practice and serves as chairman of
    the United States-Iraq Business Dialogue. I mention these
    positions because I think we can all agree that American
    foreign policy is not just formed in the halls of Foggy Bottom
    but in the Departments of Defense, Energy, Commerce, Treasury,
    Justice, and many other agencies throughout Washington.
        It is in this vein that I believe John's substantial and
    diverse experience in the Federal Government will serve as an
    important complement to Secretary Tillerson's background in the
    private sector. John's experience also speaks to a greater
    understanding of what it takes to develop and execute U.S.
    foreign policy. He understands the importance of a robust
    interagency cooperation and coordination element of our
    government. He understands that our Nation's foreign policy is
    most effective when we combine all instruments of American
    power--diplomatic, military, energy, trade, private sector. He
    understands the critical importance of working with our allies
    around the world. And he understands what it means to honorably
    serve our Nation and has a career of doing so.
        And with a name like Sullivan, I am confident that John
    will also bring an Irishman's wit, charm, gift of gab, and
    pugnaciousness to the job, all important qualities of a
    diplomat.
        He is a man of integrity. I know he will serve Secretary
    Tillerson, the men and women of the Foreign Service and civil
    service, and this Nation well, and I urge you to support his
    nomination.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you for coming and for your support.
    You can return to your other duties. Thank you so much, sir.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you.

        [Whereupon, the hearing paused for a business meeting
    vote.]

        The Chairman. Senator Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me thank
    Mr. Sullivan for his willingness to serve our country again. He
    seems to always want to come back to public service, and we
    very much appreciate that, a very talented person who has a
    distinguished record.
        And we thank your family for being willing to share you
    with our Nation, because in the position that you have been
    nominated for, it will take 110 percent of your time and
    effort.
        The challenges are great. And as Chairman Corker pointed
    out, so much goes through the Deputy Secretary. It is the
    person who really makes sure that that personnel systems are
    working, that the different regional areas are held
    accountable. It is a critically important position.
        I am going to use my time and my opening statement to share
    some of the comments that we talked about in our private
    meeting, because I think it is important at this nomination
    hearing to review a couple areas of concern that we have on the
    Trump administration and get your views as, if confirmed, a
    critical person in developing the foreign policy of our
    country.
        The first is what I led with in our private discussion, to
    talk about American values, American strength.
        I just came from an ADL meeting where we were talking about
    what makes America the strong Nation that it is. Yes, we have a
    strong military, and you helped to develop our strong military.
    That is important.
        We have a strong economy, and Senator Sullivan was involved
    in helping to develop that strong economy.
        But America's strength is in our ideals, our values,
    speaking up for democracy, speaking up for human rights,
    anticorruption, and embracing diversity.
        So I want to start with that because I want to have a
    dialogue, I hope today during this nomination hearing, as to
    how you value the importance of what America stands for. It is
    in context to Secretary Tillerson's statement last week that
    gives me grave concern, where he said that our foreign policy
    is out of balance, that our policies and values are not the
    same, and that if we condition our national security efforts on
    someone adopting our values, we probably cannot achieve our
    national security goals or our national security interests.
        That did not just concern a Democratic Senator from
    Maryland, but Senator McCain, who is well-respected globally
    for his commitment to American values, said, let me quote from
    Senator McCain's op-ed this week, ``In the real world, as lived
    and experienced by real people, the demand for human rights and
    dignity, the longing for liberty and justice and opportunity,
    the hatred of oppression and corruption and cruelty is reality.
    By denying this experience, we deny the aspirations of billions
    of people and invite their enduring resentment.''
        Senator McCain went on to state, ``Our values are our
    strength and our greatest treasure. We are distinguished from
    other countries because we are not made from a land or tribe,
    or a particular race or creed, but from an ideal that liberty
    is the inalienable right of mankind and in accord with nature
    and nature's Creator.
        ''To view foreign policy as simply transactional is more
    dangerous than its proponents realize. Depriving the oppressed
    of a beacon of hope could lose us the world we have built and
    thrived in. It could cost us our reputation in history as the
    Nation distinct from all others in our achievements, our
    identity, and our enduring influence on mankind. Our values are
    central to all three.``
        So I hope that we will have a chance to talk about this.
    This is not a hypothetical discussion. The Russian Federation
    has made a strategic decision to try to undermine our values as
    an effort to spread their influence in countries that currently
    have democratic values. So this is a current issue that is of
    grave concern.
        The second point I want to mention is our respect for
    involvement internationally. I say that in context to the fact
    that I led a 10-Senator delegation to COP21 to bolster U.S.
    leadership and provide calm and confidence in the United
    States' commitment to the global efforts to fight the
    existential threat of climate change.
        Now, we may disagree as to what the solution should be. I
    happen to side where science tells me the solution is, but we
    may have some different views on that. But I would hope that we
    would all agree that the United States must be at the table
    during these discussions and that we need to remain a part of
    the international family as we talk about these issues because
    without U.S. leadership, there will be other countries that
    will try to fill it.
        But we will be on the side of very few countries--I think
    Nicaragua and Syria are the only two countries that did not
    join COP21, and that is certainly not the neighbors that we
    want to associate ourselves with.
        So I hope we will hear your view for the importance of
    America's engagement globally, and that it would be wrong for
    us to sit on the sidelines as the international community
    discusses major issues.
        In that vein, we will talk to you about the President's
    skinny budget of a 36 percent cut in the State Department. We
    understand that Congress will draft its own budget, and I fully
    respect that, and I know the commitment of many members of this
    committee on both sides of the aisle to make sure that we have
    adequate resources to deal with our international commitments.
    But we want to hear your view as to America's engagement.
        Over and over again, we are involved in Afghanistan and
    Iraq. And they are talking about more of the soft power so that
    we can avoid military engagements in these countries. We know
    that in Africa, we need to do more in spreading democracy. We
    know about the famines and the challenges that we have to deal
    with there.
        So I would be interested in hearing your view as to how
    resources can be more efficiently spent and allocated, but that
    America's role will be one of increased influence, not reduced
    influence, in using what is under the State Department to
    provide stable neighbors for us to work with.
        And the last point, with what the chairman has said, in our
    private discussions, you made it clear that you would respond
    to requests by members of this committee. I would ask that that
    also be reaffirmed at today's hearing.
        Welcome. We look forward to your hearing, and we look
    forward to the continued partnership between this committee and
    the State Department.

        [Whereupon, the hearing paused for a business meeting
    vote.]

        The Chairman. We look forward to your opening comments. We
    hope you will welcome and introduce your wonderful family, who
    is with you today. We found that generally tones down committee
    members when you do that.
        And I do hope that you will affirm the fact that, if we
    have any questions, that you will promptly come before us in
    hearings in the future.
        With that, we look forward to your comments.

     STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN J. SULLIVAN, OF MARYLAND, NOMINATED TO
                      BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE

        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member
    Cardin, members of the committee. I am honored to appear before
    you as the President's nominee to be Deputy Secretary of State.
        I am joined by members of my family, my wife for almost 29
    years, Grace Rodriguez, the love of my life who has been my
    biggest supporter and best friend. We are also joined by two of
    our three children, Jack and Katie Sullivan. Our youngest,
    Teddy, is in the midst of final exams at college, and he is not
    able to join us today.
        But I am immensely proud of all of them. I hope there is a
    future for them in government service. I tell people that they
    are CIA, Cuban-Irish-Americans.
        Also, with us are my mother-in-law, Graciela Rodriguez, and
    my sister-in-law, Susan Rodriguez.
        It was an honor to be introduced by Senator Sullivan of
    Alaska, my dear friend and former colleague from the Bush
    administration. I am very thankful for his kind words.
        I want to express my enormous gratitude to President Trump
    and to Secretary Tillerson for the trust and confidence they
    have reposed in me. If confirmed, I pledge to devote all that I
    have to be worthy of that trust and confidence.
        By way of personal introduction, I am the grandson of Irish
    immigrants who arrived in South Boston in the 1880s. My
    parents, born in the 1920s, endured the Great Depression and,
    with millions of their generation, fought and won the Second
    World War. My father served in the U.S. Navy submarine service
    in the Pacific theater. My mother was a USO volunteer. We would
    now call them members of the Greatest Generation, but they
    never thought of themselves that way. They rarely spoke of
    their experiences during the war.
        One thing they did to make clear and instilled in me was a
    profound love of our country and respect for the high calling
    of public service. In the 32 years since my law school
    graduation, those values have animated my career.
        As Senator Sullivan mentioned, I have had the privilege of
    serving in a variety of positions in the U.S. Government.
    During that public service, I have learned a great deal about
    our country, its role in the world, and the functioning of the
    executive branch.
        But the most important lessons I have learned were humility
    and respect. As deputy general counsel of DOD, I saw firsthand
    the sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, and I learned
    to walk humbly through the halls of the Pentagon.
        I also learned respect for the career civil servants who
    rarely get the praise they deserve. The executive branch
    functions because of these men and women, many with decades of
    experience.
        A small number of public servants are accepted into the
    Foreign Service, which I know well. My uncle Bill Sullivan was
    a Foreign Service Officer for 32 years. He was the last U.S.
    Ambassador to Iran in the 1970s. It was his staff in Tehran
    that was taken hostage on November 4, 1979, a few months after
    the President had recalled him.
        It is an earlier date from 1979, however, that sticks in my
    mind, February 14, Valentine's Day. The U.S. Embassy in Tehran
    was overrun by a mob, and my uncle and his staff were seized.
    After a few hours, the Americans were released and the Embassy
    reopened. My uncle appeared in a picture on the cover of the
    next issue of Newsweek. He was surrounded by Iranians carrying
    assault weapons, one of whom was brandishing a bayonet in his
    face.
        That day in 1979 is significant not merely because of the
    drama in Iran but also because of a tragedy in Afghanistan. Our
    Ambassador Spike Dubs was kidnapped and assassinated in Kabul.
    Like my uncle, Ambassador Dubs was a U.S. Navy World War II
    veteran and a career Foreign Service Officer.
        The assassination of Ambassador Dubs and the seizure of our
    Embassy in Tehran on February 14, 1979, made a huge impression
    on me. I was a college student at the time. I have remained in
    awe of our Foreign Service Officers who venture into such
    dangerous places on our behalf. If confirmed, it would be my
    highest honor to work with the Foreign Service, the civil
    service, and the department's locally employed staff in the
    conduct of American diplomacy.
        In a world in which we face significant and enduring
    threats, these challenging times require leadership from the
    United States. As Secretary Tillerson said when he came before
    this committee, to achieve the stability that is foundational
    to peace and security in the 21st century, American leadership
    must not only be renewed, it must be asserted.
        And we will be aided in the assertion of that leadership by
    two of our abiding strengths, our allies and our values. We
    have relationships with allies in this hemisphere and across
    the globe that extend back many decades and have been the
    cornerstone of our national security in the post-war era.
        But our greatest asset is our commitment to the fundamental
    values expressed at the founding of our Nation, the rights to
    life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These basic human
    rights are the bedrock of our republic and at the heart of
    American leadership in the world.
        Should I be confirmed, I commit to work with the members of
    this committee as the administration implements an American
    foreign policy that is worthy of our ideals as a people, ideals
    that have been handed down by the many generations that
    preceded us.
        Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your
    questions.
        [Mr. Sullivan's prepared statement follows:]

                         Statement of John J. Sullivan

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the committee, I
    am honored to appear before you as the President's nominee to be Deputy
    Secretary of State.
        I am joined by members of my family: my wife for almost 29 years
    Grace Rodriguez, the love of my life, who has always been my biggest
    supporter and best friend. We are joined by our children, Jack, Katie,
    and Teddy Sullivan, of whom I am immensely proud. Also with us are my
    mother-in-law Graciela Rodriguez and my sister-in-law Susan Rodriguez.
        It was an honor to be introduced by Senator Sullivan of Alaska, my
    former colleague from the Bush administration. I am thankful for his
    kind words.
        I want to express my enormous gratitude to President Trump and to
    Secretary Tillerson for the trust and confidence they have reposed in
    me. If confirmed, I pledge to devote all that I have to be worthy of
    that trust and confidence.
        By way of personal introduction, I am the grandson of Irish
    immigrants who arrived in South Boston in the 1880s. My parents, born
    in the 1920s, endured the Great Depression and, with millions of their
    generation, fought and won the Second World War. My father served in
    the U.S. Navy's Submarine Service in the Pacific Theater. My mother was
    a USO volunteer. We would now call them members of the Greatest
    Generation, but they never thought of themselves that way. They rarely
    spoke of their experiences during the War.
        But one thing they did make clear, and instilled in me, was a
    profound love of our country and respect for the high calling of public
    service. In the 32 years since my law school graduation, those values
    have animated my career. In addition to stints in private law practice,
    I have had the privilege of serving in the U.S. Government: as a law
    clerk for Judge John Wisdom and for Justice David Souter, followed by
    senior positions at the Justice, Defense, and Commerce Departments.
        During my public service, I have learned a great deal about our
    country and its role in the world. Most significantly, my experiences
    have prepared me to serve in the position for which I recently have
    been nominated: Deputy Secretary of State. In both legal and policy
    positions, I learned the operations of the national security
    bureaucracy. As Deputy Secretary of Commerce, I was chief operating
    officer of a cabinet department and participated in the budgeting
    process with OMB. I also worked closely with the Department of State
    while leading trade missions and government delegations on trips to
    China, Pakistan, Germany, Iraq, Israel and the West Bank, Jordan,
    Georgia, Azerbaijan, Japan, and the UAE.
        But the most important lessons I learned were humility and respect.
    As Deputy General Counsel of DoD, I saw firsthand the sacrifices of our
    men and women in uniform. I learned to walk humbly through the halls of
    the Pentagon. I also learned respect for the career public servants who
    rarely get the praise they deserve. The executive branch functions
    because of these men and women, many with decades of experience.
        A small number of public servants are accepted into the Foreign
    Service, which I know well. My uncle Bill Sullivan was a Foreign
    Service Officer for 32 years. He was the last U.S. Ambassador to Iran
    in the late 1970s. It was his staff in Tehran that was taken hostage on
    November 4, 1979--a few months after the President had recalled him.
        It is an earlier date from 1979, however, that sticks out in my
    mind: February 14, Valentine's Day. The U.S. Embassy in Tehran was
    overrun by a mob, and my uncle and his staff were seized. After a few
    hours, the Americans were released and the embassy reopened. My uncle
    appeared in a picture on the cover of the next issue of Newsweek. He
    was surrounded by Iranians carrying assault weapons, one of whom was
    brandishing a bayonet in his face.
        That day in 1979 is significant to me not merely because of the
    drama in Iran, but also because of a tragedy in Afghanistan. Our
    Ambassador, Spike Dubs, was kidnapped and assassinated in Kabul. Like
    my uncle, Ambassador Dubs was a U.S. Navy World War II veteran and a
    career Foreign Service Officer.
        The assassination of Ambassador Dubs and the seizure of our embassy
    in Tehran on February 14, 1979, made a huge impression on me. I have
    remained in awe of our Foreign Service Officers who venture into such
    dangerous places on our behalf.
        If confirmed, it would be my highest honor to work with the Foreign
    Service, the Civil Service, and the Department's locally employed staff
    in the conduct of American diplomacy. In a world in which we face
    significant and enduring threats, these challenging times require
    leadership from the United States. As Secretary Tillerson said when he
    came before this committee, ``to achieve the stability that is
    foundational to peace and security in the 21st century, American
    leadership must not only be renewed, it must be asserted.''
        And we will be aided in the assertion of our leadership by two of
    our abiding strengths: our allies and our values. We have relationships
    with allies in this hemisphere and across the globe that extend back
    many decades and that have been the cornerstone of our national
    security in the post-war era. We have maintained and enhanced the
    relationships with our allies on the basis of our shared interests. But
    in many cases, we also share a commitment to the fundamental values
    expressed at the founding of our nation: the rights to life, liberty,
    and the pursuit of happiness. These basic human rights are the bedrock
    of our republic and at the heart of American leadership.
        Should I be confirmed, I commit to work with the members of this
    committee as the administration implements an American foreign policy
    that is worthy of our ideals as a people--ideals that have been handed
    down by the many generations that preceded us.
        Thank you for your time and I look forward to your questions.

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Just one question from me. Do you commit to appear and
    testify upon request from this committee?
        Mr. Sullivan. I do, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. With that, I am going to reserve my time for
    interjections, and turn to our distinguished ranking member,
    Ben Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Sullivan, first of all, thank you for
    the testimony today, because you make it very clear at the end
    your commitment to American values. I appreciate that. I want
    to drill down a little bit on that, as I told you I would in
    our private meeting.
        I quoted from Senator McCain in my opening statement. I
    thought part of his experience and the way that he related to
    the fact that, as a prisoner of war, where he was trying to be
    broken by the enemy, it was the belief in our values that kept
    him strong, and that he felt that if America was transactional,
    that is how we do business rather than our values, then why
    shouldn't prisoners of war be transactional also and give up
    our country in order to achieve more comfort for themselves?
    They did not do that. Our soldiers do not do that, and our
    diplomats shouldn't do that.
        So I want to hear from you your commitment that, as we deal
    with Russia, as we deal with China, as we deal with countries
    around the world that we need to deal with that do not share
    our commitment to universal values, how America's foreign
    policy will always be framed in the values that have made us
    the great Nation we are.
        Mr. Sullivan. Senator, our values, as I said in my opening
    statement, are the bedrock of our republic. Before we became a
    world power, before we had the world-class military that you
    mentioned, before we became the economic juggernaut that we are
    today, we had our values.
        We achieved those successes because all of that was based
    on our values as Americans expressed in the Declaration of
    Independence and in our Constitution.
        Senator Cardin. So I am going to tell you some specific
    examples. You will have a chance to visit a lot of countries,
    if you are confirmed, visiting with the opposition, visiting
    with NGOs that are not particularly liked by the Government,
    visiting with people who have been persecuted by the Government
    is a clear sign that America stands on the side of universal
    human rights. Are you prepared to make those types of visual
    commitments so that our leadership is maintained?
        Mr. Sullivan. Not only am I prepared to make that
    commitment going forward, but I have made that commitment in my
    prior service in government.
        I am a Roman Catholic. When I travel, I always go to mass
    and meet with Catholics in the country in which I travel. That
    includes countries where the Catholic Church is, for lack of a
    better word, oppressed--in particular, China.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        Congress is taking steps to try to give the administration
    greater tools. In one case, the Magnitsky global human rights
    bill that was championed by Senator McCain and myself is now
    available globally, and it is a congressional initiative. It
    allows the State Department to promote names of individuals who
    have violated basic human rights for sanctions here in the
    United States.
        Our leadership has been recognized globally, and other
    countries are following suit, doing the exact same thing that
    America has done, but it requires a robust administration. Are
    you prepared to use that tool to advance American human rights
    and values?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I am, Senator.
        Senator Cardin. There is legislation that we are working on
    in Congress to deal with corruption. We have a model dealing
    with trafficking, and I applaud many members of this committee
    that were deeply involved, including our chairman, who is
    passionate about stopping modern-day slavery. The TIP Report is
    a very valuable tool in advancing our goals on fighting
    trafficking in humans. We want to use a similar model to fight
    corruption.
        Corruption is growing, unfortunately, in too many places in
    the world. No country is immune from corruption. No country is
    immune from trafficking. There are countries that are taking
    steps to protect their country against trafficking, and there
    are countries that are taking steps to protect their country
    against corruption. Having guides in how we conduct our foreign
    policy because corruption is a cancer in a country that leads
    to instability, are you prepared to work with members of this
    committee on legislation that would give greater tools for
    evaluating how well we are doing in fighting corruption
    globally?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I am, Senator.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Rubio?
        Senator Rubio. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, for your willingness to serve once again in
    government. I want to continue on the theme of human rights. I
    think it is an essential part of our foreign policy.
        I think you know this from your time in government and
    outside of it that so many of the groups around the world who
    are fighting for the principles that we as a Nation stand for--
    democracy, free press, freedom of religion, freedom of
    expression--they look to America for inspiration.
        I have been touched deeply by examples of that just in the
    last 3 months. Sometimes you give these speeches on the Senate
    floor. We do not think anyone hears them, and then you get to
    interact with someone that was recently released from a prison,
    and they tell you that what we did in a resolution or in a
    hearing or on the Senate floor was impactful and ran counter to
    the oppressor's message to them that they do not matter to
    anybody, that nobody cares about you.
        And while I think it is important that we here in the
    Senate continue to stand for these principles, I also think it
    is important that we have a State Department that is structured
    in a way that shows that this is a priority of the United
    States. There is no shortage of these, obviously.
        In Iran, we know about their grotesque human rights record.
    In Syria, we have seen the horrifying crimes committed against
    innocent civilians.
        We also have challenges with some allies in the region. I
    think that is perhaps some of the messaging that the Secretary
    was pointing to. Egypt is an ally. It is also a human rights
    violator, and it is important for us as their ally to tell them
    that that is an unsustainable position moving forward. Saudi
    Arabia is a country we work with very closely, and yet it is
    not a human rights star, to say the least.
        In Asia, we obviously talk a lot about the North Korean
    nuclear weapon. We do not talk nearly enough about the forced
    labor camps that exist there, a horrifying reality. Of course,
    in China, we could have days and days of testimony about the
    thousands of political prisoners.
        In Europe, obviously, we are aware of Russia's horrifying
    human rights record. We have seen recently in the pro-Russian
    areas of Chechnya how LGBT gay men have been rounded up and put
    in jail, again, another horrifying instance.
        But in our own hemisphere, even as we stand now, we see
    horrifying human rights violations in Venezuela, dozens of
    people that have been in jail, some upwards of 3 years' total,
    ignoring the constitution of that country, the security forces
    firing on protesters in the street.
        And of course, one that I know is near to you and to me,
    the issue of Cuba, where we still, despite all the celebratory
    language about an opening, there are people in jail in Cuba,
    there are people being rounded up in Cuba, there are people
    being oppressed systematically in Cuba.
        I believe the Cuban people are deserving of freedom and
    democracy just like the people in the Dominican Republic have,
    just like the people in Haiti just had an election, just like
    the people in Colombia, just like the people--why are the
    Cubans any less worthy of those basic freedoms?
        And what I would ask you to share with the committee is
    what you shared with me on the issue of human rights, in
    particular with Cuba but broader. This is not just an issue
    that is of academic interest.
        In your own family, through marriage, you actually have a
    gentleman who experienced a horrifying violation of human
    rights, who experienced being jailed by an oppressive regime,
    who is a Floridian. You shared that story with me.
        To me, that is very important, because it tells me that we
    have someone here before us who understands human rights and
    oppression not because he read about it in a book, because he
    knows and loves someone who himself has been a victim of the
    denial of freedom. I would just invite you to share with the
    committee for a moment the story of this incredible man and the
    impact that he has had on your thinking with regard to all
    this.
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator. You are referring to my
    wife and my mother-in-law's uncle, Jose Pujols, who was a
    political prisoner in Cuba for 27 years, over 27 years. He was
    one of the so-called plantados in Castro's prisons.
        Senator Rubio. Explain plantados.
        Mr. Sullivan. Plantados were those prisoners who refused to
    cooperate, refused to wear prison uniforms. They were planted
    in their cells. He was in solitary confinement for 7 years. He
    was sustained by his religious faith, his Catholic faith, his
    wife who, despite the fact that she had the opportunity to
    leave Cuba and come to the United States, stayed on the island
    so that she, in those few opportunities when she could, meet
    with him.
        He was released from prison a week after my wife and I got
    married in 1988, and he is still alive today. He is 92, almost
    93 years old. And he is a great inspiration to our family and
    an inspiration to me and someone that my experience with, in
    talking to him, inspires me to serve in the United States
    Government to ensure that our government provides the
    leadership that is necessary to protect human rights around the
    world, to protect men like Jose Pujols.
        Senator Rubio. I would just close by saying, as proof that
    there is justice in the universe, Jose is alive and his
    oppressor is dead.
        Mr. Sullivan. Amen.
        The Chairman. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Sullivan, for your willingness to return to
    government service and for your strong assertion of your
    commitment to our basic values and for your willingness to take
    up this work on behalf of the American people. I am encouraged
    by your statement in your opening that you have remained in awe
    of our Foreign Service Officers who venture into dangerous
    places on our behalf, and I am encouraged by the stories you
    shared with me and that you just shared in response to Senator
    Rubio's questioning.
        So I look forward to working with you and to finding ways
    that we can together continue to speak up about human rights,
    about democracy, to meet with and to advocate for the Foreign
    Service Officers around the world who today are a little
    anxious about their place in the State Department and are
    looking for clarity about support for their service and their
    mission.
        Just three quick questions, if I might. We talked a little
    bit about your service in the Commerce Department.
        How do you view the Power Africa initiative? I think it has
    been a successful public-private partnership that helps bring
    private sector ingenuity and effort into the basic development
    challenge of infrastructure on the continent. Is that something
    that you think the Trump administration might well embrace and
    continue to move forward?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, Senator. I agree, and we discussed that
    yesterday in our meeting.
        I would also add that we discussed sub-Saharan Africa as a
    place that we cannot lose sight of, of the opportunities that
    are there, both for the sake of promoting human development,
    economic development in those many countries, but also as
    protection of U.S. interests, both national security and
    economic prosperity. So I look forward to working with you on
    that, Senator.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. One of the things I am concerned
    about is that, in the absence of Russia paying some price for
    its interference in our 2016 election, arguably in France's
    election just this past week, and potentially in the election
    in Germany that is upcoming, that they will simply continue and
    become more aggressive and more robustly engaged.
        How do you think we could best deter Russia from future
    cyberattacks and efforts to subvert democracy throughout our
    Western European allies and here in the United States?
        Mr. Sullivan. Well, Senator, it is a persistent threat that
    we face, most recently from Russia in our election, and, as you
    mentioned, in the elections in Europe and France and the
    Netherlands, and upcoming elections in Germany and Italy next
    year or maybe later this year.
        As the Secretary has said--Secretary Tillerson has met with
    Foreign Minister Lavrov, with President Putin, raised these
    issues directly with the Russians. I believe we have to be
    robust in our response to this intrusion into our democracy
    when we talk about basic human rights. Our republic is premised
    on a representative democracy. Interference with our political
    processes is simply unacceptable. It is a profound threat to
    our way of life, and we need to respond as robustly as we can,
    using all of the means that we have at our disposal.
        Senator Coons. I am encouraged to hear you say that,
    because I have heard expressions of concern from
    representatives of some of our European allies, particularly
    those closest to Russia geographically, who say that if we are
    not going to stand up and defend our democracy, how can they
    count on us to defend theirs, and that sense of uncertainty
    about our future actions I think makes all of us weaker.
        Last, what do you think we should be doing to restrain
    Iran's destabilizing actions in the Middle East and throughout
    the region? I think they continue to engage in destabilizing
    actions throughout the region, in Yemen, in Syria, in Iraq, and
    elsewhere. And coming up with a sustained, bipartisan approach
    to Iran is I think one of our major foreign policy challenges.
        Mr. Sullivan. I agree, Senator. Iran policy is currently
    under review in the administration. I would say that Iran has
    been a persistent threat to U.S. national interests, national
    security interests in many areas, including those that you
    mentioned.
        The Secretary has sent a letter to this committee regarding
    Iranian compliance with the JCPOA. I thought Secretary Mattis
    best characterized the JCPOA in his testimony before the Armed
    Services Committee, in which he described it as an imperfect
    arms control agreement, not a treaty of friendship.
        We have a lot of other problems that we need to address
    with Iran beyond the JCPOA and their nuclear program. We need
    to make sure that they comply with the terms of that agreement,
    but we have a number of other problems that we need to address
    with them, whether it is their sponsorship of terrorism, human
    rights in their own country, ballistic missile programs, the
    list goes on.
        Senator Coons. I agree, and I look forward to having you
    testify before this committee in the future and to hearing that
    you visit with Foreign Service Officers as well as with the
    political opposition, human rights activists, and NGOs in your
    travels around the world. Thank you, Mr. Sullivan.
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Senator Flake?
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you and also to
    hear your testimony here, your willingness to serve.
        I enjoyed the discussion that Senator Rubio had with regard
    to Cuba. Many of us feel strongly about ways that we can hasten
    change in Cuba and move toward democracy. I happen to think
    that some of the measures taken by the last administration with
    regard to allowing Cuban-American travel, allowing increase in
    remittances, have allowed a lot of Cubans--I think we have gone
    from virtually very little Cuban employment outside of the
    Government sector to today about one in four Cubans employed in
    the so-called private sector in Cuba, running bed-and-
    breakfasts or private restaurants or beauty shops, auto repair
    facilities, and have some modicum of independence from the
    Government, more than they had before. I think that is a good
    development. There are obviously still human rights abuses that
    take place.
        The question is, how do we best ensure that freedom is
    hastened and we move forward? I know that those policies are
    being reviewed, and I hope that we will look at the whole
    picture there and see where we are as opposed to where we were
    a few years ago. We have had policies in place for 50 years
    that have not moved the needle very far until now.
        With regard to the State Department and some of the things
    that you will be involved with, there was a report recently
    noting that there are 67 special envoy, special representative
    and special coordinator positions at the department, most of
    them outside of the regular bureaus and a handful of them, only
    a handful of them, approximately 20, have been authorized by
    Congress.
        From a managerial perspective, how do we deal with this? Is
    there going to be an effort to wind down some of these special
    envoy positions?
        Just as a matter of note, they seem pretty duplicative. For
    example, we have a special envoy and coordinator for
    international energy affairs, as well as the special envoy for
    climate change and the special representative for environmental
    and water resources. This is over and above any other positions
    that we have at State.
        Then we have a special envoy for North Korean human rights
    issues and a special envoy for the Six Party talks and a
    special representative for North Korea policy. Again, this is
    all in addition to regular State Department positions.
        From a managerial perspective, how are we dealing with
    these special envoy positions?
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Flake.
        This is all part of Secretary Tillerson's review of the
    mission of the department with the intent of basically bringing
    the department into the 21st century to address the challenges
    we have now. He has reached out to all employees of the
    department, having listening sessions with employees of the
    department to discuss the best ways to define and accomplish
    our missions.
        With respect to these special envoy positions you have
    mentioned, Senator Flake, my concern, without addressing any
    particular office, is that when an office like that is created
    outside of the chain of command in the bureaucracy, it removes
    some level of accountability for those individuals who have
    been nominated by the President, reviewed by this committee,
    and confirmed, whether they serve at the Assistant Secretary or
    Under Secretary level. We then appoint a special envoy for a
    particular issue who is outside that chain of command. This
    committee has not reviewed that person's qualifications.
        And it, in many ways, will undermine the leadership and
    authority of those individuals who have been put in positions
    of substantial authority because there is somebody outside that
    chain of authority who has responsibility for that narrow
    issue.
        Senator Flake. That is my concern as well. I hope that we
    can move forward and make some changes here. My colleague just
    mentioned maybe we need a special envoy for special envoys.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. But absent that, we have to get a handle on
    this. With only 20 of the 67 even authorized by Congress, and
    so many very duplicative, it would seem that a fully
    functioning, right functioning State Department would seek to
    get some of its power and authority back.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I would point out, it is not just
    the envoys but, in many cases, very, very large staffs that
    support them.
        We had testimony in a prior hearing from Republican and
    Democrat witnesses who had served at the State Department that,
    in many cases, these envoys were put in place to work around
    folks that otherwise could not perform in those roles. So I do
    hope you will look closely at that, and I appreciate the top-
    to-bottom review that is taking place.
        Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Congratulations on your nomination. I
    look forward to continuing the conversation we started last
    week.
        Along with many others on this committee, I am deeply
    concerned about the lack of senior management positions that
    have yet to be filled at the State Department, and we welcome
    the opportunity to move forward with many more nominees,
    because I believe leaving senior positions that require Senate-
    confirmed, empowered individuals vacant undermines the ability
    of the department to carry out its mission, which ultimately
    compromises our foreign policy and our national security
    objectives.
        So this is a department, for those of us who care deeply
    about foreign policy and the men and women who dedicate their
    lives to serving this country overseas, it is critically
    important that we see senior leadership who also value the
    mission of the State Department, will fight for its employees,
    its proper place in the national security apparatus, and its
    budget.
        So my question is, are you that person?
        Mr. Sullivan. I am, Senator.
        Senator Menendez. You are committed to those goals?
        Mr. Sullivan. I am committed to making the State Department
    the preeminent force to protect American values and promote
    American values in the world.
        Senator Menendez. So given your experience at the Commerce
    Department and in the private sector, you come with some degree
    of a greater business orientation toward foreign policy. One of
    the things that I found in my 25 years in Congress is that
    sanctions can be a powerful tool in terms of a peaceful
    diplomacy arsenal. I know that you have experience advising
    clients on sanctions compliance in Russia and Cuba, just to
    mention a couple.
        Do you believe sanctions are an effective tool for foreign
    policy?
        Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. Do you believe that the network of
    sanctions that we have in place on adversarial countries like
    Russia and Iran should be kept in place at this time?
        Mr. Sullivan. I believe they should be reviewed to make
    sure they are adequate, kept in place and potentially ratcheted
    up as necessary.
        Senator Menendez. Okay. Now I want to echo the remarks of
    the ranking member. One of the hallmarks of my career has been
    human rights and democracy globally. Most of us who pay
    attention to foreign policy recognize that leading with our
    values, including prioritizing human rights in our diplomacy,
    is a critical part of promoting our national security.
        So I am really concerned about Secretary Tillerson's
    comments. I am also concerned that, notwithstanding his
    comments, I have not seen so far in the first 4 or 5 months
    human rights and democracy raised very often.
        There is no question that there are times that there may be
    an immediate national security goal that must take precedence.
    But history has proven unequivocally that countries who share
    our values of human rights, democratic governance, fundamental
    freedoms, make more stable countries. They make more prosperous
    countries. They are less likely to create war on their
    neighbors or potentially against us.
        Now we have somehow forgotten that history at times. We
    have engaged with dictators and tyrants. And in the short term,
    it may have served us. But in the long term, boy, are we paying
    huge consequences for it--huge consequences for it. And I could
    rattle off a series of countries in which we did that.
        If you are sitting in Combinado del Este in Cuba, believe
    me, you want someone speaking about human rights and democracy.
    If you are being human trafficked by some slave trafficker,
    whether for sex or labor, you want somebody speaking out about
    human rights and democracy. If you are struggling inside of
    your country in Southeast Asia to change the essence of your
    life under a government that is totalitarian, you want somebody
    to speak out about human rights and democracy.
        So I hope that what I heard you say to Senator Rubio, your
    comments to me, and others that have said for the record, I
    cannot emphasize it enough, because we need someone who has the
    moral clarity that Nikki Haley has. I voted for her even though
    I did not think she had a lot of foreign policy experience, or
    any. I am not sure I would have hired her for my senior foreign
    policy person, but I think she is outstanding. But she is moral
    clarity. That moral clarity can ultimately drive us in the
    right direction, and I hope that you have that moral clarity as
    the number two person at State Department.
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman. Just on that note, we had some issues, and we
    have had to continuing discussions on the TIP Report. I think
    most of us felt like political interference took place to
    accommodate the TPP as it relates to certain countries on the
    TIP Report itself. As a matter of fact, I am pretty certain
    that that did occur.
        Since that time, we have had a much different relationship
    with the State Department under two administrations as it
    relates to that. I just wish and hope you will confirm the fact
    that you will do everything in your power to assure us that the
    TIP Report will be done with the utmost integrity, and, when
    you meet with foreign officials, it will be an issue that you
    bring up when that is necessary.
        Mr. Sullivan. I will, Senator. I know that Secretary
    Tillerson feels that way as well, as he said to this committee.
        The Chairman. Okay.
        Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Mr. Sullivan, I enjoyed our visit together
    in the office. Thank you again for your interest in serving.
        There is a matter that has come to my attention since our
    meeting that I would like to bring up in this hearing. On April
    21st this year, the Ethiopian Government issued an order to
    suspend indefinitely international adoptions from their
    country. According to our State Department, this has left
    dozens of U.S. families in the late stages of the adoption
    process unable to obtain the necessary paperwork to bring home
    their legally adopted children.
        This includes the Oren family from my home State of
    Indiana. They have successfully adopted their son under
    Ethiopian law but are unable to bring that son home to Indiana
    because of the Ethiopian Government, which is unwilling to
    issue the paperwork necessary to receive an exit visa.
        As a father of four young children, I take this especially
    seriously, as all Americans should. In an email this morning,
    Mrs. Oren, wrote the following, ''We met, interacted with, and
    began the attachment process with our son while we were in
    Ethiopia. He is almost 4 years old. He knows we are his parents
    and that he was supposed to come home with us on our trip. He
    was upset and confused when we had to say goodbye, leaving him
    in an orphanage while we had to return to the United States
    without him.``
        Now I had an opportunity yesterday to speak with the
    Ethiopian ambassador about this issue. My hope is that it can
    be resolved quickly.
        So, Mr. Sullivan, if it is not resolved quickly, once
    confirmed, will you work with my office to not only elevate
    this issue but to make clear to the Ethiopian Government at the
    highest level that this is important, that we need to resolve
    this issue, and we need their assistance, especially for
    families like the Orens who have already legally adopted their
    children when this order was issued?
        Mr. Sullivan. Senator Young, if confirmed, I would be
    honored to do so.
        Senator Young. Thank you.
        Mr. Sullivan, I am a strong supporter of the international
    affairs budget. I have made that really clear, as have so many
    of my colleagues on this committee. As of yesterday, the
    Government Accountability Office lists 132 recommendations,
    including 22 priority recommendations, for the Department of
    State that have not been implemented or fully implemented.
        Some of these open recommendations go back to 2011. Among
    other issues, these recommendations relate to important topics
    such as international food assistance, human trafficking, fraud
    oversight, management challenges, diplomatic security, North
    Korean sanctions, and terrorism. In order to maintain strong
    support for international affairs among the American people,
    they are going to insist upon proper and responsible
    stewardship of every single dollar we spend on that account.
        So, Mr. Sullivan, as a nominee to serve as Deputy Secretary
    of State, which at least historically has played a very
    important role with respect to some of these management and
    budgetary challenges, do you agree that this is important for
    this committee to have full visibility on the status of these
    open recommendations?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I do, Senator Young.
        Senator Young. Okay. That is why I, along with Senators
    Menendez, Rubio, and Coons, introduced legislation, S. 418, the
    Department of State and United States Agency for International
    Development Accountability Act of 2017.
        Mr. Sullivan, once confirmed, do you commit to providing,
    as this legislation asks that we do, providing to this
    committee and to my office without delay detailed written
    unclassified updates regarding the status of all open GAO
    recommendations for the Department of State?
        Mr. Sullivan. Senator Young, if confirmed, yes, I do.
        I took GAO reports, IG reports, very seriously when I was
    Deputy Secretary at Commerce, and I will do so as Deputy
    Secretary of State, if confirmed.
        Senator Young. Okay. And further, for any recommendations
    State has decided to adopt, will you provide a timeline for
    implementation and an explanation for any delay?
        Mr. Sullivan. Of course, Senator. I will consider that part
    of our interaction with you and members of this committee.
        Senator Young. And for those recommendations State has
    decided not to implement or fully implement, will you provide a
    detailed justification, sir?
        Mr. Sullivan. Certainly.
        Senator Young. Thank you.
        I have a bit of remaining time here. In your prepared
    statement, you mentioned the 1979 seizure of our Embassy in
    Tehran and the assassination of Ambassador Spike Dubs in
    Afghanistan. On March 9, the IG for the Department of State
    Steve Linick testified before the State and Foreign Ops
    Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. In his
    written testimony, the IG cited systemic issues in the
    department related to physical security measures. The IG cited
    a lack of coordination and an inability to track and prioritize
    physical security needs.
        More than 4.5 years after the terrorist attack in Benghazi
    at our diplomatic facility, and with the events of 1979 in
    mind, would you agree that the Department of State can and must
    do better when it comes to physical security and emergency
    action plans at our posts overseas?
        Mr. Sullivan. Senator, I would have no higher priority, if
    confirmed as Deputy Secretary of State, then to protect our men
    and women that we send abroad on our behalf.
        Senator Young. Have you reviewed this IG testimony, sir?
        Mr. Sullivan. I have not, but will make that a priority, if
    confirmed.
        Senator Young. That was my follow-up. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        The Chairman. You agreed to a lot a couple questions back.
    Let me just ask you, do you have any sense of the contours of
    the top-to-bottom review that is taking place and any sense of
    what type of realignments might take place within the State
    Department?
        Mr. Sullivan. In my discussions with the Secretary, he has
    made clear that he has no preconceived ideas on what the
    outcome should be. He has started this interaction with all the
    employees of the department to get their feedback and their
    input. I look forward to working with him on that.
        The Chairman. Do you have any sense of when that will be
    complete?
        Mr. Sullivan. I have not spoken to the Secretary about
    that, but my goal would be to have it completed as quickly as
    humanly possible.
        The Chairman. Is that having any impact, from what you can
    tell, on appointing Assistant Secretaries and other positions
    there?
        Mr. Sullivan. I am not involved in the selection process
    now. My perception as an outsider is that any slowness in
    making appointments is not related to the review of the
    department's mission and its structure that is ongoing.
        I commit, if I am confirmed, to making sure that those
    personnel appointments are moved forward as quickly as
    possible.
        The Chairman. My sense is they have actually selected most
    of those positions prior to you being there. That is my sense,
    and they are going to be forthcoming soon.
        But you do not have any sense of when the top-to-bottom
    review will be complete and you will have a layout as to how
    the new State Department, if you will, is going to function?
        Mr. Sullivan. I have not spoken to the Secretary about the
    timing of what he thinks the timing should be. We have talked
    about the mechanics and the process that he is going through. I
    have not had that conversation with him yet, but I look forward
    to it and to also working with you and members of this
    committee on making sure that that review is done as
    expeditiously as possible.
        The Chairman. Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy
    to pick up on that line of questioning.
        First, thank you for your willingness to serve. I really
    enjoyed our meeting together. Your resume is impressive, your
    willingness to come back into government to serve the country
    that you love.
        To be honest, your resume is maybe not the one that we had
    expected to receive for this position. We have a President who
    has no diplomatic experience, a Secretary of State who has no
    diplomatic experience. While you have extensive experience
    running the operations of government, you do not have direct
    diplomatic experience either. So these questions about the
    reorganization of the department, which I assume you will be
    riding herd over, are really critical given the fact that, I
    think as you have acknowledged, you are unlikely to be sent out
    around the world as a frontline diplomat, given that your
    responsibilities will largely be in helping to run the
    operations of a very large department.
        So you took this job understanding that there was a
    reorganization that was going to be undertaken. I think you
    have done a good job articulating what you think the core
    mission of the State Department is. But this reorganization is
    done under the principle that the State Department has departed
    from the core mission. That is what the Secretary of State has
    said, and his belief is that we need to get back to the core
    mission.
        So explain to me your view of how the State Department has
    departed from its core mission, thus necessitating this
    reorganization.
        Mr. Sullivan. I would characterize it, Senator Murphy--
    first of all, thank you for our discussion yesterday. I very
    much enjoyed it.
        I think the world has changed in the 21st century, and our
    State Department and the way it is organized has not changed.
    The Defense Department has, in my experience in government, has
    reorganized several times in the same time frame in which the
    State Department has not.
        Let me give you an example of an area where I think we need
    to focus on management issues, and that is the intersection of
    our regional bureaus, which we need to have, obviously, and the
    functional bureaus that have been created and multiplied over
    time as issues have arisen. I think the interconnection between
    those two, and to make sure that they are united in promoting
    our common interests on national security and economic
    prosperity, is an area where we really need to focus.
        So it is not so much that--I think the world has changed.
    We have added functional bureaus, for example, as issues have
    arisen, but we have not integrated our approach to this new
    world with new technologies, new means of communication, new
    threats, transnational threats that are much different from the
    world that existed, say, in the mid-1990s.
        Senator Murphy. So I agree. I think that is exactly the
    problem. The world has changed, and while we have seen some of
    our adversaries beef up their military capacity, what has
    really changed is the panoply of nonmilitary threats or at
    least threats that are not conventional military threats that
    are presented to the United States--disease, epidemics,
    famines, online terrorist organizations recruiting lone-wolf
    attackers, global warming, creeping corruption.
        And yet what worries me is that, given the fact that the
    world has changed and all of these nonmilitary threats have
    multiplied, this reorganization essentially has been
    predetermined by a President who has called for a 30 percent
    reduction in the capacity of the State Department while calling
    for a $50 billion investment in the Department of Defense.
        So given the fact that the world has changed, and I think
    you would agree that the number of nonmilitary threats
    presented to the United States has multiplied, how can you take
    on a job of reorganization, which you have said is not
    prejudged in its outcome, given the fact that the United
    President of the United States, your boss and Secretary
    Tillerson's boss, is commanding you to conduct that
    reorganization through a means that results in thousands of
    layoffs and dramatic cuts to the department? How is the outcome
    here not predetermined that the reorganization is essentially
    just an excuse to slash and burn the department?
        Mr. Sullivan. Well, Senator, I would repeat that the
    outcome from the Secretary's perspective is not preordained.
        For example, on job cuts that you mentioned, I know from
    speaking to the Secretary, there is no decision made on,
    despite what has been reported in the press on particular
    numbers of job cuts and so forth, what the Secretary has
    undertaken is a review of the mission of the department to make
    sure that the workflow, the work product of that department,
    meets those missions and we are organized in a way to
    accomplish those missions in the most efficient and accountable
    way possible, and that is my commitment to you, Senator.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much. Again, I really
    appreciate your willingness to serve. This is a very tough job,
    but your willingness to continue to talk to us gives me
    confidence that we can build on the conversations we have had.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. If I could, personally, I think having top-
    to-bottom reviews are good things for everyone. I will say the
    reason that the State Department is being cut by 30 percent in
    this initial budget is that the real drivers of our deficits
    are unwilling to be looked at. So the administration, appears
    to me, is looking at a department that many people around
    America believe does not spend its money well. For some reason,
    Americans think we spent 25 percent of our money on aid and
    other diplomacy efforts when we spend 1 percent.
        I think we have done a pretty good job recently causing
    people to understand the importance of this, and fortunately,
    our military generals have done the same. However, I do think
    it is incumbent on all of us to not just make sure we are
    spending the dollars well, and certainly food aid and reform
    and those kinds of things should be undertaken, but I think as
    a committee to point out that, to the extent that we do not
    carry out these activities, our men and women in uniform that
    we respect and admire are more likely going to be in harm's
    way. I think we have done a pretty good job of that recently.
        But let's face it, the skinny budget came out because this
    administration, nor Congress, is willing to deal with the major
    drivers of deficits. It was a way of looking as if we were
    addressing deficits when we are really not. That is what is
    happening here, and I think it is incumbent on us to understand
    that is what is happening.
        Senator Paul?
        Senator Paul. Congratulations on your nomination, and
    welcome.
        There has been some discussion of sort of whether or not
    diplomacy or our country's policies--and the spreading of human
    rights and somehow the vanquishing of human rights abusers
    around the world is our policy, or whether it should be more
    realistic. There have been many voices saying it really needs
    to be the preeminent part of our foreign policy to vanquish
    those human rights abusers.
        But I guess while we are all for that, and while we are all
    for the notion that we wish there were not these human rights
    abuses around the world, sometimes I think that that policy
    leads to unintended consequences.
        So, for example, was Colonel Qaddafi a human rights abuser?
    I do not probably think there is any question he probably was.
    Would we wish there would be someone better involved in running
    Libya? Yes. But after his negotiating away his nuclear weapons,
    there are some ramifications that we are still living with. The
    West toppled him anyway.
        The message that sent to North Korea and the message that
    sent to Iran was, you know what? If you get rid of your nuclear
    weapons, you may well be toppled by the West.
        So I guess my question to you is, in balancing sort of the
    realism of how the world is and how we see it with human
    rights, would you say that there were unintended consequences
    of toppling Qaddafi in Libya?
        Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely, Senator. I think we are seeing
    them on a daily basis.
        Senator Paul. The same would go with regard to Iraq.
    Hussein was accused of gassing the Kurds, using chemical
    weapons. We have had another incident of that now. So everybody
    would say Hussein was a terrible person we should get rid of.
    The problem is it also led to unintended consequences.
        I think now the same people who wanted to get rid of
    Hussein now want to get rid of the Government of Iran, and Iran
    is emboldened because of the counterbalance of Iraq being gone.
        So to every action there is a reaction, an unintended one.
    I think that it is important that we have people involved in
    the State Department who understand that your job, as I see it,
    is diplomacy not war. That does not say we do not have military
    might and that we do not have the expression of that and the
    potential threat of that. But we have plenty of voices for
    that.
        My hope is that yours will be a voice for diplomacy and
    that you recognize that is your role or the job description or
    part of it, other than the management of the State Department,
    is that the State Department, in general, is supposed to be
    about diplomacy.
        If you could comment on sort of the role of the State
    Department and diplomacy in general terms, I would appreciate
    it.
        Mr. Sullivan. Certainly. Thank you, Senator Paul.
        Yes, I think that is emphatically the mission of the State
    Department. I think our Secretary of Defense, Secretary Mattis,
    would agree with that.
        I was originally nominated to work for Secretary Mattis at
    the Defense Department. I have a fundamentally different job at
    the State Department, fundamentally different mission, which I
    am committed to.
        With respect to our most recent discussions, I think that
    concerns about the use of military force in forcing regime
    change, for example, are very serious concerns. Use of military
    force should only be as a last resort when our national
    interests, our vital national interests, are at stake. But
    there is no diminution of our commitment to our fundamental
    values as Americans on which our foreign policy, our diplomacy
    that you and I agree should be at the heart of what we do, is
    based.
        Senator Paul. He and I agree. I think that is the point in
    the discussion of realism versus human rights. We should never
    shy away from saying and representing and being the symbol of
    freedom and liberty around the world, and justice. But at the
    same time, if we as our foreign policy say we are going to
    topple every regime that has human rights abuse, we will be at
    war with about 50 countries right now, and the unintended
    consequences, one of bankrupting the country, but two of
    getting us involved in wars for which we have no answer and
    there is no end, would be interminable.
        So I think the overall debate on realism, and many have
    tried to sort of cast aspersions on Tillerson's comments, but I
    think he was recognizing that there is a balance. We never give
    up on what we stand for and that we are this shining right as a
    free nation, but we also do not need to be naive enough that we
    think that we are somehow the descendants of Wilsonian ''let's
    make the world safe for democracy.`` If we are unwilling to
    look at the ramifications of our involvement around the world
    and particularly getting involved in another war in Yemen,
    whether it will be better or worse for us. I have cautioned
    that, in Yemen, I have a fear that we get involved in a war
    that both sides are beaten down and Al Qaeda shows up the way
    same way that ISIS showed up in Syria, ready to pick up the
    pieces of the chaos there. And if we do not think that through
    in advance and do not think that there has to be a diplomatic
    arm to our government, that we are making a big mistake.
        But I wish you well, and I hope you will be one of the same
    voices for diplomacy.
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you for placing yourself forward for this
    responsibility.
        I wanted to ask you about the Paris Agreement that is under
    discussion right now. A tremendously high percentage of the
    world's governments have joined up for voluntary commitments to
    try to address the issue of carbon pollution and its impact on
    a warming planet.
        The question is, should we be in or out? A thousand
    companies have weighed in with the State Department to say we
    should be in, including oil companies ExxonMobil and
    ConocoPhillips. What do you think? Should we be in the Paris
    Agreement? Should we stay in or otherwise?
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Merkley.
        I understand that there is an ongoing discussion within the
    administration and within the interagency on continued
    participation in the Paris Agreement. There are complex issues,
    as you know better than I, including legal issues with respect
    to Article 4.11 and so forth.
        I have not been involved in those discussions, but what I
    would say to you, Senator, is my view as a general matter is
    that the United States is best served and its interests
    protected when it has a seat at the table, as a general matter.
        Not with respect to the Paris Agreement, I have not been
    involved in the discussions. I know that they are ongoing, but
    that is my general approach, Senator.
        Senator Merkley. That is the point that the Secretary of
    State has made, the point that he is arguing, that we should
    keep a seat at the table. In keeping a seat at the table, since
    the agreements are nonbinding, we can either seek to uphold the
    pledges that we made or we can ignore those. If we do stay at
    the table, should we seek to honor the pledges we made for
    reducing our carbon dioxide production?
        Mr. Sullivan. I understand that there is both a policy and
    a legal component to that question, Senator. I have not been
    involved in the discussions on that and have not studied those
    issues in sufficient detail to provide you with a definitive
    answer today. I would be happy, if confirmed, to focus and to
    participate in that discussion with you personally, if
    confirmed.
        Senator Merkley. Let me turn to North Korea. We have had
    statements coming out of the administration from different
    individuals, some arguing that primarily military pressure is
    going to make the difference, and we have the carrier strike
    group positioned off North Korea. We have others saying that
    the pressure from China is going to make the difference. We
    have others saying that we are laying the ground for
    negotiations.
        All of this creates a wide space for potential
    miscommunication, which could lead to events spiraling out of
    control. Should it be the State Department that is taking the
    lead in creating a clear, consolidated message to avoid
    misunderstandings?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, Senator. I think that is the primary
    function of the State Department, the Secretary of State, is to
    be the President's principal foreign policy adviser and
    spokesperson on U.S. foreign policy.
        Having said that, I think the Secretary's approach to North
    Korea, and he has been very clear about this, is that our goal
    is to have a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. That is our
    objective, and we are going to use all the means at our
    disposal, our national power, to accomplish that, in working
    with allies, partners, and others, and in using and having as
    an option the use of other means at our disposal at the Defense
    Department.
        Senator Merkley. The administration has been very
    complimentary of China, and China is applying pressure. That
    pressure has been directed more, however, to stop what they
    refer to as provocative acts, that is missile tests and nuclear
    tests, than denuclearization.
        Is China on board with the vision that America has of
    denuclearizing North Korea?
        Mr. Sullivan. I have not been involved in those
    discussions, Senator. I really know only what I read in the
    news media. But my understanding is that there has been
    positive feedback from the Chinese giving us hope that, as the
    Secretary has described it, leaning in on the Chinese and
    really trying to convince them how important it is for us and
    for them that the Korean Peninsula be denuclearized, it gives
    us some basis for, I will not say optimism, but at least for
    going forward with this policy.
        Senator Merkley. Daniel Runde was before the committee and
    he was noting--he is from the Center for Strategic and
    International Studies. He had a lot of concerns about USAID
    being merged with the State Department because USAID's vision
    for assistance is a longer term vision while often diplomatic
    circumstances require a vision of 6 months to 2 years versus a
    10- to 20-year vision.
        Should USAID be brought under the more direct influence of
    the short-term diplomatic mission?
        Mr. Sullivan. I know that that is a question that will be
    considered in the review that the Secretary has undertaken. I
    would say, Senator Merkley, that I have met with virtually
    every former Deputy Secretary of State to discuss this and
    other issues. I understand both the cultural and policy
    differences between AID and the Foreign Service. In some ways,
    it reminds me of the differences when I was at Commerce between
    our scientists at NOAA who do climate science, which is longer
    term, and the weather scientists who are focused on short-term
    weather. I understand that difference in the AID, State foreign
    policy context.
        So I would look forward to working with you and members of
    the committee as we consider the best way forward to implement
    our foreign aid policy in a way that promotes U.S. objectives,
    protects our interests, and does so in an efficient way,
    understanding the unique role of AID, the culture of the
    agency, and the important role that its employees provide.
        Senator Merkley. I will take that as at least a point that
    you understand the argument and the concern about diluting the
    vision and work of AID.
        Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely.
        The Chairman. If I could give an editorial comment, I get
    the sense there is no beginning point that says they should be
    combined. That is not where people are starting. That may be
    where they finish, but just for what it is worth, I do not
    think that is where they are beginning.
        Senator Gardner?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Sullivan, thank you very much for your willingness to
    serve, and thank you to your family for your willingness to
    serve alongside as well. So thank you for being here.
        Mr. Sullivan, do you believe in sustained and consistent
    American engagement around the globe?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I do, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. What does that mean to you? What does
    ''consistent and sustained engagement`` mean to you?
        Mr. Sullivan. Well, from the State Department's
    perspective, it means that we have a cadre of Foreign Service
    Officers, junior to senior, around the world representing U.S.
    interests, both on the national security sphere, political
    sphere, economics sphere, and we also have at our embassies
    foreign commercial service officers, whom I know well, who are
    employees of the Commerce Department, and when I was Deputy
    Secretary of Commerce worked very closely with them in
    promoting U.S. business interests abroad, protecting our U.S.
    companies doing business abroad.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you for that. I think the questions
    that Senator Murphy and Senator Young brought up about
    restructuring are important. Of course, when we talk about
    different bureaus, the East Asian Pacific Bureau, one of the
    most important bureaus around the globe that is dealing with a
    population that will soon be 50 percent of global population,
    the regional economy, which will soon be 50 percent of world
    GDP. Yet we have a bureau that is perhaps the lowest funded of
    all the bureaus around the globe.
        So I hope we can pay additional attention, as we
    restructure the State Department to reflect priorities, I hope
    that we will increase our priorities on Asia and the regions
    represented, because, again, it is where our treaty alliances
    reside, it is where the world's largest standing armies will
    reside, and it is where our trade is certainly growing and
    opportunities reside.
        I want to talk a little bit about North Korea as well. If
    you look at China right now with North Korea, it was recently
    announced that China's trade with North Korea grew in the first
    quarter of this year by nearly 40 percent. Iron exports to
    China from North Korea grew by 270 percent. Imports in China
    from North Korea grew.
        I met with Chinese officials, met with government
    officials. While there may be some positive signs over the past
    couple weeks that China is willing to implement the United
    Nations Security Council resolutions to a degree that they had
    not before, I was disheartened though in some of these meetings
    with Chinese officials that, when you have a long conversation
    about North Korea, their opinion seems to basically slide back
    into what it has been, and that is basically to allow North
    Korea to continue to develop a nuclear program with little
    pressure from China.
        China controls 90 percent of North Korea's economy. It is
    responsible for 90 percent of North Korea's economy. If China
    is serious about holding bad actors responsible for those bad
    actions, we cannot, as the United States, allow China to
    backslide into a posture that does not hold Kim Jong Un
    responsible for his bad actions.
        So I would hope that the State Department, Secretary
    Tillerson and yourself, would continue our pressure,
    abandonment of the failed strategic patience doctrine, and
    continue to apply pressure on the North Korean regime as well
    as China and other actors who are enabling the proliferation of
    North Korea's nuclear program.
        Do I have your commitment that you will continue to push
    for pressure on China?
        Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. And I hope that that includes fully
    utilizing, following through with the laws that this Congress
    has passed under the North Korea sanctions act last year,
    unanimous last Congress, unanimous approval, bipartisan
    support, for a bill that says, if somebody is violating our
    actions, there is the mandatory investigation and mandatory
    placement of sanctions on that entity, be it in China, be it in
    North Korea or anywhere around the globe.
        Do I have your commitment that you will work with us to
    make sure that those laws are fully executed?
        Mr. Sullivan. Certainly, Senator. The Secretary has made
    clear that we will use all of the legal and policy authorities
    that we have to, as he put it, turn the dial on the pressure on
    China to make sure that we are leaning in, I think was the
    Secretary's expression, on China, leaning on China more than we
    ever have to make clear how important this is to the United
    States.
        Senator Gardner. I hope that in your interactions with
    Chinese officials, that you will make North Korea the highest
    priority possible because this concern that China will continue
    to slide back into its own doctrine of patience with North
    Korea.
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        And if you could report back to the committee, that would
    be truly critical.
        Again, what I do not want to see is any kind of a softening
    of our approach toward our allies or other nations around the
    globe to try to make China happy because we think they are
    going to take action against North Korea. Until they show that
    sustained commitment to pressuring North Korea, we should not
    be avoiding--news reports today cite that we may be forgoing a
    sale of arms to Taiwan. I do not know if that is true. I do not
    know if Taiwan has asked for that sale to be carried through or
    followed through. But I do not think that we should be forgoing
    that kind of a sale of defense equipment to Taiwan because we
    think China is going to suddenly change their behavior on North
    Korea, because they have not proven that it is going to be a
    sustained and consistent commitment to North Korea
    denuclearization.
        If you could talk a little bit about cybersecurity and
    where you think the cybersecurity priority will be within the
    State Department, I would appreciate it.
        Mr. Sullivan. Cybersecurity, we were talking about this
    earlier. The Russian hack of our election is an example of
    failed cybersecurity by the United States and the United States
    Government. Cybersecurity has to be one of our highest
    priorities at the Department of State and as an entire
    government.
        My experience in government when I was at the Commerce
    Department was, because of our lack of cybersecurity--now, this
    was 12 years ago--all our systems were open to a number of
    different foreign governments, such that we had to create our
    own internal operating system to communicate among ourselves
    and prepare documents for the Secretary to send to the White
    House because we had so little confidence that our system we
    were using was not penetrated.
        So cybersecurity is, for me, a very high priority.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Sullivan.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Sullivan, for your willingness to take on
    this responsibility.
        I just want to follow up a little bit on Senator Gardner's
    point about China. We had a hearing before the Armed Services
    Committee where experts testified that there are really only
    two things that the Chinese are going to respond to from the
    United States' perspective. One was whether we sanctioned their
    financial system in a way that meant doing business with North
    Korea would be a challenge for them. The other was that if they
    believed, truly believed, that there was the danger of war on
    the Korean Peninsula because of the statements from President
    Trump. So while I appreciate Secretary Tillerson's
    reassurances, there does not seem to be unanimous agreement on
    what is going to make China respond.
        I want to go, however, to questions about reorganization at
    the State Department. I serve as ranking member on the
    subcommittee that is tasked with oversight of the State
    Department and USAID, along with Senator Isakson.
        The department has not shared any information with me or
    with my colleague about what changes they are contemplating to
    the State Department and to USAID. Do you think it would be
    helpful for Congress to have a role or to at least have an
    understanding of what the State Department is contemplating in
    terms of a reorganization?
        Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I do, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Would you then commit to sharing with this
    committee the plans once they are--I do not want to say
    finalized, because I think it would be helpful to engage this
    committee in understanding what you are thinking about, because
    there are years of experience on this committee that might be
    helpful in looking at some of the analysis that the department
    comes up with.
        Mr. Sullivan. My experience in government, Senator, at the
    Justice, Defense, and Commerce Departments has been we have
    always been best served in the executive branch when we have
    consulted and coordinated with Members of Congress. In fact, as
    I was speaking to members of the minority staff yesterday,
    there have been occasions in my career in government when I
    have met with staff or members or Senators and had very
    productive conversations, gone back to my department and had
    people question, what were you thinking, going up to talk with
    those people?
        And my experience has been that collaboration,
    coordination, it is a way to anticipate problems, eliminate
    issues before they become problems. Now, we have to protect
    executive privilege, as I understand it.
        Senator Shaheen. Sure.
        Mr. Sullivan. Look, there are legal issues and so forth,
    but as a general matter, Senator Shaheen, my view is the U.S.
    Government is at its strongest when there is cooperation and
    coordination between the branches of government, particularly
    those in Article One and Article Two.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I appreciate that, because,
    again, I know you have suggested that the reports are not
    correct that point to 2,300 people who are going to be let go
    at the department, and that USAID is going to be folded into
    State. But the lack of transparency, the lack of engaging
    people who are concerned about these issues is what leads to
    these kinds of reports, these kinds of concerns that you are
    hearing expressed today. So I would certainly hope that your
    point about engagement is one that you will follow.
        Not only have we been a leader around the world because of
    our values, but we have also as a country been a leader in
    promoting the rights and empowerment of women and girls around
    the world. That has been a good investment because what we know
    is that women tend to give back 90 percent of what they earn to
    their families, to their communities, and, ultimately, to their
    countries. Men only give back 35 percent. So it has been a good
    investment.
        I want to hear from you what steps you will take to ensure
    that we continue to support these global women's programs that
    I think have been so important, everything from child marriage
    to gender-based violence, to peace and security.
        And one of the other rumors about restructuring at the
    State Department is that the Office of Global Women's Issues
    will be eliminated. Can you tell me what you know about that
    and what your commitment is to ensuring that these programs
    continue?
        Mr. Sullivan. What I know about that, Senator Shaheen, is
    only what I see in the press. I am confident that no decisions
    have been made about whether that office or any particular
    office would be reorganized, eliminated, or anything done to
    it.
        With respect to women's issues and women empowerment,
    Senator Cardin is smiling at me, and I feel as though I should
    put a paper bag over my head as I am sitting in front of all
    the women in my family behind me. But it is an extremely
    important issue to me, but it is important to Secretary
    Tillerson as well who has been quite forceful in his statements
    about the very points you have raised, Senator, about the
    investment in women, women's health, women's education, women's
    empowerment, pay dividends many times over than other ordinary
    programs.
        So you have my commitment that that is something that will
    remain a priority of the department and, more importantly, the
    Secretary's commitment.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I
    appreciated the Secretary's talking about that and what he had
    seen in the private sector at his hearing. Then the next thing
    I saw was the report that the office was going to be
    eliminated.
        So, again, a little transparency and engagement I think
    would go a long way in reassuring people about what the intent
    is of the restructuring at the State Department.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. If I could follow up, is it transparency or
    lack of progress? Has anything actually occurred relative to
    the streamlining, based on what you know?
        Mr. Sullivan. No decisions to my knowledge.
        The Chairman. I am not talking about decisions.
        Mr. Sullivan. Progress----
        The Chairman. Has it even begun?
        Mr. Sullivan [continuing]. Well, the Secretary's process of
    soliciting feedback from the employees has begun. His own
    staff's planning on these issues to tee up issues for his
    decisions, I believe, is underway. I have not participated in
    that, so I really do not have more definitive information for
    you.
        The Chairman. I think it would be good for the committee to
    know where the process is right now. Mary Waters behind you is
    your sherpa. And I know, with your confirmation hearing, it is
    not the time for you to commit to what you--I do not think you
    really know what is underway. I think they probably have not
    talked to you much about it so you cannot answer these
    questions.
        But, Mary, if you would, if you would get back with us this
    afternoon and share with us where you think that is? I know we
    have a committee meeting tomorrow afternoon at 5 with McMaster,
    and we could share it at that time. But I think, obviously,
    people would like to know.
        Senator Cardin. If I could just interject here just for one
    moment, this is what I wanted to come back to.
        Several members have asked you that we be engaged in how
    the State Department handles reorganization, and you have been
    very forthcoming about the value of that type of working
    relationship between Members of Congress, this committee, and
    the State Department. But I think the key point is that before
    decisions are made, it is important that that input be
    received.
        There are members of this committee who are prepared to
    support decisions that could be perceived to be pretty
    controversial. But if we read about it being done, you are
    liable to develop a political backlash that will make it
    impossible for you to achieve what you are seeking to do.
        So I would just urge you, at the earliest possible moment,
    to share information. It can be in an informal setting. We do
    not have to have formal hearings. But for us to understand your
    thinking and for you to get the benefit of our thinking as you
    are going through a reorganization at the State Department, to
    me, that is going to be critically important for the success of
    a reorganization.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Thank you to the witness. I enjoyed our visit.
        Mr. Chair, I want to raise a concern at the start. We have
    a rule in this committee and I think generally that nominees
    should not presume confirmation, and it seems to go way beyond
    presuming confirmation to have a sign that says ''Senator
    Sullivan`` sitting there on the desk right next to this
    witness. [Laughter.]
        Senator Kaine. I hope he does not live in Virginia.
        Okay, now we will be serious. I did enjoy our visit.
        One of the things that you said, Mr. Sullivan, when we were
    chatting was that you spent some time meeting with former State
    Department Deputy Secretaries as you kind of scope out what you
    might do. Share some takeaways from those meetings that you
    have learned from them that would be helpful to you, should you
    be confirmed.
        Mr. Sullivan. Well, my immediate reaction to that question,
    Senator Kaine, is the passion that every one of those men and
    women, Republican, Democrat, have for the department and its
    employees, its Foreign Service Officers, its AID professionals,
    its civil servants. Everybody has enormous respect for the
    employees of the department.
        I know this from my own personal experience, but it is
    gratifying to talk to people and to hear them tell me about
    what a treasure we have in the men and women at the Department
    of State. And the fact that I am going to be able to go there
    and work with them has energized me and is my biggest takeaway.
        There have been a number of common concerns that have been
    brought up in my discussions. We talked about one of them today
    with respect to AID, concerns about morale issues at the
    department.
        And in talking with Secretary Tillerson, what I have said
    to these former senior State Department officials, he has been
    quite emphatic in our discussions about how much he respects
    the men and women in the department and how helpful they have
    been to him.
        So the universal theme is our biggest strength at the
    department is our people, and we have to utilize them and lead
    them in the best way possible.
        Senator Kaine. Talk a little bit about, since you have had
    multiple management experiences in both the Federal public
    service and the private sector, I am really interested in this
    morale question. A huge number of our State Department
    professionals live in Virginia or have homes in Virginia when
    they are abroad. I meet them all over the world.
        I think I told you, when I travel, I tend to meet with
    first and second tour FSO officers, and I always ask them the
    question, ''Congratulations, you achieved something pretty
    major by getting this job. What will make you decide to make it
    a career versus so frustrated that you leave?`` Then I just do
    not say anything else and I listen for an hour and a half.
        I am worried about some of the morale issues. The budget
    proposals could raise additional morale issues. I know a lot of
    colleagues have already asked you about that. But in your role,
    how would you approach the management challenge of trying to
    assure people and create a high morale organization, which is
    ultimately going to be a higher productivity organization.
        Mr. Sullivan. Senator, these are men and women who have
    dedicated their lives to public service and public service in
    dangerous places on our behalf. They are not in it for the
    money. They want to make a difference for the United States,
    for the world.
        What they are looking for is leadership and leaders who
    engage with them, explain what we are about, what this
    reconceptualizing the department is about, as the Secretary has
    said, making their jobs worthwhile for them personally. It is
    not about paying them more money, although everybody would like
    more money. They are in it because they want to do right by the
    United States and they want to do right by their own moral
    compass and their work to help people around the world.
        So providing that leadership, that they are involved in an
    enterprise that is doing good, that is protecting our interests
    and our values, that is the most important thing, and
    communicating that to them, not just letting them read about it
    in the paper but communicating it to them personally.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you. I will just ask about one kind of
    regional area that I like to focus on a lot, and that is the
    Americas. I think the U.S. in the last few years, the diplomacy
    involved with the Cuba deal, which was controversial but in my
    view has been a positive, the U.S. decision to diplomatically
    aid the peace negotiations in Colombia which have led to a
    ceasefire, the U.S. has played some important roles in
    diplomacy.
        I think that we often spend a lot of our State Department
    time flying east-west around the globe and not enough time in
    State or Defense or other areas focusing north-south. To the
    extent that you have had conversations either with the
    Secretary or the administration, what could you tell us about
    areas of potential focus in the Americas at the State
    Department?
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Senator. We spoke about this when
    we visited earlier. The principals always have their time
    chewed up with whatever the hot topic is today--another missile
    test in North Korea, some atrocity in Syria, problems in
    Eastern Ukraine. My concern, and I have discussed this with the
    Secretary--I discussed it with Secretary Mattis when I was
    under consideration to be the general counsel of the Department
    of Defense--the United States needs to be able to walk and chew
    gum, for lack of a better term.
        As we discussed, the Roosevelt administration was able to
    fight wars in the Atlantic and the Pacific, and you quickly
    pointed out, and build the United Nations all at the same time.
    We have to be able to address these crises but also keep our
    eye on important areas, whether it is Latin America or sub-
    Saharan Africa, so where just a little bit of effort by the
    United States can pay huge dividends. Meanwhile, we certainly
    have to keep our eyes on the high-profile national security
    priorities that are in the paper every day.
        So my commitment to you is, as Deputy Secretary, I will
    make sure to do my best to make sure that those areas of the
    world where we have very important interests are not neglected
    while everybody is being spun up over today's headline.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The record will
    remain open until the close of business on Thursday. There will
    be numbers of written questions, and I know that you will be
    ready to answer those promptly.
        The Chairman. Short of something unusual happening, I have
    to tell you I look forward to very strongly supporting your
    nomination. I think you have acquitted yourself exceptionally
    well today. It is evident that, in your private meetings with
    members on both sides of the aisle, you have done the same
    there.
        I really do believe that the experiences you have had in
    other departments and the professionalism that you have as an
    individual have equipped you to be an exceptional Deputy
    Secretary.
        So we thank you for your willingness to serve, for your
    family's willingness to allow you to do something that we know
    is going to be a 7-day-a-week job, at least in the beginning,
    and probably all the way through.
        With that, the meeting is over.
        Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Bob Corker

        Question 1. In recent years the cost of building new embassies and
    consulates has risen while the pace of completion has slowed
    significantly when compared to just a decade ago.

       Will you commit to streamlining our embassy construction process,
            evaluating the cost implications of using custom instead of
            standard designs, and investigate the management problems in
            the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations?

        Answer. Yes. The Department of State's Bureau of Overseas Buildings
    Operations has a critical mandate to provide and maintain secure
    facilities for Department staff and other federal agencies serving
    overseas under chief of mission authority.
        I am committed to ensuring that the Department's planning, design,
    and construction efforts will accomplish this critical mission. I am
    further committed to ensuring that we execute these projects
    efficiently and in accordance with industry best practices. We will
    provide the best value for the American taxpayer while constructing
    diplomatic facilities that prioritize security.
        I am aware that the Department has faced management challenges,
    including in implementing our overseas buildings program. If confirmed,
    I am committed to working across the Department on this issue.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

        Question 1. If confirmed, will you commit to making sure the
    Department responds promptly to letters and other requests for
    information from members of the Foreign Relations Committee?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 1. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the executive branch?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. As Deputy Secretary, what concrete actions do you
    envision taking to stop the closing of space for civil society abroad?

        Answer. The effects of closing civic space are felt across sectors,
    with humanitarian assistance providers, development practitioners,
    journalists, environmentalists, public interest lawyers, religious
    leaders, and others civic actors increasingly operating under threat.
        In the United States, we have achieved economic success because of,
    not despite, our values. Our values expressed in the Declaration of
    Independence and our Constitution are the bedrock of our republic.
        Should I be confirmed, I will work aggressively to advance human
    rights for everyone.

        Question 4. How should the United States deal with a situation in a
    foreign country, as in Turkey, where there is concern on the part of
    credible independent bodies that there were irregularities in the vote
    on the referendum to hand the President broad powers, and in which the
    President did everything possible to silence the voices of those who
    attempted to question a ``yes'' vote?

        Answer. For the United States, our values are the bedrock of our
    republic, and our greatest asset is our commitment to the fundamental
    values expressed at the founding of our nation. Therefore, we must
    ensure a foreign policy that is worthy of our ideals as a people, even
    when that means having honest but difficult conversations with allies,
    like Turkey, when there is a problem. The OSCE monitors, investigates,
    and reports on campaigns and elections in foreign countries, including
    Turkey, and will provide a report on problems and irregularities. This
    undertaking is very important, and I strongly support the difficult
    work of the OSCE election monitors. The United States looks to Turkey,
    a NATO ally and critical member of the international coalition to
    defeat ISIS, to protect the rights and freedoms of all citizens as
    guaranteed by the Turkish constitution and in accordance with Turkey's
    international commitments.

        Question 5. Describe your view of the United Nations' role in the
    world, and of America's place in and partnership with the United
    Nations in reducing instability and reinforcing international norms.

        Answer. The United Nations, created 71 years ago after the Second
    World War, is far from perfect. However, it remains important to U.S.
    national security interests. Even though the United States is the most
    powerful country in the world, we are more effective when we work
    multilaterally. Engagement in the U.N. multiplies our effectiveness and
    spreads the costs of international action.
        We must continue to partner closely with the United Nations. But we
    also need to work simultaneously to reform the organization in a
    serious and meaningful way that brings it up to 21st century standards.
    As you know, the Trump administration is very focused on U.N. reform,
    particularly on U.N. peacekeeping, but also on U.N. budget, management,
    and development issues and on ending the disturbing anti-Israel bias
    that permeates much of the U.N. system.

        Question 6. If confirmed, would you prioritize the promotion and
    protection of human rights and, if so, how?

        Answer. As I told Senator Rubio, my wife and my mother-in-law's
    uncle, Jose Pujals, was a political prisoner in Cuba for over 27 years,
    so human rights are a personal issue for me. I made a commitment to you
    at the hearing that I will work with civil society to promote and
    protect human rights. Among other things, the administration will use
    the Global Magnitsky Act. I am committed to making the State Department
    the preeminent force to protect American values and promote American
    values in the world. I will use a range of tools to work aggressively
    to advance human rights for everyone.

        Question 7. Are you willing to use State's role in approving arms
    sales as leverage to achieve such progress?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am willing to exercise State's authority to
    ensure arms sales are consistent with the foreign policy interests and
    values of the United States. As a part of every case-by-case review,
    and in accordance with law and policy, the decision to approve arms
    sales will take human rights into account.

        Question 8. There is a growing body of evidence that poor
    governance--marked by high corruption and lack of government
    transparency--is a key driver of fragility and political instability in
    many parts of the world today.

       Can you tell this committee what concrete steps you will take, if
            confirmed, to promote good governance, anti-corruption and
            transparency efforts around the world?

        Answer. Around the world, corruption saps economic growth, hinders
    development, harms American business competitiveness, destabilizes
    governments, and provides openings for dangerous groups to operate.
        If confirmed, I will prioritize the importance of combatting
    corruption and promoting good governance and transparency through a
    variety of means, including private diplomacy, public statements,
    targeted visa bans and financial sanctions, and pressure in
    multilateral forums.

        Question 9. Will you come before this committee for full, public
    hearings on the restructuring of State and USAID if major changes are
    proposed, prior to making such changes? What is your view on the
    proposed cuts to the State Department and foreign assistance budgets?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will come before this committee for full,
    public hearings on the restructuring of State and USAID if major
    changes are proposed, prior to making such changes.
        As Secretary Tillerson told the Department's workforce in a written
    letter, the State Department's budget request addresses the challenges
    to American leadership abroad and the importance of defending American
    interests and the American people. It acknowledges that U.S. engagement
    must be more efficient, that our aid must be more effective, and that
    advocating the national interests of our country must always be our
    primary mission. Additionally, the budget is an acknowledgment that
    development needs are a global challenge to be met not just by
    contributions from the United States, but through greater partnership
    with and contributions from our allies and others. The Secretary has
    initiated a process to draw a new budget blueprint that will allow us
    to shape a Department ready to meet the challenges that we will face in
    the coming decades. We will do this by reviewing and selecting our
    priorities, using the available resources, and putting our people in a
    position to succeed.

        Question 10. What is your view on the current number of vacancies
    in critical State Department leadership positions? How soon can we
    expect to see nominees for Assistant Secretary positions?

        Answer. As discussed during my confirmation hearing, I have not
    been involved in the selection process for nominees at the Department.
    However, my perception as an outsider is that any slowness in
    nominating individuals for positions is not related to the review of
    the Department's mission and structure that remains ongoing.
    Additionally, I committed in the hearing and recommit in writing, that
    if confirmed I will make sure that personnel vacancies are filled and
    nominations are moved forward as quickly as possible.

        Question 11. What do you believe is the purpose and mission for
    U.S. international Development Assistance and how valuable do you
    believe U.S. development assistance is to the U.S. foreign policy and
    maintaining U.S. leadership in the world?

        Answer. Development assistance plays a vital role in protecting
    U.S. national security by fostering stability, resolving conflict,
    responding to humanitarian crises, and ending infectious diseases. Our
    development assistance upholds America's moral leadership and advances
    our nation's ability to influence and shape world events consistent
    with U.S. interests and is an invaluable tool in our foreign policy
    toolkit. Our global engagement abroad depends on the day-to-day
    engagement and expertise of our development professionals at USAID, who
    promote resilient, democratic societies around the world through
    programs supporting agriculture, education, economic growth, and the
    rule of law.

        Question 12. Do you believe that U.S. interests are better served
    by prioritizing Foreign Assistance to serve political and strategic
    ends as opposed to address real world needs?

        Answer. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary of State, my foremost
    responsibility will be to implement the President's foreign policy
    vision under the guidance of the Secretary of State. In fulfilling the
    President's vision, it is clear that promoting U.S. national security
    objectives to protect the American people, fostering economic
    opportunities for the American people, and ensuring the Department's
    effectiveness and accountability to the U.S. taxpayer must be our
    primary considerations in our foreign policy and in prioritizing our
    limited resources. However, as Secretary Tillerson has clearly stated,
    putting ``America first'' does not mean that it comes at the expense of
    others--in fact, addressing ``real world'' needs and promoting U.S.
    interests are inextricably linked.

        Question 13. Is hard power more effective than soft power in
    demonstrating and promoting U.S. values like respect for human rights
    including the rights of women and girls, democracy, good governance,
    and rule of law, and supporting free societies? How valuable is the
    promotion of these values to U.S. foreign policy and international
    engagement?

        Answer. Our soft powers of development and diplomacy are critical
    in demonstrating and promoting U.S. values abroad. There has long been
    a tradition of U.S. engagement and assistance in support of democracy,
    human rights, good governance, the rights of women and girls,
    supporting free societies, and more. Our investment in these core
    values and principles safeguard our national security and foster global
    prosperity. These values are critical to our U.S. foreign policy and
    international engagement.

        Question 14. Will you commit to maintaining USAID's independence
    and function?

        Answer. This question will be considered in the review that the
    Secretary has undertaken. I have met with virtually every former Deputy
    Secretary of State to discuss this and other issues, and I understand
    the differences in both the culture and operational capacity between
    USAID and the State Department, as well as the distinct role they play
    in protecting our national security. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with members of the committee and other partners as we consider
    the best way forward to implement our foreign assistance in a way that
    promotes U.S. objectives, protects our interests and does so in an
    efficient way, understanding the unique role of USAID, the culture of
    the agency, and the important role that its employees provide.

        Question 15. What will you do to engage and draw on the Foreign and
    Civil servants in an effective way?

        Answer. One of the most important components in leadership is
    listening to those whom you lead. If confirmed, I plan to meet with as
    many employees of the Department as I can on a regular basis, as I did
    when I was Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
        As I mentioned to Senator Kaine in my confirmation hearing,
    Secretary Tillerson and all of the former Deputy Secretaries with whom
    I have met have told me of the tremendous resource we have in the women
    and men of the State Department. The best engagement with them will be
    for me to listen to them and communicate with them so that they feel
    invested in their work. The employees of the State Department, many of
    whom have decades of experience, have much to share and much to offer
    to the Department and to our great country.

        Question 16. How will you ensure that you are developing the
    intellectual capital and policy ideas you need to shape and implement
    your foreign policy, and represent the Department in the interagency?

        Answer. The best way to shape and implement our policies is to
    provide leadership to and receive input from our career Foreign
    Service, civil service and other employees, who the keepers of our most
    valuable intellectual capital. We should encourage robust policy
    discussions, which will support our mutual efforts to represent the
    State Department's perspective in interagency discussions.

        Question 17. What are your ideas on how to ensure high morale among
    these dedicated public servants?

        Answer. The men and women of the State Department are the most
    valuable component of the organization. Their desire to do what is
    right for the United States, and what is right by their own moral
    compass, is part of what makes them so special. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with the Secretary to provide them leadership and
    leaders who will engage with them, explain the mission and direction in
    which the organization is going, and, as the Secretary has said, make
    their jobs rewarding.
        Additionally, I want to make sure that the men and women of the
    Department know that they are involved in an enterprise that is doing
    right by the American people and that is protecting our American
    interests and our American values. It is my goal to make sure these
    public servants continue to enjoy remarkable careers in service to
    their country.

        Question 18. The Department of State has the difficult job of
    balancing foreign policy priorities and must have a voice in the
    provision of military assistance to foreign countries. We've seen a
    sustained effort over the last decade to reproduce and transfer State's
    security assistance responsibilities to the Department of Defense.
        Will you reverse this indifference, and personally work in the
    interagency to defend the State Department's central role is the
    provision of US security assistance?

        Answer. The Department has a crucial role in the provision of
    military assistance. Security assistance is a powerful tool that the
    United States can use to strengthen our alliances and partnerships
    around the world and mitigate threats that require a collective
    response--terrorism, organized crime, restraints on the freedom of
    navigation, and much more. But the United States must use security
    assistance in conjunction with the other pillar of foreign policy:
    diplomacy. It is the Department's job to ensure that our security
    assistance aligns with and advances U.S. goals in light of the broader
    diplomatic and defense relationship.
        State must work hard to ensure that all security sector
    assistance--whether it be providing major munitions to Iraq, border
    security programs in Eastern Europe, maritime capacity building in
    Vietnam, or military justice programs in Mexico--strategically targets
    and advances our foreign policy objectives in the country we are
    working with and accounts for the broader regional and global context.
    The Department must work to ensure that any investments we make in
    foreign security forces advance both political and security purposes;
    that they account for the political balance between civil and military
    institutions in the recipient country; that they are based on mutual,
    enduring interests between our countries; and that they do not cause
    long-term unintended effects in the country or region.
        At Secretary Tillerson and Secretary Mattis' direction, State and
    DoD are working closely together to optimize the full range of security
    sector assistance resources and achieve the best possible outcomes for
    U.S. national security and the American taxpayer. Strong State-DoD
    joint planning and program implementation is crucial in this regard.
    With your support, State will maintain a legislated and appropriated
    role in all U.S. foreign assistance, including that managed by other
    agencies. I also will personally defend the Department's central role
    in the provision of U.S. security assistance, including by ensuring
    that that the Department and DoD work closely and collaboratively on
    our respective foreign assistance programs.

        Question 19. You stated during your confirmation hearing that the
    Russian Government poses a persistent and profound threat to
    representative democracy here at home and around the world, especially
    in Europe. What do you believe are the Russian Government's motivations
    and strategic objectives in interfering in the political processes of
    the United States and our allies and partners? What do you think can
    change their decision-making calculus and aggressive behavior?

        Answer. Russia does not accept the post-Cold War settlement in
    Europe and is pushing back against it.
        Our response is, and should continue to be, twofold. We must be
    clear-eyed about Russia's transgressions, frank in our dialogue with
    Russia, and resolute in raising the costs of their behavior, including
    the use of defense, diplomatic, and law-enforcement tools. We must also
    continue to build the resilience of the countries on Russia's periphery
    with a whole-of-government approach that includes working with allies,
    partners, and institutions such as NATO and the EU.

        Question 20. You also stated during your confirmation hearing that
    the United States should ``be robust in our response to this intrusion
    into our democracy.'' In a classified or unclassified form, please
    describe the specific steps that the State Department is currently
    taking to address the threat posed by the Russian Government.
    Specifically, what is the State Department's strategy for countering
    Russian malign-influence operations around the world?

        Answer. I understand that the U.S. strategy is to work with the
    host governments of targeted countries to identify such operations and
    respond appropriately, largely through non-military means such as
    intelligence cooperation and law-enforcement, coordinated through the
    interagency.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with you and the members of
    this committee on this extremely important issue and to providing more
    information once I have become fully engaged.

        Question 21. Please describe how State Department personnel working
    to counter the Russian Government's malign influence operations
    coordinate their work both within the department (across offices and
    bureaus) and throughout the interagency. Do you believe that the
    current level of coordination is sufficient and, if not, what can be
    done to improve coordination?

        Answer. I understand that the State Department personnel working on
    this issue coordinate their work across geographic and functional
    offices, and through standing interagency working groups at the deputy
    assistant secretary level and above. My understanding is that they rely
    on reporting from our embassies in the region and incorporate them into
    the process, also ensuring that their reporting is shared across the
    Government.
        Because I am not in the Department yet, I simply do not have enough
    information to know how best to enhance the coordination that is
    already occurring. However, in the broader context, I know the
    Secretary is looking at all of the State Department's operations to
    identify ways to improve their effectiveness. If confirmed, I will
    assist in this endeavor.

        Question 22. Please describe how State Department personnel working
    to counter the Russian Government's malign influence operations
    coordinate their work with allied and partner governments, especially
    in Europe, that are the targets of these operations. Do you believe
    that the current level of coordination is sufficient and, if not, what
    can be done to improve coordination?

        Answer. I understand that there has been increasing interest by
    allies and other partners in Russia's new challenge to the post-Cold
    War order generally and in Russian malign influence operations in
    particular. I understand they believe this coordination has increased
    the effectiveness of the State Department's approach.
        Because I am not in the Department yet, I simply do not have enough
    information to know how best to enhance the coordination that is
    already occurring. However, in the broader context, I know the
    Secretary is looking at all of the State Department's operations to
    identify ways to improve their effectiveness. If confirmed, I will
    assist in this endeavor.

        Question 23. In addition to our military power, what tools does the
    US have at its disposal to pursue our interests in Afghanistan?

        Answer. The United States has a broad set of civilian assistance
    programs and resources to foster stability and ensure Afghanistan is a
    reliable and resilient partner, and that directly contribute to the
    achievement of our national security objectives. Civilian assistance
    programs have improved health and education, facilitated private sector
    development, boosted government capacity, improved Afghanistan's
    strategic communications to counter violent extremism, and challenged
    the corrosive effects of corruption and the narcotics trade.
    Afghanistan remains one of the largest recipients of U.S. civilian
    foreign aid. This investment has had an impact and has leveraged
    additional resources from other donors on a roughly two-to-one basis.
        The United States also has a robust public diplomacy program to
    support Afghan efforts to combat extremist messaging that has helped
    build the capacity of Afghanistan's independent media--an essential
    pillar of representative and accountable government.
        Finally, the United States has been active diplomatically, helping
    Afghanistan build its political institutions over the last 15 years,
    helping to promote political stability and development, and working
    with Afghan leaders to build international and regional support for
    stability in Afghanistan and for a negotiated settlement to the
    conflict with the Taliban.
        All of these activities have contributed to the stability of the
    Afghan Government, a government that stands with us in fighting
    terrorism and violent extremism.

        Question 24. What are your plans to leverage U.S. status in
    institutions like NATO, the OSCE, and Council of Europe to pursue U.S.
    national interests?

        Answer. I understand the United States can use its membership in
    NATO and the OSCE to create a force multiplier effect to support our
    security policy in Europe. At NATO, this would include leveraging the
    deployment of one U.S battalion as part of NATO's enhanced forward
    presence to generate the deployment of three Allied battalions to the
    Baltic States. The United States can work with Allies to maintain
    NATO's policy of deterrence and dialogue towards Russia. At the OSCE,
    we will continue to support the monitoring mission in Ukraine, seek the
    implementation of the Minsk accords, and in the OSCE's tradition of a
    broad approach to security, push for progress on a range of human
    rights issues. The United State can cooperate with the Council of
    Europe, where we are an observer state, and where the stated aim is to
    uphold human rights, democracy and rule of law.

        Question 25. Past Deputy Secretaries, notably your immediate
    predecessor, took a particular interest in forging and implementing US
    policy in the Asia-Pacific region, and the US-China relationship in
    particular. What is your vision for the future US-China relationship?

        Answer. The last several decades of political and economic reforms
    have brought monumental changes to the way in which China interacts
    with the outside world. Rather than opposing China's rise, if
    confirmed, I would echo the administration's overarching goal of
    bringing China's behavior in line with internationally accepted rules
    and order.
        The Trump administration also wishes to have a positive, results-
    oriented, mutually beneficial relationship with China. As part of that,
    the Trump administration wishes to put America first by ensuring that
    American interests are safeguarded in all aspects of our relationship
    with China.
        If confirmed, I would work to improve the relationship the United
    States has with China, seeking to make positive progress in areas such
    as economics and trade, law enforcement, and counterterrorism, while at
    the same time promoting American values like human rights. If
    confirmed, I will engage frankly and constructively on areas of
    disagreement.

        Question 26. In your view, are there any options for a genuine and
    lasting peace that do not include a two-state solution?

        Answer. President Trump has made it clear that it is a top priority
    for him to work towards achieving peace throughout the Middle East,
    including a comprehensive and lasting peace agreement that would end
    the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Any peace settlement ultimately has
    to be the product of direct negotiations between the parties, and both
    sides must agree. We can help, and support progress towards a peace
    deal--and the President is determined to do so--but we can't impose a
    solution on the Israelis and Palestinians. Nor can one side impose an
    agreement on the other.

        Question 27. Is U.S. policy the pursuit of a two-state solution?

        Answer. President Trump has made it clear that he supports whatever
    solution the parties, both the Israelis and Palestinians, can live
    with. The administration is not casting aside the two-state solution.
    It still remains a possibility if both parties agree that a two-state
    solution is their preferred approach, and in such an event the
    President will strongly support them in moving towards that goal. This
    is not our choice to make, it is theirs to make together.

        Question 28.  On April 18th the Trump administration certified that
    Iran is in compliance with its commitments under the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action, but raised concerns about Iran's role as
    a state sponsor of terrorism. Secretary Tillerson announced that the
    administration is undergoing an interagency review of the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action that will evaluate whether suspension of
    sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the JCPOA is vital to the
    national security interests of the United States.

       In your assessment of current U.S, efforts to prevent Iran from
            obtaining a nuclear weapon, are there options other than the
            JCPOA which can maintain international commitment and pressure
            on Iran?

        Answer. The President has ordered a review of the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which is part of a broader review
    of Iran policy and U.S. strategy in the Middle East. While this review
    is underway, it is my understanding that the administration is
    insisting on strict implementation by Iran of the terms of the JCPOA.
    At the same time, the United States will continue to fulfill its JCPOA
    commitments. I understand the review is comprehensive and covers all
    aspects of the JCPOA. Furthermore, even as the review continues, the
    United States will keep working closely with Israel, our Gulf allies,
    and other partners to combat Iranian support for terrorism and counter
    Iran's destabilizing activities in the region. The United States will
    also continue to use authorities outside the scope of the JCPOA,
    including authorities available to designate entities and individuals
    involved in Iran's ballistic missile program, its support for
    terrorism, and human rights abuses. This includes the February 3
    designations of 25 individuals and entities involved in Iran's
    destabilizing activities, including persons and entities connected to
    the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as well as persons and
    entities involved in Iran's ballistic missile program. On March 17, the
    Trump administration also designated two individuals for terrorism-
    related activities. This was followed by sanctions on 11 individuals
    and entities under nonproliferation authorities on March 21 for their
    support for Iran's ballistic missile program. Finally, on April 13, the
    administration designated an individual and entity involved in Iran's
    abuses of human rights.

        Question 29. On April 18th the Trump administration certified that
    Iran is in compliance with its commitments under the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action, but raised concerns that Iran's role as a
    state sponsor of terrorism. Secretary Tillerson announced that the
    administration is undergoing an interagency review of the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action that will evaluate whether suspension of
    sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the JCPOA is vital to the
    national security interests of the United States.
        Is U.S. compliance with its obligations pursuant to the JCPOA in
    the U.S. national security interest?

        Answer. The President has ordered a review of the JCPOA, which is
    part of a broader review of Iran policy and U.S. strategy in the Middle
    East. While this review is underway, I understand the administration
    will insist on strict implementation by Iran of the terms of the JCPOA.
    At the same time, the administration has been clear it will continue to
    fulfill JCPOA commitments.

        Question 30. For the last six years, the United States has sought
    to bring an end to the conflict in Syria. The House of Representatives
    is considering legislation to encourage prosecution of war crimes in
    Syria and to sanction foreign entities that support the Government of
    Syria's slaughter of the Syrian people.

       What are your views on the efficacy of new sanctions in this
            context?

        Answer. De-escalating the conflict in Syria is a top priority for
    this administration. I understand the administration is committed to
    working toward a credible political resolution to this conflict.
    Accountability is an integral part of any lasting political resolution
    as defined by the 2012 Geneva Communique and U.N. Security Council
    Resolution 2254. As a result of the recent actions of the regime,
    notably the April 4 sarin attack, the United States designated 271
    employees of the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center, the
    organization responsible for the Assad regime's chemical weapons
    program. These designations send a strong message that the United
    States holdsthe entire Assad regime accountable for the barbaric use of
    chemical weapons in Syria, a blatant violation of the Chemical Weapons
    Convention and U.N. Security Council Resolution 2118.
        The United States has also targeted sanctions on Iran's Islamic
    Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Ministry of Intelligence and Security
    for their support to the Assad regime. This was a coordinated effort
    with the international community toward ways to limit Iran's efforts to
    resupply the Assad regime with the means to perpetuate its brutality
    against the Syrian people. I cannot speculate about future potential
    designations, though broadly, the administration will continue to apply
    pressure to the Assad regime by targeting the Government, its ability
    to generate revenue, its attempts to advance its chemical weapons
    programs, as well as its human rights abuses.
        Although the latest round of U.S. sanctions are designed to
    discourage the Assad regime from using chemical weapons, the regime
    continues to target civilian and medical facilities since the April 4
    sarin attack, and is unlikely to deviate from its use of indiscriminate
    bombardment absent increased pressure from Russia.
        I understand the administration appreciates the authorities
    Congress has granted to sanction both the Assad regime and individual
    officials. The United States intends to press the regime to the full
    extent allowed under those authorities, which have provided the tools
    necessary to stand against Assad's atrocities.

        Question 31. What pressure do you think the State Department could
    use to get the parties to be more serious about ending the violence?

        Answer. I've learned the United States recently attended the May 3-
    4 Astana Conference as an observer. At this meeting, the ceasefire
    guarantors--Iran, Russia, and Turkey--agreed to work together to create
    de-escalation zones. The United States hopes this arrangement can
    contribute to a de-escalation of violence in Syria, ensure unhindered
    humanitarian access, and set the stage for a political settlement of
    the conflict. In light of the failures of past arrangements, there is
    reason to be cautious. Russia in particular can be pressed to act as
    genuine ceasefire guarantor and to persuade Iran to do the same.
        In Geneva, U.N.-led political negotiations are slated to resume May
    16. Foreign parties, including the United States, are not formal
    participants; but will stay in close contact with the U.N. and the
    Syrian opposition as they take part in the talks. The United States has
    urged the opposition to take a strategic and constructive approach to
    both these processes. De-escalation and an inclusive political process
    to resolve Syria's future is the only path forward to ending this
    conflict and supporters of the belligerents have a unique
    responsibility to incentivize the belligerents to de-escalate the
    violence.

        Question 32. Do you believe that Assad has a place in Syria's
    future?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson has maintained a consistent position on
    the fate of Assad. The Secretary believes that a lasting peace in Syria
    ultimately means a Syria without Assad. The United States remains
    committed to a political resolution which can bring about a more
    representative and peaceful Syria. The United States believes there is
    a need to de-escalate the violence in Syria and to have an inclusive
    political process through which Syrians will decide their own political
    future and al-Assad's role, consistent with the principles enshrined in
    U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254 and the Geneva Communique. The
    United States believes that once Syrians are afforded the chance to
    decide for themselves without coercion and with full participation, it
    is very likely they will chart a course for their country's future with
    new, credible leadership. It is my understanding that the
    administration has never said that we believe Bashar al-Assad is an
    appropriate or credible leader for Syria, or that the country will see
    peace as long as he is in power. Assad's regime has perpetrated war
    crimes and grievous violations of human rights over the past six years.
    It is not possible to imagine a peaceful, stable Syria led by Bashar
    al-Assad.

        Question 33. The May 2nd readout of President Trump's phone call
    with Russian President Putin noted that their conversation included
    ``discussion of safe, or de-escalation, zones to achieve a lasting
    peace for humanitarian and many other reasons.'' Then on May 4th in
    Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkey signed a Memorandum of Understanding for
    the creation of four ``zones of de-escalation'' in Syria.

       Will the Turkey-Russia agreement inform U.S.-Russian discussions on
            safe zones in Syria?

        Answer. Russia, Iran, and Turkey, the Astana guarantors, agreed May
    4 to work together to create four ``de-escalation zones'' in greater
    Idlib, northern Homs, Eastern Ghouta, and ``certain parts of southern
    Syria.'' The arrangement has not yet been approved by the Syrian
    Government and armed opposition groups. Secretary Tillerson has stated
    publicly the goal is to foster interim areas of stability in Syria and,
    separately, to stabilize areas liberated from ISIS. When ISIS is
    cleared from particular areas, these regions can stabilize, so that
    displaced families may return to their homes. This means supporting
    critical projects like de-mining and ensuring these communities have
    water and basic necessities.
        The May 4 proposal that Russia drafted, and that the Astana
    guarantors--Russia, Turkey, and Iran--accepted, calls for the
    establishment of four de-escalation zones in areas controlled by the
    Syrian opposition. While there are problematic elements of the Astana
    agreements, the United States nevertheless support any effort that can
    genuinely de-escalate the violence in Syria, ensure unhindered
    humanitarian access, focus energies on the defeat of ISIS and other
    terrorists, and create the conditions for a credible political
    resolution of the conflict.

        Question 34. What are the other reasons' for establishing safe
    zones, as noted in the May 2 White House read out?

        Answer. If ceasefires hold and areas of Syria become more stable,
    there may be a better environment for serious political negotiations.
    That is something we all want, so the United States calls on Russia and
    all parties to fulfill their ceasefire commitments through the Astana
    process. The regime systemically blocks aid to people in need in areas
    of Syria where opposition control. The United States supports the
    language in the Astana de-escalation agreement that calls for
    unhindered access to humanitarian assistance to people in need. The
    United Nations should determine the needs of distressed and besieged
    communities, and that all parties should cooperate fully to grant the
    U.N. unhindered access to such areas. The Astana guarantors should
    press the regime to abandon its tactic of obstructing access to food
    and humanitarian assistance as a weapon of war.

        Question 35. Will you commit to provide Congress with a briefing on
    the funding, authorities, personnel requirements, and objectives of
    establishing safe zones in Syria?

        Answer. The administration continues to explore how to best support
    the de-escalation of the Syrian civil war and if confirmed I will
    commit to providing appropriate congressional committees with a
    briefing. It is my understanding that the administration avoids the use
    of the term ``safe zones'' or ``no fly zones'' or ``zones,'' as these
    terms suggest a militarily-enforced no-fly zone. Rather than trying to
    create such a zone, which would pull resources from the D-ISIS
    campaign, the United States is trying to capitalize on stabilized
    conflict lines to de-escalate the conflict in various parts of the
    country--effectively cementing ceasefires and, lowering the level of
    violence, so that humanitarian assistance can reach civilians in need.
    When the fighting has stopped and civilians receive humanitarian relief
    and basic services in areas throughout Syria, there will be a better
    environment for a serious discussion of Syria's political future.

        Question 36. It is my understanding that U.S. and Iraqi officials
    are currently discussing a follow-on mission for U.S. forces in Iraq,
    after the defeat of ISIS. However, I am concerned that Iraq will remain
    perpetually unstable and susceptible to ISIS' successor if Iraq's
    leaders do not come together in a national program of inclusive
    governance and reconciliation.

       What conditions should the U.S. insist on if we are going to
            shoulder the cost and risk of keeping forces in Iraq?

        Answer. Defeating ISIS and ensuring that it cannot reconstitute is
    a core national security priority of the United States. The ISF,
    including Kurdish Peshmerga, are bravely leading this fight, taking the
    vast majority of the casualties, and slowly but surely pushing ISIS out
    of Iraq. More than 63 percent of the territory ISIS once held is now
    back under Iraqi control and not a single liberated community has
    fallen back under ISIS control. At the invitation of the Government of
    Iraq, the United States has played a supporting, but critical, role in
    helping the ISF achieve a nearly two-year run of unbroken victories in
    Tikrit, Ramadi, Sinjar, Fallujah, Hit, Bayji, Rutbah, Qayarrah, and
    soon Mosul. Nevertheless, ISIS remains a brutal foe that is a threat to
    the United States and our partners in the region and Europe; it is
    clearly in the interest of the United States to defeat ISIS and to
    remain engaged with our partners to ensure the group cannot reemerge.
        President Trump and Prime Minister Abadi made it clear during
    Abadi's March visit to Washington that they looks forward to building a
    post-ISIS security and economic partnership in Iraq. Continued U.S.
    security partnership will help Iraq to develop the forces needed to
    prevent threats to Iraqi sovereignty and a resurgence of terrorist
    activity, helping to ensure our gains against ISIS are lasting. It is
    in the interests of both the United States and Iraq to develop this
    post-ISIS partnership. I share your concerns about instability in Iraq
    and the potential for continued terrorism, even after ISIS no longer
    controls territory. This is all the more reason why the United States
    should remain engaged with our Iraqi partners--we, and they, must not
    fight the same war again. The administration agrees that Iraqi leaders
    need to do more to improve governance and address unresolved issues to
    better meet the needs of the Iraqi people. The decentralization
    program, which helps bring responsibility for government services
    closer to local communities, is one example of these efforts. The
    United States will continue to work with a wide range of Iraqis across
    the political spectrum and civil society to advance this agenda. As a
    starting point, the United States considers stabilizing areas liberated
    from ISIS a key component in ensuring that displaced communities,
    primarily Sunnis and ethnic minorities, are able to return home in
    dignity and with greater autonomy from the central government to manage
    their affairs. These grassroots efforts to promote reconciliation
    complement and enforce the Government of Iraq's efforts at broader
    national reconciliation.
        Iraq will hold national elections in the spring of 2018 and the
    Iraqi people will be able to hold their leaders accountable for their
    performance in office. The United States will continue to work with the
    United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) to ensure that these
    elections occur on time, are transparent, and reflect the will of the
    Iraqi people. The focus remains on supporting the constitutional system
    and strengthening democratic institutions that transcend the interests
    of individuals, political parties, or sectarian components of Iraqi
    society.

        Question 37. Is it in the U.S. national security interest to
    increase our military involvement--either directly or through enhanced
    support to the Saudi coalition?

        Answer. Ending the conflict in Yemen is a priority for this
    administration. The conflict has not only created a humanitarian
    crisis, it threatens Saudi Arabia's security, allows AQAP to expand,
    allows ISIS to gain a foothold, and allows Iran to exploit the
    political and security vacuum.
        The United States is currently providing limited support to the
    Saudi-led coalition, which is responding to the Yemeni Government's
    request for assistance in countering aggressive Houthi military
    actions. It is unacceptable for an armed militia to threaten Saudi
    Arabia's southern border. Iran, which is supporting the Houthis with
    military equipment, funding, and training, cannot be allowed to
    establish a foothold in the Arabian Peninsula. It is in our national
    security interest to help the Government of Yemen restore stability and
    counter terrorism, and also to help Saudi Arabia protect its border,
    which is why the United States is providing logistical and intelligence
    support to the coalition. At the same time, the United States continues
    to press the coalition at the highest levels to take appropriate
    measures to mitigate the impact of the conflict on the civilian
    population.
        Ultimately, a political solution is the only way to end the
    conflict, and Saudi Arabia understands the imperative of ending this
    conflict quickly. The United States continues to support U.N. efforts
    to restart negotiations aimed at reaching a comprehensive peace
    agreement.

        Question 38. Is there any solution other than a negotiated
    settlement?

        Answer. There is no decisive military solution available to either
    side to end the conflict--an enduring solution will come through a
    comprehensive political agreement which will require compromise from
    all sides. The United States fully supports the ongoing efforts of the
    U.N. Special Envoy for Yemen, Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, to bring about
    an end to the fighting and to bring the parties to the conflict back to
    negotiations as soon as possible.
        The United States also does not believe a split between north and
    south would be sustainable or in the U.S. national interest, and the
    administration continues to support a unified Yemen. Neither the north
    nor the south has the resources or political cohesion to endure
    independently from one another. This would lead to a fracturing of the
    Yemeni state, worsening the political and security vacuum for AQAP and
    ISIL to exploit.

        Question 39. Before the Obama administration used force against
    ISIS in Surt last fall, it waited for the Government of National Accord
    to request U.S. military support and ensured that it had identified
    committed local forces to work on the ground. As ISIS continues to lose
    ground in Iraq and Syria, the organization will turn to other locations
    including Libya. In remarks before the Senate Armed Services Committee
    on March 9, General Waldhauser--Commander of U.S. Africa Command--
    stated that in Libya, ``we must carefully choose where and with whom we
    work in order to counter ISIS and not shift the balance between
    factions and risk sparking greater conflict in Libya.''

       What actions might the United States take that could spark greater
            conflict? In other words, what must we avoid doing?

        Answer. The United States should avoid any actions or statements
    that might prejudice--or appear to prejudice--the outcomes of Libya's
    national reconciliation process. The roles of individual Libyans must
    be determined by the Libyans themselves. The United States is concerned
    about the risk of armed civil conflict in Libya and has urged all
    parties to exercise restraint. Libyan forces have made progress against
    ISIS in Sirte and eastern Libya. Renewed fighting between Libyans will
    distract from the fight against terrorism and create space that ISIS
    and other violent extremists can exploit. The United States must try to
    ensure that the political process remains open and inclusive, so that
    all parties can participate in national reconciliation rather than
    resorting to violence.

        Question 40. Does the State Department have a role in ending the
    conflict in Libya?

        Answer. It is my understanding that the State Department works
    closely with Libyan leaders and with regional and international
    partners to support efforts to broker a political compromise among
    Libyans and bolster the Libyan Political Agreement as the basis of
    negotiations and a path to national elections.
        Ending the civil conflict in Libya, keeping the Libyans engaged in
    a political dialogue, and finding a negotiated political solution are
    essential to building the stability Libya needs to defeat ISIS and
    other terrorists, address transnational flows of irregular migrants and
    weapons, rebuild Libya's economy, and meet the humanitarian needs of
    the Libyan people. There is no military solution.

        Question 41. Are there any alternatives to the Government of
    National Accord that could bring long-term stability to Libya?

        Answer. I understand most Libyans believe the Libyan Political
    Agreement must remain the framework for a political solution. There is
    also growing consensus on the need for negotiated amendments to the
    Political Agreement.
        The United States supports efforts to broker discussions between
    Prime Minister al-Sarraj's Government of National Accord (GNA) and
    eastern Libyan leaders to overcome the impasse. The only way to bring
    lasting stability is through a Libyan-driven effort to build an
    inclusive, effective national government and unify national security
    forces under governmental authority.

        Question 42. The civil war in South Sudan shows no signs of
    abating, precipitating a humanitarian disaster. 40 percent of the
    population currently faces life-threatening hunger; 100,000 face
    famine. As much as one-third of the population is displaced. The number
    of refugees fleeing to neighboring countries has more than doubled
    since July 2016. Uganda hosts almost 900,000 refugees at what has
    become the largest camp in the world. The only hope I see for turning
    the tide is a political solution. I've advocated for a Special Envoy to
    lead U.S. efforts to help find peace in South Sudan. What role do you
    see for the U.S. in helping bring peace to this troubled country?

        Answer. The United States has played and will continue to play a
    central role in the effort to bring peace to South Sudan, as the
    world's youngest country endures its fourth year of civil war. With the
    eruption of violence in Juba in July 2016, South Sudan's conflict
    entered a more complex and destructive phase, with Riek Machar's exile
    to South Africa, the fracturing of the opposition, and the emergence of
    new armed groups. The urgency of the situation and its attendant
    humanitarian crisis demand that the United States continue to play its
    historic leadership role in seeking peace. However, the complexity of
    the situation means that the United States must redouble coordination
    and cooperation with key partners, notably the Inter-Governmental
    Authority on Development (IGAD), the Troika (Norway and the United
    Kingdom), the African Union (AU), and the United Nations.

        Question 43. The civil war in South Sudan shows no signs of
    abating, precipitating a humanitarian disaster. 40 percent of the
    population currently faces life-threatening hunger; 100,000 face
    famine. As much as one-third of the population is displaced. The number
    of refugees fleeing to neighboring countries has more than doubled
    since July 2016. Uganda hosts almost 900,000 refugees at what has
    become the largest camp in the world. The only hope I see for turning
    the tide is a political solution. I've advocated for a Special Envoy to
    lead U.S. efforts to help find peace in South Sudan. If confirmed, will
    you support the appointment of a Special Envoy?

        Answer. There are many complex issues at stake in South Sudan--
    devastating conflict, mass atrocities, famine and widespread food
    insecurity, counterterrorism, and regional destabilization due to mass
    population movements--which constitute a threat to peace and stability
    in east and central Africa. They require a tightly focused policy
    engagement at a senior level.
        The United States is heavily involved in supporting peace efforts
    and providing assistance to refugees and displaced populations in Sudan
    and South Sudan and the region.
        Given these complex issues, if confirmed, I will explore how we can
    do better, including consulting with Secretary Tillerson about any
    proposed future structure to address all issues related to Sudan and
    South Sudan, and will also take into consideration the results of our
    internal State Department organizational review.

        Question 44. Aside from provision of equipment, what steps could
    the United States take to help improve the Nigerian military's
    effectiveness in the north east?

        Answer. The United States is actively supporting efforts by Nigeria
    to fight and defeat Boko Haram and its offshoot ISIS-West Africa. In
    addition to equipment, the United States provides the Nigerian military
    with advisors. advisors deployed to Maiduguri, the capital of Borno
    State and the heart of the Boko Haram and ISIS-WA insurgency, continue
    to play an important role in advising the Nigerian Army Theater Command
    Headquarters, which is located there.
        I understand the United States also has a robust program of
    intelligence sharing with the Nigerian military, both in Maiduguri and
    at the Fusion Cell in Abuja. We are working with Nigerian partners to
    make our intelligence sharing more timely and even more effective in
    bolstering Nigerian military operations. Additionally, and in full
    accordance with the human rights requirements of the Leahy Law, the
    United States continues to train the Nigerian military on a number of
    issues, including counterterrorism and human rights. This training has
    tangibly augmented the effectiveness of the Nigerian Army in its
    operations, and we look forward to continuing and expanding these
    training programs.

        Question 45. What will you do, if confirmed, to ensure that we
    remain steadfast in encouraging the Nigerian Government to hold those
    in the military responsible for human rights abuses, including the
    Zaria massacre of 2015, accountable?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure we continue to encourage the
    Nigerian Government to hold accountable those in the military
    responsible for human rights abuses. Through high-level diplomatic
    engagement, we will continue to underscore how human rights abuses by
    the security forces, as well as impunity for those violations,
    undermine Nigeria's security goals, tarnish its international
    reputation, and impede efforts to defeat Boko Haram and ISIS-West
    Africa. We will also continue to ensure that no assistance is provided
    to any Nigerian security force unit responsible for human rights
    abuses, in accordance with the law.
        We will continue to press the Nigerian Government on accountability
    for the Rann bombing. As the investigation is finalized, we will
    continue to seek full access to the information on the Nigerian
    investigations and for further corrective actions related to its
    findings.

        Question 46. Do you agree with Freedom House's characterization of
    the state of democracy in Africa? If so, do you believe America has a
    role to play in working to promote democracy and good governance on the
    continent?

        Answer. Strong, accountable, and democratic institutions, sustained
    by a deep commitment to the rule of law, generate greater prosperity
    and stability, and meet with greater success in mitigating conflict and
    ensuring security. While the African continent has made important gains
    in democracy and institution building, those gains are fragile. U.S.
    Government engagement in the region spans a wide range of country
    situations, from autocracies to post?conflict states to consolidating
    democracies. Although elections have become a regular occurrence across
    the continent, there are still too many countries where the transition
    to democracy is uneven and slow, and too many leaders who resist
    relinquishing power. In many countries, corruption is endemic and state
    institutions remain weak, leading to greater regional instability.
        Performance varies widely across the Continent. West Africa, for
    example, has undergone a significant democratic transition, and the
    period from 2015 through 2017 saw a host of West African nations
    peacefully going to the polls, with some, like Cote d'Ivoire and
    Burkina Faso, experiencing their first peaceful elections or transfers
    of power in decades. Most notably, in Nigeria, Ghana, Cabo Verde, and
    Benin opposition candidates were able to win elections and were sworn
    in as heads of state. This increased democratization has even changed
    how the region views attempts to cling to power. Proof of this came
    with the departure into exile of the long-time leader of The Gambia in
    January 2017 following his defeat at the ballot box. After the former
    president attempted to ignore the results and cling to power, the
    Economic Community of West African States sent democratically elected
    heads of state to demand he step down, threatening diplomatic
    isolation, sanctions, and even military intervention if he failed to do
    so. Faced with this unified opposition, the former president agreed to
    go into exile.
        Elections alone do not define a democracy, particularly as some
    incumbents in Africa and elsewhere narrow or close altogether the space
    for competition, participation, and a free press long before an
    election is held. A healthy democracy requires checks and balances,
    including a strong judiciary and legislature, competitive political
    parties, a free press, and an engaged civil society.
        Recognizing the foundational importance of democracy, human rights,
    and governance to Africa's future and U.S. foreign policy objectives on
    the continent, strengthening democratic institutions remains a
    priority. The United States seeks to advance democracy in Africa by
    promoting the rule of law, respect for human and civil rights, credible
    and legitimate elections, a politically active civil society, and
    accountable and participatory governance. Working in partnership with
    African Governments and civil society, United States support aims to
    strengthen governance institutions and to protect the democratic and
    development gains that have been made across the continent and to
    prevent democratic backsliding.

        Question 47. What steps will you take to advance multilateral
    diplomacy in response to Venezuela's political crisis and coordinate a
    regional approach to growing humanitarian challenges?

        Answer. It is my understanding the United States is working with
    its international partners to build consensus for a peaceful solution
    and to see the re-establishment of democratic norms in Venezuela. On
    April 26, the United States joined a majority of countries in the
    hemisphere in adopting an OAS resolution calling for an emergency
    meeting of foreign ministers to discuss the worsening situation in
    Venezuela, including the humanitarian situation. This follows a U.S.-
    supported resolution condemning recent actions taken by the Venezuelan
    Supreme Court to undermine the separation of powers and urging the
    Government of Venezuela to restore full constitutional authority to the
    National Assembly.
        The United States should continue to call for the release of all
    political prisoners, the publication and implementation of an electoral
    calendar to achieve a political resolution to this crisis, as well as
    respect for the National Assembly.

        Question 48. How can the U.S. best use targeted sanctions and other
    tools to hold accountable those Venezuelan officials that are engaged
    in corruption, drug trafficking, and actions that are destabilizing
    democratic governance and the rule of law?

        Answer. The U.S. Government evaluates, on an ongoing basis, the
    range of foreign policy tools at its disposal to best achieve its
    foreign policy objectives and enhance the nation's security. These
    include sanctions under the Narcotics Kingpin Act, as well as under
    Executive Order 13692, which implements the Venezuela Defense of Human
    Rights and Civil Society Act.
        Sanctions under that Executive Order target specific persons,
    including those involved in human rights abuses or violations,
    undermining democratic processes or institutions, and public
    corruption, among other things. U.S. sanctions do not target the
    Venezuelan people or economy as a whole.
        I believe the U.S. Government should, of course, encourage
    Department of Justice investigations of criminal conduct under U.S.
    law, particularly as it relates to public corruption and drug
    trafficking.

        Question 49. Will the United States meet its New START treaty
    commitments? Does the United States believe Russia in February 2018
    will meet its New START Treaty commitments?

        Answer. It is my understanding that the United States and Russia
    will meet the New START Treaty central limits in accordance with the
    stipulated deadline of February 5, 2018. Senior Russian officials have
    reaffirmed their commitment to meeting these limits.
        The United States continues to monitor Russia's strategic nuclear
    modernization and implementation of the New START Treaty through the
    Treaty's verification regime. Without the New START Treaty in force,
    the United States would lack critical knowledge about the composition
    and size of Russia's strategic forces and the insights the Treaty
    provides into Russia's modernization program for its strategic systems.

        Question 50. Is the Trump administration planning to withdraw from
    the New START Treaty or to modify it before the treaty expires in 2021?

        Answer. It is my understanding the administration is reviewing
    Russia policy, including the approach to enforcing compliance with arms
    control treaty obligations. Currently, the administration is focused on
    reaching the New START Treaty's central limits by February 2018, and
    will not assess next steps in strategic arms control until after that
    point.

        Question 51. Does the Trump administration believe Russia's
    deployment of a ground based cruise missile is a ``material breach'' of
    the INF Treaty?

        Answer. The international legal doctrine of material breach allows
    one party to terminate a treaty or suspend its operation in whole or in
    part based on, inter alia, another party's violation of a provision
    essential to the accomplishment of the object and purpose of the
    treaty. It is my understanding that the administration has not made a
    determination of material breach at this time. The administration is
    undertaking an extensive review of Russia's violation of the INF Treaty
    in order to assess the viability of the Treaty, the potential national
    security implications for the United States of the violation, and
    possible responses aimed at imposing costs and denying Russia any
    advantage from its violation.

        Question 52. Will you commit to maintaining a separate bureau in
    the State Department (currently the Bureau of International Security
    and Nonproliferation) exclusively devoted to preventing the
    proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and related
    materials?

        Answer. I am committed to preventing the proliferation of Weapons
    of Mass Destruction (WMD) and related materials. Nonproliferation of
    WMD has been a pillar of U.S. foreign policy over many decades and it
    remains in our vital national security interest to prevent and deter
    the proliferation and use of WMD. If confirmed, I will work closely
    with Secretary Tillerson on how best to organize the State Department
    to address proliferation.

        Question 53. Will you commit to fully funding critical non-
    proliferation intergovernmental organizations such as the IAEA, OPCW,
    and CTBT Preparatory Organization at FY 2016 levels?

        Answer. I understand that the Department is in the process of
    determining how to implement the funding reductions called for by the
    President's FY18 budget request. The Department appreciates
    Congressional support for funding necessary to meet U.S. commitments,
    responsibilities, and interests in areas such as this.

        Question 54. What is your interpretation of Section 4.11 of the
    Paris Agreement and the flexibility it provides parties to adjust their
    nationally determined contributions as they see fit? What significance
    does the word ``may'' in this section have to the U.S., or any party's
    ability to adjust their contributions in whatever way they see fit? Do
    you agree that the presence of the term ``may'' in this section makes
    this provision non-binding? If you believe this provision is legally
    binding please explain your argument.

        Answer. This question involves a degree of specificity and
    technicality with respect to treaty interpretation in the context of
    the Paris Agreement that would require me to consult with State
    Department lawyers before providing a response.

        Question 55. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary, you will be the
    primary person for State in overseeing and coordinating U.S. security
    cooperation and assistance to foreign countries, including military
    exercises and exchanges. Will you devote particular personal attention
    to this responsibility to fulfill the Secretary's role to oversee all
    assistance to foreign assistance, including oversight and participation
    in the formulation of the Department of Defense security assistance
    projects as allowed by law?

        Answer. Yes. State's role in the provision of security assistance
    is critical to ensuring that all such assistance directly advances a
    common set of foreign policy goals and accounts for broader U.S.
    interests in the country, region, and world. At Secretary Tillerson and
    Secretary Mattis' direction, the Department and DoD are working closely
    together to optimize the full range of security sector assistance
    resources and thereby achieve the best possible outcomes for U.S.
    national security and the American taxpayer. To further this effort, if
    confirmed, I will devote personal attention to building collaborative
    relationships between the Department and DoD at all levels, such that
    all of our assistance efforts are integrated and synchronized in a
    manner that is strategic, efficient, and reflects our agencies'
    respective strengths and missions. Where the Department has a
    legislated role in the planning or approval of DoD assistance programs,
    I will ensure that the Department has the resources and direction
    necessary to fulfill that role in a meaningful way, such that all
    assistance--regardless of the agency managing it--advances a single set
    of foreign policy objectives and is subject to the same level of
    rigorous foreign policy oversight.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator James E. Risch

        Question 1. Do you support completing the Export Control Reform
    Initiative?

        Answer. I support the modernization of the U.S. export control
    system and look forward to being briefed by the Department's experts on
    the status of the Export Control Reform Initiative. As a general
    matter, I believe it is important that we provide all American
    industries with a level playing field.

        Question 2. What is the status of the proposed rule to transfer to
    Commerce the export licensing responsibility for commercial and
    sporting products currently on the USML categories I, II, and III?

        Answer. I understand the Department is finalizing the rule for
    three remaining categories of controls, and plans to obtain guidance to
    publish them. It intends to solicit public comment, as it did for the
    other 18 categories. This process was requested by U.S. industry
    members, including the firearms and ammunition industry, to help ensure
    the rules are clear and implementable.

        Question 3. Please provide the timeline for when the State
    Department will publish its proposed rule to transfer export licensing
    of commercial and sporting firearms and ammunition products currently
    on the USML categories I, II, and III to the Commerce Department's CCL?

        Answer. I understand the Department is in the process of obtaining
    guidance for publication and to have the rule included in an upcoming
    issue of the Federal Register. The Department does not have an exact
    timeline for publication at this time because revisions to the U.S.
    Munitions List (USML) require contemporaneous publication of a
    companion rule by the Department of Commerce, and because of required
    interagency and intra-Executive approvals for publication in
    conjunction with an ongoing review of regulatory activities. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working towards an expeditious
    publication.

        Question 4. Do you support continuing the QDDR process at the State
    Department?

        Answer. The previous administration implemented a Quadrennial
    Development and Diplomacy Review (QDDR). The QDDR process is an
    exercise to assess how we can be more efficient, effective, and
    accountable. As discussed in my confirmation hearing, the world has
    changed in the 21st century and the way the Department is organized has
    not kept pace. I look forward to supporting the Secretary's review of
    the current structure of the State Department to see how we can better
    meet these challenges.

        Question 5. As you know, the Department of Defense issues the QDDR
    as part of a series of documents produced used to help inform a
    Planning, Programming, Budgeting process. If you keep the QDDR process,
    will you also take the additional steps of drafting similar long-term
    strategic budget and other planning and programming documents?

        Answer. The Department of State and USAID are mandated by the
    Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 to produce
    an agency-level strategic plan. The strategic plan is a long-term,
    multi-year strategy that outlines our goals and objectives, and which
    provides direction and guidance in the formulation of our budget and
    other planning and programming processes. I understand the State
    Department is in the development stages of this strategic plan. This
    process has already guided formulation of our FY 2018 budget and will
    provide key inputs to our FY 2019 budget, as well as the concurrent
    reorganization. I look forward to working with the Secretary to ensure
    the Department's management priorities are strategically aligned with
    policy guidance and direction to meet our core mission across our
    global organization.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. What role do you see the United States playing in
    Venezuela?

        Answer. The Venezuelan people aspire to a free, democratic, and
    prosperous country, and the United States should continue to strongly
    support those aspirations. The U.S. Government should remain engaged
    with a broad range of Venezuelan society and our international partners
    to insist that the Venezuelan Government respect its democratic
    institutions.
        The U.S. Government should call on the Government of Venezuela to
    fulfill its obligations to promptly hold elections, respect the
    rightful authority of the National Assembly, provide for the immediate
    and unconditional release of all political prisoners, and tend to the
    humanitarian needs of the Venezuelan people. The United States, in
    concert with a majority of other countries in the hemisphere, adopted
    an OAS resolution calling for an emergency meeting of foreign ministers
    to review the situation in Venezuela and offer humanitarian assistance
    to the Venezuelan people.

        Question 2. How can we leverage the OAS and our regional alliance
    to address this crisis?

        Answer. The United States is working with its international
    partners to build consensus for a peaceful solution and to see the re-
    establishment of democratic norms in Venezuela. The United States
    joined a majority of countries in the hemisphere on April 26 in
    adopting an OAS resolution calling for an emergency meeting of foreign
    ministers to discuss the worsening situation in Venezuela. This follows
    a U.S.-supported resolution condemning a series of Venezuelan Supreme
    Court actions to undermine the separation of powers and urging the
    Venezuelan Government to restore full constitutional authority to the
    National Assembly.
        he United States should continue to call for the release of all
    political prisoners, the publication and implementation of an electoral
    calendar to achieve a political resolution to this crisis, and respect
    for the National Assembly.

        Question 3. We have an opportunity to achieve a peaceful resolution
    of the long festering and untenable situation in Cyprus. Positive
    Turkish engagement and support of this process is vital, as is that of
    International Organizations and the U.S.

       How do you view the current, ongoing Cyprus settlement talks held
            under UN auspices?

        Answer. The United States continues to fully support the Cypriot-
    led, UN-facilitated process under UN Special Adviser Espen Barth Eide.
    We support efforts by the parties to reach a settlement to reunify
    Cyprus as a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation, which would benefit all
    Cypriots as well as the wider region. Greek Cypriot leader Nicos
    Anastasiades and Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci have made
    considerable progress in their negotiations over the last two years
    toward achieving a settlement. These negotiations are the best chance
    in decades to achieve a lasting and comprehensive solution.

        Question 4. We have an opportunity to achieve a peaceful resolution
    of the long festering and untenable situation in Cyprus. Positive
    Turkish engagement and support of this process is vital, as is that of
    International Organizations and the U.S.

       Do you support a reunified Cyprus with a single sovereignty, single
            international personality and single citizenship; and with its
            independence and territorial integrity safeguarded as described
            in the relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions?

        Answer. In their February 2014 Joint Declaration, Greek Cypriot and
    Turkish Cypriot leaders agreed to negotiate a settlement based on a bi-
    zonal, bi-communal federation rooted in political equality. They also
    agreed that a reunified Cyprus, as a member of the United Nations and
    of the European Union, would maintain a single international legal
    personality, a single sovereignty, and a single united Cyprus
    citizenship. The United States continues to support Cypriot-led, UN-
    facilitated efforts to achieve a negotiated settlement based on these
    principles and those established through relevant United Nations
    Security Council Resolutions and other high-level agreements.

        Question 5. We have an opportunity to achieve a peaceful resolution
    of the long festering and untenable situation in Cyprus. Positive
    Turkish engagement and support of this process is vital, as is that of
    International Organizations and the U.S.

       Will you maintain U.S. high-level engagement on this issue?

        Answer. Yes. The United States supports the reunification of Cyprus
    as a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation consistent with UN Security
    Council Resolutions. If confirmed, my role would be to advance the
    longstanding U.S. policy of supporting reunification efforts. The
    administration has continued high-level U.S. engagement in support of
    current settlement talks: Secretary Tillerson telephoned Greek Cypriot
    leader Nicos Anastasiades and Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci
    early in his tenure, and in March Under Secretary for Political Affairs
    Tom Shannon hosted UN Special Advisor Espen Barth Eide for
    consultations in Washington and later met with Republic of Cyprus
    Foreign Minister Ioannis Kasoulides. As a friend to all Cypriots, the
    United States engages with all parties, and I would continue to
    encourage all relevant stakeholders--including Greece and Turkey--to
    negotiate constructively to reach a just and lasting settlement.

        Question 6. While Turkey remains a critical NATO ally, Turkish
    President Erdogan recently consolidated his power through a referendum
    the OSCE assessed suffered from a lack of transparency among other
    concerns. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Turkey was
    the top jailer of journalists worldwide. What steps do you think the
    United States should take to directly address these human rights
    concerns in Turkey?

        Answer. The United States remains committed to a strong bilateral
    relationship with Turkey. It is in the U.S. national interest for
    Turkey to be a stable, prosperous, and reliable ally. The United States
    has long supported Turkey's democratic development. Respect for the
    rule of law, freedom of the press, and transparency are pillars of a
    successful democracy and provide Turkey with the potential for
    expanding its partnership with the United States. If confirmed, I will
    raise these important points directly with senior Turkish officials.

        Question 7. In its 2016 National Drug Threat Assessment, the Drug
    Enforcement Administration (DEA) identified Mexican transnational
    criminal organizations as the ``greatest criminal drug threat'' to the
    United States. As you know, the State Department plays a central role
    in coordinating U.S. counternarcotics assistance and Mexican criminal
    organizations continue to illegally traffic South American cocaine and
    a growing volume of Mexican-produced heroin and Mexican- and Chinese-
    produced fentanyl into the U.S.--which is fueling opioid addiction and
    an alarming number of overdoses across the U.S.

       As we cannot resolve this challenge alone, if confirmed, what
            strategies will you employ to work with the Government of
            Mexico to combat these criminal organizations and the illegal
            drug trade?

        Answer. Building on prior security collaboration and under
    Secretary Tillerson's leadership, it is my understanding the State
    Department is working with the Government of Mexico to identify new
    opportunities to combat transnational criminal organizations, including
    by focusing on disrupting their business model. This includes exploring
    new ways to strengthen criminal investigations of money laundering,
    build Mexico's capacity to criminally prosecute and sanction financial
    crimes, and work jointly on detecting and interdicting bulk cash
    shipments from the United States into Mexico.
        The United States and Mexico are working together with Canada
    through the North American Dialogue on Drug Policy to develop a greater
    understanding of drug flows and drug threats within North America and
    are working more closely to address them. For example there is
    agreement to improve cooperation by: (1) sharing results of research
    and analysis of heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine, and precursor
    chemicals; (2) exploring ways to better track cross-border financial
    transfers; and (3) coordinating our messaging to countries outside of
    North America that impact the illicit opioid threat in our continent.

        Question 8. Violence in Mexico, particularly the homicide rate has
    increased dramatically over the past year. Alarmingly, Mexico has seen
    an increase of targeted attacks against journalists and media outlets.
    Mexican courts have failed to successfully prosecute and convict 99
    percent of cases that involve journalists being killed. A free press
    and the freedom of speech form the bedrock of any democratic society.
    We have a number of programs through the State Department aimed at both
    supporting free press in Mexico and strengthening the rule of law.

       Do you believe these programs are effective?

        Answer. Yes, but they can be improved. U.S. programs have been
    effective, and if confirmed, I will ensure the Department of State
    continues to work with Mexico to improve them. We should remain
    committed to working with Mexico on supporting a free press and
    strengthening the rule of law. USAID and the State Department's Bureau
    of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor have played a key role in
    supporting the Government of Mexico in standing up its Protection
    Mechanism that provides protection measures to more than 600 human
    rights defenders and journalists. If confirmed, I will advocate for
    increased protection and apply lessons learned from international best
    practices in protecting freedom of expression. I support USAID's
    engagement with civil society groups that advocate for threatened human
    rights defenders and journalists.
        In addition to these programs, I will consistently raise the issue
    of press freedom and rule of law with Mexican officials and in public
    messaging.
        As Mexico has embarked on an essential set of reforms to its
    justice sector, the United States, through the Merida Initiative, has
    provided essential support by targeting every facet of the criminal
    justice system, including: law enforcement professionalization,
    strengthening judicial institutions, training prosecutors and judges,
    and improving the corrections system.

        Question 9. Do you believe that the United States should commit
    resources and attention to strengthening institutions in Mexico
    including a strong, independent judiciary?

        Answer. Yes. Through the Merida Initiative, the United States and
    Mexico have forged a multi-faceted partnership to combat organized
    crime and drug trafficking and to support Mexico's efforts to
    strengthen its security institutions, enhance rule of law, improve
    border security, and promote respect for human rights. A transparent,
    efficient, and effective criminal justice system in Mexicao is
    essential to the administration's goal of dismantling transnational
    criminal organizations. It also strengthens the rule of law by
    protecting due process, promoting assistance to crime victims, and
    strengthening human rights. As Mexico has embarked on this essential
    set of reforms, the United States has provided essential support by
    targeting every facet of the criminal justice system, including: law
    enforcement professionalization, strengthening judicial institutions,
    training prosecutors and judges, and improving the corrections system.
    If confirmed, I will ensure the Department of State continues to work
    with Mexico in these important areas.

        Question 10. How do you plan to engage with the Government of
    Nicaragua?

        Answer. The Department of State has repeatedly expressed concerns
    about the state of democracy in Nicaragua. Previous U.S. Government
    statements have consistently criticized the flawed electoral process,
    which precluded the possibility of free and fair elections. If
    confirmed, I would ensure the Department of State continues to press
    the Nicaraguan Government to uphold democratic practices, including
    press freedom and respect for universal human rights, consistent with
    its commitments under the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
        At the same time, the U.S. Government should continue to advance
    U.S. national security and economic interests in Nicaragua through
    engagement with the Nicaraguan Government, civil society, and private
    sector on issues such as countering illegal migration, countering
    narco-trafficking, and ensuring a favorable climate for U.S.
    businesses.
        Despite being the second poorest country in the hemisphere,
    Nicaragua enjoys a robust trade relationship with the United States.
    Since the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade
    Agreement entered into force in 2006, U.S. exports to Nicaragua have
    increased over 100 percent from $625 million in 2005 to $1.47 billion
    in 2016, supporting almost 9,000 jobs in the United States.
        If confirmed, I will continue to strengthen the U.S. partnership
    with the Nicaraguan people and work on their behalf to achieve a more
    prosperous, secure, and democratic Nicaragua.

        Question 11. Do you believe we should do more to empower civil
    society in Nicaragua?

        Answer. Strong civil society organizations (CSOs) are critical to
    strengthening institutions and building a vibrant and functioning
    democracy. Nicaragua's democracy and human rights CSOs struggle to
    remain operational in a country that has restricted political space.
        USAID supports media programs that mentor young journalists and
    increase citizen advocacy for independent media, the right to freedom
    of expression, and access to public information. USAID programs also
    teach cybersecurity techniques to help protect CSO members and their
    organizations.
        Department of State programs that support civil society seek to:
    improve citizen security through community engagement, prevent drug
    abuse and violence among at-risk youth, prevent trafficking in persons
    through education and raising awareness, increase advocacy of the rule
    of law, and prevent domestic violence and improve services for victims.

        Question 12. The US and Taiwan have maintained a strong and
    mutually beneficial relationship based on the Taiwan Relations Act
    (Public Law 96-8) and Six Assurances. Recognizing Taiwan's capacity and
    willingness to contribute to important global issues, Congress has
    passed legislation requiring the State Department to support Taiwan's
    participation in international organization such as the World Health
    Organization (WHO). After Taiwan first woman president Tsai Ing-Wen
    took office last year, Taiwan has experienced increasing pressure from
    Beijing constricting its participation in international organizations.
    How do you and the administration plan to support Taiwan's
    international participation?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Taiwan's membership in
    international organizations that do not require statehood. In
    organizations that require statehood for membership, I will support
    Taiwan's meaningful participation, and this includes ICAO, INTERPOL,
    WHO, and the more than 60 international organizations in which Taiwan
    participates. I am committed to supporting Taiwan as it seeks to expand
    its already significant contributions to addressing global challenges.
        I believe the United States has a deep and abiding interest in
    cross-Strait peace and stability. The benefits that stable cross-Strait
    ties have brought to both sides of the Taiwan Strait, the United
    States, and the region have been important. Both sides of the Taiwan
    Strait should understand the value of stable cross-Strait ties and work
    to establish a basis for continued peace and stability. If confirmed, I
    will encourage authorities in Beijing and Taipei to engage in
    constructive dialogue that seeks a peaceful resolution of differences
    acceptable to the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

        Question 13. How do you plan to engage with the relatively new
    Haitian Government?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to understand the top priorities
    of the new Haitian administration. Ongoing U.S. support for job
    creation initiatives that create opportunities beyond the capital of
    Port-au-Prince can help improve political and economic conditions in
    Haiti.
        The scheduled termination of the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti
    (MINUSTAH) in mid-October and transition to a successor mission
    focusing on the rule of law, police development, and human rights is an
    important opportunity for Haiti to increasingly take responsibility for
    maintaining a stable security environment with UN Police support.May 9,
    2017

        Question 14. What changes do you think can be made in our
    diplomatic and development efforts to best utilize American resources
    and personnel in Haiti?

        Answer. With a new, democratically-elected government in Haiti and
    a Haitian President who is keenly familiar with the role that the
    private sector and foreign direct investment can play in building
    sustainable economic growth, there is a window of opportunity to lessen
    Haiti's dependence on foreign aid.
        If confirmed, I would urge Haiti to pursue its development and
    growth priorities. That means taking steps to attract and increase
    domestic and foreign investment, which will in turn fuel economic
    opportunity and growth and, ultimately, generate revenue for the
    Haitian state.
        In the near-to-medium term, however, Haiti will continue to need
    the support of its international partners, including the United States,
    to address the economic, social, and security challenges facing the
    country. U.S. assistance plays an important role in addressing these
    goals.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. What role should universal values, including human
    rights, the right to religious freedom, and the promotion of
    representative democracy and freedom of the press, play in U.S. foreign
    policy and determining the U.S. national security interest?

        Answer. As I said in my testimony before the committee, I believe
    our greatest national asset is our commitment to the fundamental values
    expressed at the founding of our nation: the rights to life, liberty,
    and the pursuit of happiness. These basic human rights are the bedrock
    of our republic and at the heart of American leadership in the world.

        Question 2. Do you commit to supporting U.S. sanctions against the
    Maduro Government in Venezuela? Would you support expanding U.S.
    sanctions against the Maduro Government?

        Answer. I am committed to evaluating on an ongoing basis the range
    of foreign policy tools at our disposal that can best achieve our
    objectives, enhance our national security, and improve the dire
    situation in Venezuela. These include sanctions under Executive Order
    13692, which implements the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil
    Society Act. Sanctions under that Executive Order target specific
    persons, including those involved in human rights abuses or violations,
    undermining democratic processes or institutions, and public
    corruption, among other things. Such U.S. sanctions do not target the
    Venezuelan people or economy as a whole.

        Question 3. Do you commit to working with regional partners, as
    well as with regional bodies such as the Organization of American
    States (OAS), to restore democracy in Venezuela?

        Answer. Yes. The United States is working with its international
    partners to build consensus for a peaceful solution and to see the re-
    establishment of democratic norms in Venezuela. If confirmed, I will
    continue to prioritize these efforts. On April 26, the United States
    joined a majority of countries in the hemisphere in adopting an OAS
    resolution calling for an emergency meeting of foreign ministers to
    discuss the worsening situation in Venezuela, including the
    humanitarian situation. This follows a U.S.-supported resolution
    condemning recent actions taken by the Venezuelan Supreme Court to
    undermine the separation of powers and urging the Government of
    Venezuela to restore full constitutional authority to the National
    Assembly.
        The U.S. Government should continue to call for the release of all
    political prisoners, the publication and implementation of an electoral
    calendar to achieve a political resolution to this crisis, as well as
    respect for the National Assembly.

        Question 4. If and when Venezuela enters a post-Maduro era and also
    returns to the path of democracy, do you commit to supporting foreign
    assistance funding to hasten the country's return to self-
    determination, representative democracy, and a free-market economy?

        Answer. Yes. The U.S. Government wants the Venezuelan people to
    thrive under representative democracy. The FY 2017 appropriation
    provides support for democracy in Venezuela, consistent with current
    USAID programs.

        Question 5. Do you support current U.S. sanctions against Russia?
    Do you believe that U.S. sanctions should remain in place until Crimea
    is rightfully returned to Ukraine and Russia stops supporting
    separatists in eastern Ukraine?

        Answer. I understand United States sanctions are carefully
    coordinated with those of our European partners to impose costs on
    Russia for its aggression in Ukraine and its occupation of Crimea.
    These sanctions have helped discourage Russia and the separatists it
    supports from attempting to seize more Ukrainian territory and helped
    keep Russia at the table to negotiate a peaceful resolution under the
    Minsk Agreements.

        Question 6. Will you pledge to implement fully the Sergei Magnitsky
    Act and support the designation of additional Russian officials for
    their roles in human rights abuses as the U.S. Government obtains new
    evidence of such abuses?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will support the Department's
    implementation of the Sergei Magnitsky Act, continuing the work the
    Department has done since 2013 to list anyone who meets the criteria
    set forth in the Act. The Department believes the Act is a valuable
    tool to help combat impunity for gross violations of human rights in
    Russia. The Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve a
    government that supports transparency and accountability, equal
    treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise their rights
    without fear of retribution.

        Question 7. Would you commit to supporting the continuation of the
    State Department's efforts to empower civil society organizations in
    Russia and other authoritarian countries around the world?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue the Department of
    State's efforts to empower civil society in Russia. The Department
    continues to raise in public statements and private discussions our
    serious concerns about the human rights situation in Russia. Although
    the space for civil society and free media in Russia has become
    increasingly restricted, Russian organizations and individuals continue
    to express a desire to engage with the United States. As long as this
    continues to be the case, the United States will support opportunities
    for direct interactions between Russians and Americans, including
    through peer-to-peer, educational, cultural, and other regional
    programs that provide exchanges of best practices and ideas on themes
    of mutual interest.
        The Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve a government
    that supports an open marketplace of ideas, transparent and accountable
    governance, equal treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise
    their rights without fear of retribution. The United States continues
    to call on the Government of Russia to uphold its international
    obligations and commitments to promote and protect human rights and
    fundamental freedoms, and to cease restrictions on the work of civil
    society organizations in Russia.

        Question 8. If Congress passes a bill that imposes visa bans and
    asset freezes on those responsible for the commission of serious human
    rights abuses in any territory, forcibly occupied or otherwise
    controlled by Russia, would you advise the President to sign it?

        Answer. The Secretary has been clear that our foreign policy will
    continue to be guided by our values, including the defense of human
    rights. Subject to the need to review the precise terms of any
    legislation before making a recommendation, if confirmed I am committed
    to doing all we can as a nation to promote and protect human rights in
    the areas described.

        Question 9. The United States has long served as a global leader in
    advancing women's equality and empowerment. Central to this is the work
    of the Office of Global Women's Issues in the State Department. Can you
    assure us that this administration will maintain the Office of Global
    Women's Issues and the critical programming, policy and diplomatic work
    that it does?

        Answer. The integration of gender into the State Department's
    foreign policy efforts has never been more critical. The United States
    has put gender equality and the advancement of women and girls at the
    forefront of U.S. foreign policy, and the Secretary's Office of Global
    Women's Issues has played a central role in ensuring the Department has
    the know-how and the appropriate processes to strategically incorporate
    gender into policies and programs. As I stated at my confirmation
    hearing, you have my commitment that women's issues will remain a
    priority of the Department.

        Question 10. Will you support ensuring that women's issues, such as
    ending child marriage and promoting access of girls to education, are
    included in larger foreign policy discussions, where appropriate?

        Answer. Yes. The incorporation of gender considerations into
    foreign policy planning and execution is strategic and imperative. It
    is a fundamental tenet of our foreign policy that when women are able
    to participate politically and economically to the same degree as men,
    societies are more prosperous, stable and secure. As I told Senator
    Shaheen, ``women's health, women's education, women's empowerment, pay
    dividends many times over.'' You have my commitment that these issues
    will remain a priority of the Department.

        Question 11. Will it be your policy and intention to honor the
    pledges, commitments, and obligations made by your predecessors at the
    U.S. Department of State with respect to American participation in
    international fairs and expositions abroad occurring prior to September
    30, 2017?

        Answer. I am not familiar with any pledges, commitments, or
    obligations made by previous State Department officials with respect to
    American participation in international fairs and exhibitions. If
    confirmed, I will be happy to work with you and you staff to learn more
    about your concerns and what resolutions are permissible under current
    law.

        Question 12. Enacted in 1979, the Taiwan Relations Act remains
    cornerstone of relations between the United States and Taiwan. For
    decades, both parties have benefited from a strong security and
    economic relationship. However, this relationship has not benefited
    from sufficient high-level communication due to the self-imposed
    restrictions that the United States maintains on high-level visits with
    Taiwan. Will you commit to encouraging exchanges between the United
    States and Taiwan at all levels? How will you push this forward?

        Answer. I understand that many U.S. officials, including Cabinet-
    level officials, have visited Taiwan when they have had substantive
    business to conduct in order to further U.S.-Taiwan relations as
    stipulated by the Taiwan Relations Act. These visits are consistent
    with the U.S. Government's one-China policy.
        Also, consistent with longstanding practice, the United States
    allows transits by Taiwan leaders to provide for the safety, security,
    comfort, and dignity of the traveler. Senior Taiwan leaders
    occasionally travel through North America to and from destinations in
    Central and South America and the Caribbean.
        If confirmed, I will continue to encourage exchanges between the
    United States and Taiwan to advance substantive cooperation across all
    areas of our relationship.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Ron Johnson

        Question 1. It is my understanding that there are currently around
    75,500 employees at the Department of State, made up of around 11,000
    Civil Service employees, 14,000 Foreign Service employees and 50,500
    locally employed staff. How has the total number of State Department
    employees, as well as the subcategories of Civil Service, Foreign
    Service and locally employed, changed over time? Can you provide year-
    by-year State Department employment numbers as far back as possible for
    total number of employees as well as for the three aforementioned
    subcategories?

        Answer. Attached are year-by-year State Department employment
    numbers showing the total number of employees as well as Civil Service,
    Foreign Service, and locally employed staff.

                                          Department of State Employment Counts
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Civil Service   Foreign Service                       Locally
                        Year                         Full-Time         Full-Time    Total Full-Time   Employed  (LE)
                                                     Permanent        Permanent         Permanent         Staff
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FY1961*                                                5,315            8,712           14,027             9717
    FY1962*                                                4,865            8,809           13,674             9969
    FY1963*                                                5,103            9,127           14,230             9997
    FY1964*                                                4,934            9,154           14,088            10135
    FY1965*                                                5,061            9,493           14,554             9574
    FY1966*                                                4,077           10,904           14,981            10340
    FY1967*                                                3,717           11,351           15,068            12312
    FY1968*                                                3,717           10,272           13,989            11334
    FY1969                                                 3,749            9,735           13,484            10967
    FY1970                                                 3,746            8,932           12,678            10702
    FY1971                                                 3,698            8,994           12,692            10618
    FY1972                                                 3,523            8,588           12,111            10491
    FY1973                                                 3,646            8,313           11,959            10486
    FY1974                                                 3,611            8,526           12,137            10538
    FY1975                                                 3,588            8,719           12,307            10091
    FY1976                                                 3,440            8,969           12,409            10158
    FY1977                                                 3,462            8,993           12,455            10164
    FY1978                                                 3,290            9,207           12,497            10183
    FY1979                                                 3,347            9,065           12,412             9718
    FY1980                                                 3,438            9,236           12,674             9374
    FY1981                                                 3,634            9,378           13,012             9283
    FY1982                                                 3,764            9,406           13,170             9244
    FY1983                                                 3,952            9,395           13,347             9240
    FY1984                                                 4,314            9,153           13,467             9399
    FY1985                                                 4,500            9,441           13,941             9605
    FY1986                                                 4,448            9,637           14,085             9637
    FY1987                                                 4,579            9,490           14,069             9490
    FY1988                                                 4,677            9,232           13,909             9455
    FY1989                                                 4,933            8,918           13,851             9165
    FY1990                                                 5,197            8,814           14,011             8933
    FY1991                                                 5,181            8,830           14,011             9379
    FY1992                                                 5,318            8,896           14,214             9412
    FY1993                                                 5,622            8,792           14,414             9412
    FY1994                                                 5,436            8,512           13,948             8512
    FY1995                                                 5,208            8,207           13,415             8207
    FY1996                                                 5,247            7,936           13,183             9555
    FY1997                                                 5,225            7,724           12,949             9508
    FY1998                                                 5,165            7,769           12,934             9510
    FY1999                                                 5,498            8,169           13,667             7192
    FY2000                                                 7,200            9,283           16,483              N/A
    FY2001                                                 7,193            9,326           16,519              N/A
    FY2002                                                 7,368           10,089           17,457              N/A
    FY2003                                                 7,731           10,579           18,310              N/A
    FY2004                                                 7,831           10,988           18,819              N/A
    FY2005**                                               8,092           11,238           19,330            37924
    FY2006**                                               8,270           11,397           19,667            37092
    FY2007**                                               8,784           11,467           20,251            37089
    FY2008**                                               9,328           11,656           20,984            37089
    FY2009**                                               9,614           12,257           21,871            41658
    FY2010**                                              10,039           13,008           23,047            43632
    FY2011**                                              10,645           13,518           24,163            44491
    FY2012**                                              10,760           13,774           24,534            45475
    FY2013**                                              10,960           13,833           24,793            45970
    FY2014**                                              10,874           13,984           24,858            46648
    FY2015**                                              10,921           13,941           24,862            48033
    FY2016**                                              11,147           13,980           25,127            49736
    3/31/2017                                             10,978           14,029           25,007            49736
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    *``Full-time'' employees were reported between 1961 and 1968
    **LE Staff counts included both Direct Hires and Personal Service Agreement (PSAs) contractors after 2005
    ***FY 2000 reflects integration of U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA)
      into State

        Question 2. Can you provide year-by-year statistics going as far
    back as possible on the number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
    requests submitted to the State Department and to the federal
    government as a whole?  Can you also provide the annual number of
    backlogged FIOA requests for the State Department and the federal
    government as a whole for as far back as possible?

        Answer. Attached are current and historical data on FOIA requests
    submitted to the Department of State and to the federal government as a
    whole. I understand that the Department has taken a series of concerted
    actions to improve the program and reduce the backlog. The Department
    and other executive branch agencies publish a number of annual reports
    regarding their FOIA processing efforts. The Government-wide
    information can be found at https://www.justice.gov/oip/reports-1. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with you to continue to improve
    the Department's FOIA responsiveness.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator John Barrasso

        Question 1. If confirmed, will you support the elimination of all
    U.S. funding for the United Nations' Green Climate Fund?

        Answer. The administration's FY 2018 budget does not include
    funding for the Green Climate Fund (GCF). In general, the United States
    should ensure that all assistance to foreign countries and
    international organizations advances U.S. interests.

        Question 2. If confirmed, will you support the elimination of all
    U.S. funding for the Global Climate Change Initiative?

        Answer. The FY 2018 request does not include funding for the Global
    Climate Change Initiative (GCCI). In general, the United States should
    ensure that all assistance to foreign countries and international
    organizations advances U.S. interests.

        Question 3. Would you recommend that the United States stay in any
    agreement that would strengthen foreign economies at the expense of
    American workers and line the pockets of developing nations with
    billions of American taxpayer dollars?

        Answer. The United States should prioritize U.S. interests in all
    of its interactions with foreign countries and should evaluate possible
    participation in international agreements on that basis.

        Question 4. Do you support the administration submitting the
    international climate change agreement developed in Paris to the Senate
    for its advice and consent?

        Answer. I understand the United States submitted an instrument of
    acceptance to the Paris Agreement in September 2016. The Agreement
    entered into force in November 2016. I have not studied closely the
    legal issues related to the United States' acceptance of the Paris
    Agreement and would want the opportunity to consult with the State
    Department's lawyers before offering a considered opinion.

        Question 5. In your legal opinion, is the Paris climate agreement a
    treaty? Why or why not?

        Answer. I have not studied closely the legal issues related to the
    United States' acceptance of the Paris Agreement and would want the
    opportunity to consult with the State Department's lawyers before
    offering a considered opinion.

        Question 6. Do you think it serves the interests of this country to
    establish a precedent that international commitments are made in a
    manner designed to thwart the constitutionally derived oversight role
    of the U.S. Senate?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to consulting with the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee on the respective roles of the Executive
    and Legislative Branches in assessing the appropriate course for
    concluding any international agreement.

        Question 7. Do you believe staying in an agreement that was
    specifically constructed to thwart the United States Senate's
    constitutional role of advice and consent would make it more or less
    likely for similar actions to happen again in the future?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to consulting with the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee on the respective roles of the Executive
    and Legislative Branches in assessing the appropriate course for
    concluding any international agreement.

        Question 8. As Deputy Secretary of State, would you ensure that the
    State Department is promoting all forms of energy projects across the
    globe, including oil, gas, and coal?

        Answer. The State Department will use its diplomatic tools to
    promote energy projects internationally, including oil, gas, and coal.
    The State Department will work to make sure that U.S. investors and
    industry from all segments of the energy sector compete on a level
    playing field with foreign competition in emerging markets.

        Question 9. If confirmed, are you committed to opposing all
    recognition of a Palestinian state in international bodies and
    organizations, outside of a peace agreement with Israel?

        Answer. Yes. The United States position is that the only way for
    the Palestinians to achieve real statehood is through a mutually
    acceptable peace agreement with Israel. If confirmed, I would recommend
    that the President continue to oppose Palestinian membership in
    international bodies and organizations in the absence of a mutually
    acceptable peace agreement with Israel.

        Question 10. How will you hold the Palestinians accountable for
    their efforts to use the United Nations, its agencies, and affiliated
    organizations to bypass the peace process?

        Answer. The U.S. Government's approach to managing issues related
    to Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts in multilateral fora is guided by
    several priorities: supporting Israel's affirmative efforts to
    normalize its role in the international community; preserving space for
    a mutually acceptable peace agreement between the two parties;
    combatting anti-Israel bias and efforts to delegitimize Israel in the
    UN system; protecting the United States' ability to fund and
    participate in international organizations; and countering efforts to
    expand the scope of actions against Israel.
        If confirmed, I would continue to vigorously pursue this approach,
    oppose Palestinian membership in UN organizations prior to a mutually
    acceptable peace agreement with Israel, and support the enforcement of
    laws prohibiting funding to international organizations that do so.

        Question 11. Do you support multilateral institutions providing
    financing for all energy resources especially the most affordable,
    reliable and abundant forms of energy?

        Answer. The Department of the Treasury has the jurisdiction for the
    formulation and implementation of the U.S. stance on lending policies
    at multilateral financial and development institutions. The Department
    of State provides foreign policy guidance and technical expertise
    during this process. The Department supports an all-of-the-above energy
    strategy, which will inform our interaction within the interagency on
    multilateral institutions' financing energy projects.

        Question 12. Will you commit to ensuring that multilateral
    institutions allow public financing of high efficiency power stations
    fueled by coal?

        Answer. The Department of the Treasury has the jurisdiction for the
    formulation and implementation of the U.S. stance on lending policies
    at multilateral financial and development institutions. As the
    administration works to address multilateral institutions' policies
    affecting financing for energy projects, the Department of State will
    engage in the interagency to underscore the importance of considering
    all types of energy.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to John Sullivan by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. Do you agree with Secretary Tillerson that the best way
    to resolve the North Korean nuclear threat is through direct
    negotiations? Or do you share Vice President Pence's belief that North
    Korea must agree to denuclearize before any negotiations occur?

        Answer. Our objective remains a denuclearized Korean peninsula. We
    remain committed to directly addressing the threat North Korea's UN-
    proscribed ballistic missile and nuclear programs pose to peace and
    security. The United States remains open to credible talks on the
    denuclearization of the Korean peninsula; however conditions must
    change before there is any scope for talks to resume.
        As Secretary Tillerson said in New York, ``We will not negotiate
    our way back to the negotiating table with North Korea. We will not
    reward their violations of past resolutions. We will not reward their
    bad behavior with talks. We will only engage in talks with North Korea
    when they exhibit a good-faith commitment to abiding by the Security
    Council resolutions and their past promises to end their nuclear
    programs.''
        It is important that the leaders of North Korea realize that their
    current pathway of nuclear weapons and escalating threats will not lead
    to their objective of security and economic development. That pathway
    can only be achieved by denuclearizing and abandoning their weapons of
    mass destruction.

        Question 2. Do you think the United States should stay in the Paris
    agreement?Do you think climate change should remain a priority for U.S.
    international engagement?

        Answer. I understand that there is an ongoing discussion within the
    administration concerning continued participation in the Paris
    Agreement. As a general matter, the United States is best served and
    its interests protected when it has a seat at the table.
        Climate change is a global problem that requires a global response.
    No one country is going to solve it alone. The President and the
    Secretary have stated that they want a foreign policy that reflects
    American interests and that works for America. Global leadership should
    not come at the expense of U.S. competitiveness or our national
    security.

        Question 3. What value do you believe America's global climate
    leadership has in terms of national security and economic
    competitiveness?

        Answer. Climate change is a global problem that requires a global
    response. No one country is going to solve it alone. The President and
    the Secretary have stated that they want a foreign policy that reflects
    American interests and that works for America. Global leadership should
    not come at the expense of U.S. competitiveness or our national
    security.

        Question 4. What diplomatic costs and risks do you foresee if the
    United States were to withdraw from the Paris Agreement?

        Answer. More than 190 countries signed the Paris Agreement,
    indicating their intention to join, and 145 countries have already
    joined. An analysis should include the impact on U.S. relations with
    those countries.

        Question 5. Do you believe the United States should continue to
    provide technical assistance to developing nations to ensure they
    monitor their greenhouse gas emissions according to the highest
    standards possible to help ensure that we know whether they are meeting
    their commitments under the Paris Agreement?

        Answer. I understand that the administration is reviewing U.S.
    international climate change policy, including climate-related
    assistance and this question will be looked at in that context. In
    general, the United States should ensure that all assistance to foreign
    countries advances U.S. interests.

        Question 6. If confirmed what will you do to ensure robust U.S.
    diplomatic engagement with all the parties to preserve peace and
    stability in Northern Ireland?

        Answer. The United States remains firmly committed to the Northern
    Ireland Peace Process, including the 1998 Good Friday Agreement and
    subsequent agreements. I believe we should continue to engage all
    parties and communities to work together to build a better, shared
    future. Our Consulate in Belfast promotes reconciliation, two-way trade
    and investment, and cultural exchanges.

        Question 7. Do you agree that the United States must take the lead
    to protect members of the LGBT community from discrimination and abuse
    worldwide?

        Answer. Yes. As is made clear in the founding documents of the
    United States, all people should be protected from discrimination and
    violence, and must be free to exercise their universal rights,
    including their fundamental freedoms of expression, association,
    peaceful assembly, and religion. Discrimination and violence against
    members of any community or group hampers economic development, public
    health, and social cohesion.
        Protecting universal human rights is a central element of U.S.
    foreign policy and national security interests, and if confirmed I will
    work to advance human rights for all persons.

        Question 8. What steps do you think the State Department should
    take to strengthen that leadership?

        Answer. I know that the State Department is already working to
    combat discrimination and violence against members of the LGBT
    community globally, as an integral component of the Department's human
    rights and democracy strategy. This includes efforts aimed to respond
    to discriminatory legislation through bilateral diplomacy, empowering
    human rights defenders to address these challenges, building consensus
    with like-minded government partners, and elevating the voices of the
    most at risk in partnership with a broad coalition of allies, including
    in the private sector.

        Question 9. Do you believe that it serves U.S. national interest to
    cut the State Department's budget by nearly a third?

        Answer. As Secretary Tillerson told the Department workforce in a
    written letter, the State Department's budget request addresses the
    challenges to American leadership abroad and the importance of
    defending American interests and the American people. It acknowledges
    that U.S. engagement must be more efficient, that our aid must be more
    effective, and that advocating the national interests of our country
    must always be our primary mission. Additionally, the budget is an
    acknowledgment that development needs are a global challenge to be met
    not just by contributions from the United States, but through greater
    partnership with and contributions from our allies and others. The
    Secretary has initiated a process to draw a new budget blueprint that
    will allow us to shape a Department ready to meet the challenges that
    we will face in the coming decades. We will do this by reviewing and
    selecting our priorities, using the available resources, and putting
    our people in a position to succeed.

        Question 10. Many of the President's proposed cuts target foreign
    aid programs. While many people mistaken assume that foreign aid takes
    up a large proportion of the overall federal budget, it actually
    accounts for less than one percent. And while the United States gives
    more in foreign aid than any other country in absolute terms, we give
    less than other countries as a percentage of our economy.
        When I visited West Africa last year, I saw the crucial work that
    brave Americans working for the U.S. Agency for International
    Development were doing. As you said when we met, seeing crates being
    unpacked with the words, ``from the American people'' written on them
    has a powerful impact. So it is important to remember that this is not
    just charity--foreign aid expands our influence without shedding a drop
    of blood. Doing good makes us great and keeps us safe.

       Do you believe that foreign aid and the U.S. Agency for
            International Development play important roles in preserving
            U.S. global influence and serving U.S. national interests?

        Answer. The State Department and USAID work on behalf of the
    American people to further our national security objectives while
    promoting our values around the world. As Secretary Tillerson said when
    he came before this committee, to achieve the stability that is
    foundational to peace and security in the 21st century, American
    leadership must not only be renewed, it must be asserted. Our foreign
    assistance is a critical component of this and it keeps us safe while
    promoting American leadership and values and supports a more prosperous
    and healthy global community. As the primary implementer of development
    assistance, USAID has a model of partnering with host countries, NGOs,
    the private sector, and other international and multilateral donors,
    which enhances our leadership in the world and our national security. I
    am committed to making the State Department and USAID the preeminent
    force to protect and promote American values in the world, and to
    utilizing foreign assistance to preserve U.S. global influence.

        Question 11. Do you agree with Secretary Tillerson that we should
    deemphasize our values when dealing with regimes that do not share
    them?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson affirmed at his nomination hearing that
    the U.S. must continue to display a commitment to personal liberty,
    human dignity, and principled action in foreign policy. He assured the
    committee that under his leadership the Department will work
    aggressively to advance human rights for everyone. I certainly agree.
    Our commitment to American values does not waver, no matter what regime
    we are dealing with.

        Question 12. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary, what will you do to
    ensure that the State Department continues to advance democracy, human
    rights, and the rule of law?

        Answer. As I pledged during my confirmation hearing, I am committed
    to making the State Department the preeminent force to protect American
    values and promote American values in the world. And will seek to do so
    using all of the assets available to the Department.

        Question 13. Will you maintain women's rights as a priority for the
    Department, and ensure that women's andgirls' issues are considered in
    every project undertaken by the State Department?

        Answer. The State Department remains committed to continuing the
    important work of advancing the status of women and girls globally
    through diplomatic and programmatic activities. As I stated in my
    testimony, you have my commitment that women's health, women's
    education, women's empowerment, will remain a priority of the
    Department.

        Question 14. Will you pledge to support the law fully and help
    ensure that women, including those raped by ISIS terrorists, and who
    depend on U.S. foreign assistance, will have access to safe abortion
    services if they wish to terminate their pregnancies?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will faithfully execute the law, including
    as it relates to abortion. I understand the Department of State and
    USAID are continually working to ensure maximum effectiveness in
    combating poverty and improving the health and status of women and
    girls, including the survivors of sexual violence. If confirmed, I will
    insure that the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for
    International Development continue to take this issue very seriously.

        Question 15. Will you pledge to ensure that women who depend on
    U.S. foreign assistance who face a life-threatening pregnancy and will
    die without a safe termination procedure will have access to it?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will faithfully execute the law as it
    relates to abortion. I understand the Department of State and USAID are
    continually working to ensure maximum effectiveness in improving the
    health and status of women and girls.

    Foreign Service
        Question 16. Your written testimony movingly described your
    personal connection to the Foreign Service and of the sacrifices and
    dangers many of these brave Americans and their families have faced in
    many parts of the world. Your uncle, Ambassador William Sullivan, had
    an extremely distinguished career as an American diplomat. I share your
    admiration for the men and women of the U.S. Foreign Service.
        In visiting countries around the world, I am always impressed with
    the knowledge, judgement, and dedication of Foreign Service personnel.
    And I have seen that these patriotic Americans do their job with skill
    and professionalism regardless of whether they are serving a Democratic
    or a Republican president. The Foreign Service Dissent Channel is
    designed to ensure that a wide range of views are considered in making
    policy. Use of the Dissent Channel does not indicate disloyalty to the
    president or an attempt to undermine his policies.

       As Deputy Secretary, will you ensure that Foreign Service personnel
            and their families receive the support they need to do their
            jobs?

        Answer. Yes, that will be an extremely high priority for me. As I
    said in my confirmation hearing, I look forward to participating in
    Secretary Tillerson's review of the mission of the Department of State
    with the intent of bringing the Department into the 21st century to
    address the challenges we face today. If confirmed, my goal will be to
    ensure the Department, including the Foreign Service, is organized and
    has the tools to carry out U.S. foreign policy. That review must
    consider the important sacrifices and essential roles played by Foreign
    Service families in the careers of our diplomatic personnel.

        Question 17. Your written testimony movingly described your
    personal connection to the Foreign Service and of the sacrifices and
    dangers many of these brave Americans and their families have faced in
    many parts of the world. Your uncle, Ambassador William Sullivan, had
    an extremely distinguished career as an American diplomat. I share your
    admiration for the men and women of the U.S. Foreign Service.
        In visiting countries around the world, I am always impressed with
    the knowledge, judgement, and dedication of Foreign Service personnel.
    And I have seen that these patriotic Americans do their job with skill
    and professionalism regardless of whether they are serving a Democratic
    or a Republican president. The Foreign Service Dissent Channel is
    designed to ensure that a wide range of views are considered in making
    policy. Use of the Dissent Channel does not indicate disloyalty to the
    president or an attempt to undermine his policies.

       Will you listen to the views and recommendations of the State
            Department's career personnel as you formulate your own views
            on key positions and represent the Department in interagency
            deliberations?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 18. Your written testimony movingly described your
    personal connection to the Foreign Service and of the sacrifices and
    dangers many of these brave Americans and their families have faced in
    many parts of the world. Your uncle, Ambassador William Sullivan, had
    an extremely distinguished career as an American diplomat. I share your
    admiration for the men and women of the U.S. Foreign Service.
        In visiting countries around the world, I am always impressed with
    the knowledge, judgement, and dedication of Foreign Service personnel.
    And I have seen that these patriotic Americans do their job with skill
    and professionalism regardless of whether they are serving a Democratic
    or a Republican president. The Foreign Service Dissent Channel is
    designed to ensure that a wide range of views are considered in making
    policy. Use of the Dissent Channel does not indicate disloyalty to the
    president or an attempt to undermine his policies.

       Will you ensure that career State Department employees do not
            suffer from political retribution for expressing their views
            through the Dissent Channel and similar mechanisms?

        Answer. Yes, I am fully committed to the Dissent Channel, which is
    established in the Department's Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). For over
    forty years, the Dissent Channel has served as a vehicle for the State
    Department's U.S. citizen employees to express dissenting or
    alternative views on substantive issues of policy to the Department's
    most senior leadership without fear of penalty. It exists because the
    State Department has a strong interest in facilitating open, creative,
    and uncensored dialogue on substantive foreign policy issues within the
    professional foreign affairs community and a responsibility to foster
    an atmosphere supportive of such dialogue. Pursuant to the FAM, Dissent
    Channel messages, including the identity of the authors, are a most
    sensitive element in the internal deliberative process and are to be
    protected accordingly.

    Appointments
        Question 19 The Trump administration has been unusually slow to
    nominate qualified individuals to serve in government. According to the
    Washington Post, out of 556 key positions requiring Senate
    Confirmation, 465, or 83 percent, do not even have a formal nominee.
        The situation is even worse at the State Department, where there
    have only been 10 nominations for 119 positions requiring Senate
    confirmation. That's 91 percent of positions that do not even have a
    formal nominee. Many of these are crucial ambassadorships, including to
    many of our closest allies, such as France, Germany, and South Korea.
        The unfilled positions also include five of six under secretaries
    and all but two one of the Department's 23 regional and functional
    assistant secretaries. They include the Assistant Secretary for
    Diplomatic Security, who ensures the safety of our diplomats and their
    families. And the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International
    Security Affairs, who negotiates nuclear treaties and ensures that
    other countries comply with them.
        This unprecedented lack of personnel makes it hard for foreign
    governments to talk to the United States, and it breeds strategic
    incoherence, since we lack the key people responsible for formulating
    and executing our foreign policy.

       If confirmed as Deputy Secretary, one of your key roles will be
            management of the Department. How you plan to address this
            critical failure to fill the Department's vital posts?

        Answer. As I said during my confirmation hearing, I commit, if I am
    confirmed, to making sure that personnel appointments and nominations
    are moved forward as quickly as possible. In the meantime, the State
    Department is fortunate to have a deep bench of career professionals
    ably filling posts across the Department.

                                   __________

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:03 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Cory Gardner,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker, Gardner [presiding], Risch,
    Rubio, Young, Isakson, Portman, Shaheen, Murphy, Kaine, Markey,
    and Merkley.

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

        Senator Gardner. This hearing will come to order.
        Let me welcome you all to this full committee hearing on
    nominations.
        Welcome to the committee, Senator Brown.
        Senator Collins, without further ado, we will turn to you
    to have the privilege of introducing our sole witness today,
    the Honorable Scott Brown, to serve as Ambassador to New
    Zealand and concurrently to the Independent State of Samoa.
    Senator Collins?

                   STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN COLLINS,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE

        Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking
    Member Markey.
        It is my pleasure to introduce the President's nominee to
    be our next Ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, Senator Scott
    Brown, a leader who has spent much of his life in service to
    our Nation.
        Senator Brown and I worked together as colleagues in the
    United States Senate, and I also consider him to be a valued
    and trusted friend.
        I am proud to introduce him this afternoon and to recommend
    him to serve our next Ambassador to New Zealand.
        In many ways, Senator Brown is an ideal Ambassador for the
    United States as his life's story is a testament to the
    American dream. Scott overcame poverty and violence in his
    childhood. He graduated from college and law school. And he has
    spent more than 3 decades in public service that spans all
    levels of government, as well as serving in uniform and in
    elected office.
        It was at Tufts University where Senator Brown graduated
    cum laude that he first answered the call to serve. He enlisted
    in Massachusetts National Guard in 1979 and later was
    commissioned as an infantry officer through the ROTC program at
    Northeastern University.
        After earning his law degree from Boston College, he
    continued to serve as a member of the JAG Corps.
        During his years in the military, Senator Brown won many
    awards and held numerous leadership positions. Recently he
    retired as a colonel after 35 years of dedicated service in
    both the Massachusetts and Maryland National Guard. His last
    assignment was at the Pentagon where he served as the Deputy to
    the Chief Counsel to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
        Scott began his long career in public service as an
    assessor and selectman in the Town of Wrentham, Massachusetts.
    He then served in the Commonwealth's legislature serving both
    as a representative and later as a State senator.
        In 2010, Scott Brown won a special U.S. Senate election.
    During his time in the Senate, he was a model of bipartisanship
    and a devoted advocate for our veterans and our small business
    owners.
        In addition, he ably served on the Senate Armed Services
    Committee, which equipped him with the policy expertise to
    appreciate fully our longstanding defense, diplomatic, and
    intelligence cooperation with New Zealand.
        Throughout his time in the Senate, Scott Brown demonstrated
    leadership in building consensus to achieve common sense
    solutions, and he did so in a very diplomatic way.
        So I believe that those are essential skills for a U.S.
    Ambassador.
        In short, Senator Scott Brown's experiences have prepared
    him so well to represent our Nation as U.S. Ambassador in
    Wellington. I am confident that he will continue to strengthen
    our vital partnerships with New Zealand and Samoa, and I urge
    this committee to support this important nomination.
        Again, it is a great honor to be here before you today to
    support my former colleague and my friend, Scott Brown. Thank
    you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Collins, for those kind
    words of introduction. I know you have a busy schedule, so we
    appreciate your time to be here with you today and look forward
    to the rest of the confirmation hearing.
        And I noticed the Chairman of the full committee.
        So please, feel free to attend to the rest of your
    business, if you would like.
        The Chairman of the full committee, Senator Corker, has
    joined us as well. If you would like to provide a counter to
    those glowing words---- [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner [continuing]. Chairman Corker, please join
    us at the dais.
        The Chairman.  If I am ever nominated for anything, I want
    her to introduce me. [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Chairman Corker.
        Thank you, Senator Collins, for that introduction.
        And though we have had our share in the past of
    disagreements, New Zealand is one of our oldest and staunchest
    allies, a historical ally, around the globe. Our nations
    founded the Australian, New Zealand, United States, or ANZUS,
    alliance in 1951. Our soldiers have fought and died side by
    side in many global conflicts. Many Americans are well familiar
    with the exceptional bravery shown by Kiwi soldiers at historic
    battles like Gallipoli and beyond. The 2010 Wellington
    Declaration and the 2012 Wellington Declaration on Defense
    Cooperation have elevated our relations to a new level.
        Our nations have a robust trade relationship. Major U.S.
    exports to New Zealand include civilian aircraft, refined
    petroleum, autos, and auto parts. And I firmly believe that our
    ties are critical to regional peace and stability, and I look
    forward to hearing Senator Brown's testimony on how to grow
    this vital relationship.
        With that, I will turn to the ranking member, Senator
    Markey of Massachusetts.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        And many thanks to our colleague from Maine, Senator
    Collins, for joining us to introduce Senator Brown.
        Senator Brown, you are a true son of New England, born in
    Maine, now living in New Hampshire and, during the decades in
    between, serving the people of Massachusetts at every level of
    government. Your distinguished career has included stops at
    Wrentham town hall, the Massachusetts statehouse, the halls of
    the United States Senate, and the National Guard.
        Your success in overcoming hardships early in life and then
    reaching the upper echelons of public service is an inspiration
    not only to the children of Massachusetts and our country but
    to the children everywhere that you will be now representing
    our country.
        And I know that you are enormously qualified for this
    position, having been educated at Wakefield High School, Tufts
    University, and Boston College Law School. Like me, your
    education is not tainted by any values or lessons learned
    outside the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. [Laughter.]
        Senator Markey. So we thank you for your service, and we
    thank Gail and your family. They have our heartfelt thanks for
    all of their service to our Commonwealth and to the nation. And
    we congratulate you on your nomination as our Ambassador to New
    Zealand and to Samoa and appreciation for your willingness,
    once again, to serve our country in this new role.
        The United States has closely collaborated with New Zealand
    since World War II as partners promoting security, stability,
    peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific and throughout the
    world. Our relationship with New Zealand is absolutely central
    to the security and prosperity of the United States and the
    rest of the Asia-Pacific, a region that enjoys enormous
    opportunities but also faces looming threats to both our
    national security and the peace and stability of the entire
    world. From North Korea's nuclear and missile programs to
    sovereignty disputes in the East and South China Seas to the
    risk of nuclear proliferation, American leadership is essential
    for the Asia-Pacific nations to resolve differences through
    diplomacy and international law rather than through threats and
    intimidation.
        That is why I am glad that you have been willing to accept
    this nomination from the President because I think you are just
    the perfect person at the perfect time to have this job. So
    thank you.
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Markey. And I too want
    to echo the comments. Welcome to the family. Thank you for your
    commitment and service. This is a family effort. It truly is.
    And we appreciate it greatly.
        Senator Portman, Senator Barrasso, Senator Shaheen, I do
    not know if you have any comments before we turn to Senator
    Brown's opening statements.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. ROB PORTMAN,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

        Senator Portman. Just quickly, if I could, Mr. Chairman, to
    echo the comments that you and Senator Markey both made about
    Scott Brown's qualifications for this job. It is a big job
    because he will be, if confirmed--and I feel confident that he
    will--the only U.S. Ambassador really in the region and
    certainly the only one in the New Zealand-Australia area, which
    is an incredibly important role for us. We now have a more
    dangerous and volatile world, and those are two of our best
    allies and have been with us, literally standing with us, in
    conflicts from Afghanistan to Iraq and beyond. So I think it is
    important we have somebody there and someone who has the
    stature of Senator Brown and the relationships, frankly, both
    here in the Senate and throughout the Washington community.
        So I am delighted he is willing to step forward. I have had
    the opportunity meet with Senator Brown and talk at some length
    about some of the issues with New Zealand, including trade
    issues, including issues with regard to our military
    relationship, which is much improved I think over the last
    several years that he wants to continue to build on. He has
    actually served in Afghanistan, as I understand it, at the time
    when New Zealand also had a contingent there and understands
    the importance of working cooperatively with us. Senator Brown
    has some interesting ideas with regard to the relationship
    between New Zealand and China and how the United States needs
    to play a more central role in that region.
        So I think he is going to be the right guy, and it is
    really important for us to have somebody and have a U.S.
    presence in that region. And I am delighted he is willing to
    serve.
        And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to say a few
    comments.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Portman.
        Senator Shaheen or Senator Barrasso?
        Without any further hesitation, to Senator Brown for your
    opening statements.

    STATEMENT OF SCOTT P. BROWN, OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
     AMERICA TO NEW ZEALAND, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND WITHOUT
        ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
        PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
                       INDEPENDENT STATE OF SAMOA

        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
    Markey, members of the committee. It is a great honor to be
    here before the committee, and I want to just say thank you for
    those kind words. Obviously, big shoes to fill with the prior
    Ambassador and obviously to fulfill your expectations as well.
        I want to thank President Trump for giving me the
    opportunity to represent the interests of the United States of
    America in these two wonderful countries.
        In addition, I want to express my gratitude to Secretary of
    State Rex Tillerson for supporting this appointment, and I very
    much look forward to working with him and his team to achieve
    our foreign policy goals in the months and years to come.
        Finally, I am thankful for the opportunity to appear before
    this honorable committee. As a former member of this body, I
    want to say thank you to my Republican colleagues who have
    previously voiced their support, and I also want to thank
    Senator Shaheen, Senator Markey, Senator Warren, and Senator
    Hassan for their early indication of support. It means a
    tremendous amount to me and my family.
        Before I begin, I would like to express the thanks of me
    and my family for the patience, mentoring, and guidance that
    Senator Collins provided me when I was here. As you know of her
    work ethic, I understand I may be off over the last couple of
    days, but 6,357 consecutive votes, which is the record in the
    United States Senate, and it is something that I know she is
    proud of and I am proud of as a citizen of this country to know
    that she has so much dedication to this job. And it is going to
    be an exceedingly difficult record to break I venture to guess.
        I joined the military 35 years ago when I was 19 years old,
    and during that time in the military starting as an enlisted
    man and working my way up the ranks as an infantry officer, a
    quartermaster officer, JAG officer. Retired recently in the
    rank of colonel, as was referenced by the Senator. The last 4
    years, while being a Senator, I also worked in the Pentagon as
    Deputy to the Chief Counsel for one of the Joint Chiefs. And it
    was one of the most enjoyable, uplifting experiences of my
    military career to be there in the hub of the action to
    basically be there and work hand in hand with one of the Joint
    Chiefs and his team.
        My responsibility, one of the things I am most proud of,
    during that time period is that me and my team were able to
    rewrite the sexual assault regulations in the National Guard,
    which are in fact in place. Teams are investigating and they
    are doing incredible work. And I know Senator Shaheen is very
    concerned about that, as others should be. And I can tell you
    firsthand that it is working very, very well.
        An attorney in private practice since 1985, I know that
    those skills that have been given me in that practice have
    allowed me to hone in on the ability to solve problems. And I
    tried to use that as a United States Senator and also will
    hopefully use it, if confirmed, in my role as the new
    Ambassador of the United States for those two great countries.
        As was referenced earlier, I have over 30 years of public
    service, starting as an assessor, selectman, State rep, State
    senator, the United States Senate. I served on the Committee on
    Armed Services, ranking member of Airland; Committee on
    Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs where I was the
    ranking member on Federal Financial Management, Government
    Information, and International Security; Veterans Affairs, as
    well as Small Business and Entrepreneurship; four great
    committees where I enjoyed working with many of you on solving
    many of our country's problems.
        Some of the highlights and things that I am most proud of
    is working with Senator Gillibrand on the Stock Act to prohibit
    members of the executive branch and Congress from using insider
    information to benefit themselves, working with Senator Carper
    on good government initiatives. As you all know, that is his
    thing, and we just went after every wasteful dollar to try to
    make it better for the American taxpayer. And then, obviously,
    with Senator McCaskill working on the Arlington Cemetery bill
    to make sure our veterans were buried with dignity and honor.
        I could go on and on. I was very proud of being the lead
    Republican sponsor on the reauthorization of the Violence
    Against Women Act and also working to deal with our Hire Hero
    Veterans bill to give our veterans a chance to be re-employed.
        For someone like me whose mom and dad were married and
    divorced four times each and who lived in 17 houses by the time
    I was 18, as Senator Markey is aware of being from
    Massachusetts and being my former Congressman and somebody I
    always have looked up to--a lot of violence in the family.
    There were a lot of tough choices. I had to grow up pretty
    quickly. And to think that, you know, Mom was on welfare for a
    period of time. And I remember her working two or three jobs to
    keep a roof over our heads and keep my sister and me safe.
        And it is those life experiences--if you said, boy, you are
    going to be a United States Senator some day, it was very
    unlikely. But I was blessed and I am still blessed to have an
    opportunity to serve this great country. Being a United States
    Senator was one of the greatest honors of my life.
        And my wife and family are looking forward to serving not
    only the President and his team but you as Members of the
    Senate. You know how I am and you know that if there is an
    issue, you just need to pick up the phone and call if you have
    any specific concerns about what is happening in that area. And
    I will be, quite frankly, looking back for your guidance and
    help in those areas as well.
        Throughout my life, no matter what job I have had, no
    matter what experiences I have had, there is one experience
    that trumps all others and that is being married to my partner
    and friend Gail for over 30 years and father to my two great
    children. Why do you always get emotional when you talk about
    your family? I am sorry. Ayla is here. She came in from
    Nashville. She is a successful music singer in Nashville. And
    she is here with her friend Rob. I appreciate them coming.
    Arianna is here somewhere. Arianna is in her fourth year at
    Cornell Vet School. She took time off from her surgical
    rotations to come down. And her husband Jimmy is here. He works
    for the Justice Department for 4 years, and he is going to be
    in the new class of the FBI academy. So we are very proud of
    each and every one of our family members.
        Mr. Chairman, when the President asked me to serve in this
    post in New Zealand and Samoa, I want you to know that it was
    my first choice. It was my choice. I wanted to go to an area
    that, quite frankly, plays an integral and key role in the
    Pacific region, a real leader, an independent, thoughtful
    leader in New Zealand when it comes to addressing that region's
    very serious needs and concerns, especially with regard to
    China and its expansionism, changing the law of the sea and the
    law of the air, and building islands and militarizing them that
    really just changed international law as we have all known
    them.
        And in addition to that, North Korea, you know, the
    belligerence and the constant testing of missiles. New Zealand
    plays a very key role as a member of the Five Eyes intelligence
    network to not only share information with our other partners
    but also in the war on terror, leading up to not only side by
    side helping us in the war against terror but also dealing in
    humanitarian efforts to make other people's lives better and
    more fulfilling.
        New Zealand has always been an unwavering friend and
    partner to the United States, as evidenced by the fact that
    they have men and women who have served and have lost life and
    limb in the battle against terror. Right now, they are our
    tenth partner when it comes to dealing with ISIS and that
    battle that really needs to be taken on on a worldwide basis.
        Their efforts to help reconstruct and train in Iraq the
    police and military forces is amazing, and they need to be
    commended. And I want to thank the citizens of New Zealand and
    the men and women who have served in that effort.
        I have had the opportunity to visit China, Taiwan, and
    Japan. And visiting those places, as well as my cumulative
    experience not only in this body but in other bodies, has given
    me a solid understanding of the region. And we talked about the
    expansionism of China, the belligerence of North Korea and what
    they are doing. These are important areas in which we need to
    really stay focused and work with our friends in that region.
    And certainly New Zealand is one of those friends.
        And just as there are challenges in the Pacific region,
    there are amazing opportunities. I believe notwithstanding what
    is happening with TPP, that there are amazing opportunities to
    increase trade, to increase security operations, work in
    training exercises with our military, work on cybersecurity,
    Senator, which I know you are very concerned about in that
    region as evidenced by what happened recently. So I look at
    what is happening right now in that part of the world as one of
    the most active, vibrant, necessary areas where we need to play
    a key role. So I am honored to have that opportunity, if
    confirmed, to participate in that process.
        Are there opportunities for bilateral trade with New
    Zealand? That is up to the U.S. Trade Representative. If
    confirmed, I look forward to playing a role to trying to bring
    the countries together to maximize any and all trading
    opportunities that we have with New Zealand and Samoa.
        I feel honored to be nominated by President Trump to
    represent the United States as Ambassador to two such
    culturally and economically diverse countries. And if
    confirmed, within the first month and a half to 2 months of
    service, I plan to, obviously, go to the embassy in Samoa to
    make sure that we can establish and continue to nurture those
    amazing relations because if you remember from our
    conversations, we actually have a maritime border, American
    Samoa, with the Independent State of Samoa. And there are some
    very real drug trafficking, illegal fishing, safety and
    security, natural disaster opportunities that we can really do
    well to expand upon. And we have a large Samoan population in
    the United States, and there is a symbiotic relationship there.
    And they need to be treated with dignity and respect as well.
    So I look forward to that opportunity.
        Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would like to say to you and
    the committee that I have had a blessed life, notwithstanding
    those challenges, Senator, that you referenced. And being
    nominated to this position has been truly a humbling process. I
    have shard the training and other things that we have gone
    through as a family to get to this point in time. And I pledge
    to you all and to the President and the American people that I
    will work tirelessly and professionally to faithfully represent
    American interests in this ambassadorial position and in
    whatever capacity I am called to serve.
        I appreciate the opportunity to appear, and I am certainly
    eager to take any and all questions that the committee may
    have.
        [Mr. Brown's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Scott P. Brown

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members
    of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I am honored to appear
    before you today as President Trump's nominee to serve as the United
    States Ambassador to New Zealand and the Independent State of Samoa. I
    want to thank President Trump for his trust and for giving me the
    opportunity to represent the interests of the United States of America
    in these two wonderful countries.
        In addition, I want to express my gratitude to Secretary of State
    Rex Tillerson for supporting this appointment, and I very much look
    forward to working with him and his team to achieve our foreign policy
    goals in the months and years to come.
        Finally, I am thankful for the opportunity to appear before this
    honorable committee. As a former member of this body, I want to say
    thank you to Senator Warren, Senator Markey, Senator Shaheen and
    Senator Hassan, among others, for their early indication of support for
    my candidacy.
        Before I begin, I would like to express the thanks of me and my
    family for the patience, mentoring, guidance and friendship that
    Senator Collins has shown me over the years. Not only is she my sister
    Robin's U.S. Senator in Maine, but she has been someone that I have had
    a great amount of love and respect for over the years. I want to thank
    her for her dedication to public service and commend her for her 6357th
    consecutive vote in the US Senate. It is a record that will not only
    increase, but will be exceedingly difficult to break. Thank you Senator
    Collins.
        For well over 30 years, I have served my town, state and country in
    many different appointed and elected capacities. I served in the
    military for almost 35 years, joining the Army National Guard at the
    age of 19 after the big blizzard of 1978. After that tragic storm, I
    saw how our Massachusetts National Guardsmen saved the lives of our
    citizens, inspiring me to emulate their call to service. Soon
    thereafter, I raised my hand and took the oath to serve, and joined as
    an enlisted man. During my time in the military, I was branch qualified
    as an Infantry Officer, Quartermaster Officer, and a Judge Advocate
    General. Two years ago I retired at
        the rank of colonel, with my last four years of service being at
    the Pentagon as the Deputy to the Chief Legal Counsel for the Joint
    Chief of the National Guard Bureau. During that time at the Pentagon,
    my team and I wrote the sexual assault regulations and set up the
    investigation teams that are being used today in the National Guard
    with great effectiveness and results.
        In addition, I have been an attorney in private practice since
    1985, and I am confident that, if confirmed, I can bring the
    interpersonal skills and problem solving ability that I have honed in
    that role to my new role as Ambassador.
        In public service, I was honored to serve as a town Assessor,
    Selectman, Massachusetts State Representative and State Senator. From
    2010-2013, I served with most of you as a United States Senator from
    the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. During my time in the U.S. Senate, I
    served on the Committee on Armed Services, as the Ranking Member on
    Airland, on the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
    Affairs, and as the Ranking Member on Federal Financial Management,
    Government Information and International Security, the Committee on
    Veterans' Affairs and the Committee on Small Business and
    Entrepreneurship.
        I was proud to have been recognized as one of the most bipartisan
    Senators during my years here. Among the accomplishments I am proud of,
    I worked with Senator Gillibrand to pass the Stock Act--which stops
    insider trading for members of Congress--Senator Carper on good
    government and fraud, waste and abuse issues, Senator McCaskill to pass
    the Arlington Cemetery Bill, and many other Senators on the Hire A Hero
    Veteran's Bill, the elimination of the 3 percent withholding, no
    contracting with the enemy, and re-authorizing the Violence Against
    Women Act (VAWA) and more.
        For someone like me, whose mom and dad were married four times
    each, living in 17 homes by the time I was 18, being an abuse survivor
    and my family being periodic welfare recipients, I remember my mom
    having to work two to three jobs to keep a roof over our heads to keep
    my sister and me safe. For me, becoming a U.S. Senator was not only
    unlikely, but without a doubt was one of the greatest honors of my
    life. Being asked to serve again as an ambassador to two great
    countries is another great honor.
        However, no matter what jobs I have had throughout my life, or
    political or civilian capacities for which I served, there is one
    experience that trumps all other accomplishments. That is being married
    to my partner and wife of 30 years, Gail and being the father to our
    two children Ayla, a country music star living in Nashville, and
    Arianna, a third year Veterinary Student at Cornell University. With
    the Chairman's permission, I would like to introduce those members of
    my immediate family who are with me: Gail, Ayla, Arianna, Jimmy, mom.
        Mr. Chairman, when the President asked me where I would like to
    serve, the posting in New Zealand and Samoa was my first choice.
        I am honored to be considered for the posts in New Zealand and
    Samoa and excited for the opportunity to serve in Asia-Pacific because
    of the region's incredible importance to the world's security, economic
    prosperity, and innovation opportunities. There is great potential for
    us to improve and strengthen our ties in all of those areas.
        If I am confirmed as Ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, I will do
    all I can to grow our ties with New Zealand and Samoa and ensure
    stability, security, and prosperity for our three countries. With the
    help of our diplomatic and national security professionals at the State
    Department and in all other parts of our government, I will advance
    American interests and support these two longstanding partners.
        New Zealand has historically been an unwavering friend of the
    United States. That long and remarkable history has had its challenges,
    but hard work and strong communication efforts have made our ties even
    stronger. The U.S.-New Zealand relationship has also been strengthened
    due to New Zealand's commitment to our shared war against terror as
    well as reconstruction and stability efforts in the Middle East. I
    would like to publically thank the citizens of New Zealand and
    especially the men and women of its armed forces. If confirmed as
    Ambassador, I will help to deepen our security relationship.
        I have had the opportunity to visit China, Taiwan, and Japan.
    Visiting those places, as well as my cumulative experience in
    government and military service, has given me a firsthand understanding
    of the region. Chinese military and economic expansion, as well as the
    North Korean nuclear threat, pose a challenge to American interests in
    the Asia-Pacific region and the world. There are many important areas
    in which we need to work with our partners in New Zealand, to properly
    deter potential conflicts in this region.
        Just as there are challenges in the Pacific region, there are also
    opportunities. The United States is one of New Zealand's top trading
    partners. If confirmed, I hope to dramatically assist in the promotion
    of even greater economic, scientific, and cultural exchanges between
    the United States and New Zealand, including strengthening Pacific
    cooperation. With regard to investments, I will focus on both New
    Zealand's investment in the United States, and American investment in
    New Zealand.
        I am also committed to assisting in increasing bilateral trade and
    commerce opportunities, assisting with the illegal fishing concerns,
    and recognizing and helping to solve environmental issues. In addition,
    I look forward to working on cyber security issues, and ensuring strong
    intellectual property protection and enforcement as we address our
    mutual priority intellectual property issues. Above all, my greatest
    responsibility will be to assist and protect the interests of U.S.
    citizens who are either living in or visiting New Zealand and Samoa.
        I feel truly honored to be nominated by President Trump to
    represent the United States as Ambassador to two such culturally and
    economically diverse countries. If confirmed, within the first two
    months of service, I plan to visit the independent State of Samoa,
    which shares a maritime border with the United States. The Independent
    State of Samoa and parts of American Samoa have experienced serious
    environmental disasters, including a devastating tsunami that destroyed
    many parts of the islands. Being an island state presents many
    different challenges and opportunities. If confirmed, I plan to learn
    and try to understand how the United States can assist Samoa and
    strengthen our relationship. That relationship was enhanced in 2012
    when both countries signed a Mutual Law Enforcement Agreement, which
    allows Samoan maritime officials to utilize U.S. Coast Guard and Navy
    Vessels in policing Samoan waters. We will continue to work in
    cooperation on maritime issues, including putting a stop to the
    trafficking of drugs and human beings and halting illegal fishing. For
    over 50 years, the Peace Corps has maintained a vibrant and necessary
    assistance program in the country and I look forward to learning more
    about how we can assist even more.
        As you are aware, American Samoa has a strong cultural and
    geographic bond with not only the Independent State of Samoa, but also
    has a strong bond with Samoan communities in the United States. It will
    be important to cooperate closely with the American Samoan delegation
    to the U.S. Congress to see how we can improve trade and promote
    tourism and democracy.
        Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would like to say to you and the
    committee, that I have had a blessed life. Being nominated to this
    position has been a humbling process. I pledge to you, our President
    and the American people that I will work tirelessly and professionally
    to faithfully represent American interests in this Ambassadorial
    position, and in whatever capacity I am called to do so.
        I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today, and I
    would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.

        Senator Gardner. Thank you very much for that testimony.
        And we will begin with questions, and I will just start
    with this. You talked about the role that New Zealand plays in
    the Pacific. Obviously, New Zealand plays a very important role
    in terms of political stability and economic stability and
    security as well.
        What role as Ambassador would you play to help further New
    Zealand's role in the region?
        Mr. Brown. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        If confirmed, I would obviously seek immediately the
    appropriate briefings dealing with commerce, with security, and
    any opportunities that this President, this administration, and
    you as Senators want to put forth. My understanding, with all
    the research that I have done and speaking and listening and
    learning during training, is that there are some really
    wonderful opportunities. We have about $11.5 billion to $12
    billion of trade going back and forth, a slight trade deficit,
    but we have a surplus when it comes to services. The areas in
    particular where we provide planes, cars, replacement parts,
    high tech, biotech opportunities--also, there is a relationship
    now with NASA and trying to expand job opportunities in that
    field. We also have, on the other hand, beef, lamb, wine. So
    there is a pretty active and vibrant trading between the two
    countries right now.
        And I am hopeful that if confirmed, I will have an
    opportunity to work with the Commerce Department and the U.S.
    Trade Representative to find other niches where not only U.S.
    citizens can invest in New Zealand to create jobs but also,
    more importantly, the other way around, have New Zealand, which
    they are already the number two investment in the United States
    for that country, try to increase those opportunities.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Brown.
        I want to make sure that we get to the other Senators who
    have attended the hearing this morning. So I will turn right
    now to Senator Markey and then come back for questions.
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        In my office, we spoke about the fishing industry and the
    involuntary servitude issues that New Zealand has. Could you
    expand upon that, explain to the committee what your views are
    in terms of what the American position should be in dealing
    with those issues?
        Mr. Brown. Well, Senator, first of all, if confirmed, I
    look forward to really doing a deep dive into those very
    important issues. From the research and other information I
    have gathered, Senator Shaheen and you, Senator Markey, and
    former Congressman Barney Frank, we worked tirelessly on
    fishing issues. It is something that is very personal to me and
    hopefully, if confirmed, I will be able to bring that expertise
    or maybe suggestions or new ideas to the people of New Zealand
    and Samoa.
        That being said, with regard to, if I may expand upon it a
    little bit, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and
    involuntary servitude, New Zealand is a tier 1 country. They
    have done amazing work in addressing those very real concerns
    because there is a flow from China, Indonesia, and other parts
    of that region in or through New Zealand and/or through Samoa.
    The Government of New Zealand has recognized it. They have
    passed legislation not only for those issues, but in addition,
    for the victims who have been affected by that.
        With regard to your specific question, something that
    really kind of stuck out when I was doing my research and doing
    that deep dive to the limit that I can was the fact that,
    obviously, fishing is huge. It is an island nation. And there
    are folks who will sign onto a fishing vessel and, you know,
    they will say, hey, come on board. You will be the first mate
    and you will get paid X. Then they get on board and it is not
    quite what it seems to be. And New Zealand has recognized that,
    and they have passed legislation to address that type of thing
    where they now have mechanisms in place to not only do spot
    boarding, spot checking, they keep excellent records of boats
    and vessels that have a history of that. And they have passed
    legislation, maritime legislation, in dealing with that type of
    arrangement.
        Quite frankly, I had no idea it was actually something that
    happened. It is not only that. It is in other industries
    potentially, tourism, agriculture, and the like. And I look
    forward, if confirmed, to really learning more about it and
    trying to offer any suggestions based on our experiences.
        Senator Markey. There was a lull in the relationship
    between the United States and New Zealand in defense
    cooperation in the 1980s, and that relationship has been
    rebuilt. How does your experience in the National Guard inform
    this relationship in terms of what you think might be possible
    in the years ahead?
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
        As the chairman referenced earlier, we have had a historic
    and wonderful partnership with New Zealand and Australia
    through the ANZUS Treaty. There was a point when New Zealand
    changed its position on nuclear proliferation, the use of
    nuclear weapons and the like, and the United States did not
    agree with that. Obviously, if confirmed, I am going to do a
    deeper diver and get the appropriate briefings.
        But that seems to have warmed somewhat in that to celebrate
    the country's 75th anniversary, the New Zealand Royal Navy
    asked if we would send a representative. And the USS Sampson
    was able to go there. There has always been a--recently since
    that change, the Government of New Zealand prohibits any type
    of nuclear militarized or powered vessels from coming into
    their ports. That is their choice. We went in and were asked to
    come in. We were approved at the highest levels by the New
    Zealand Government. And it was really a wonderful first step in
    rehabilitating that relationship.
        Sadly or ironically, while the Sampson was there, the
    country of New Zealand had a 7.8 on the Richter scale
    earthquake that really did some very serious damage to that
    country. And the Sampson was asked to stay for relief,
    humanitarian and other disaster relief. And I am understanding
    only from what I have read and researched--and obviously, if
    confirmed, I want to do the deeper dive--that the people of New
    Zealand were very, appreciative of that humanitarian effort.
    And it showed I think the United States and New Zealand--we are
    really brothers when it comes to these issues. We are people of
    the world. I believe we are one of the most philanthropic
    countries in the world and the most helpful people in the
    world, and I believe New Zealanders are very similar. And it
    just created a great opportunity.
        So, Senator, to answer your question about my military
    experience, I look forward to getting the appropriate
    briefings, if confirmed, and meeting with their minister of
    defense and see if there are opportunities to do more in terms
    of cooperation in that region.
        Senator Markey. And, Mr. Chairman, I was able to talk for
    about 45 minutes with Senator Brown in my office, and I felt
    that he had a real grasp of all the key issues that confront
    our relationship with New Zealand. I would just like to put
    that on the record as well.
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Markey.
        Senator Portman?
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I appreciate, Senator Brown, you talking about the USS
    Sampson experience and what a change that they not only
    permitted us to be there but then looked to us for help and we
    responded in kind. And that is consistent with the broader
    relationship. So I think your being there will help to cement
    that relationship in so many ways, but one is the military
    cooperation and the ability to be of assistance in something
    like a natural disaster that you talked to me about in my
    office.
        I want to ask you something that you may not be able to
    talk about to the extent that you have classified information
    that is not appropriate. But it is about the special
    relationship we have with New Zealand as a partner in the Five
    Eyes intelligence group. What do you think the value of that is
    to the United States, to the extent you can address it? And how
    does that work so folks who are not knowledgeable about the
    importance of that can better understand it?
        Mr. Brown. Well, Senator, thank you for your question.
        And I have not been briefed yet. If confirmed, I will get
    those appropriate briefings before I head out to post. But from
    what I understand, there has been a very positive relationship,
    obviously, between the United States, Canada, Great Britain,
    Australia, and New Zealand to gather and share information for
    security purposes to understand what is happening throughout
    the world.
        I know that we value very, very much New Zealand's
    contributions and, quite frankly, guidance in a whole host of
    issues in that region because that is their turf. And the fact
    that they are there--and they are in an interesting position in
    which they do a tremendous amount of trade. China is their
    number one trading partner.
        And the thing that has really kind of stuck out with me is
    the fact that even though there is that business relationship,
    that trade relationship, they are not afraid to stand up and
    say, excuse me, China, by the way, the fact that you are
    building islands and militarizing them and changing the law of
    the air and the law of sea and international law as has been in
    place forever, we do not like that. And I think that says a lot
    about not only the leadership in New Zealand but the fact that
    they are not afraid to stand up and be counted.
        So I look forward, Senator, once confirmed, to learn more
    about that and be our country's representative in assisting in
    that area.
        Senator Portman. Yes. They are fiercely independent, kind
    of like some New Englanders I know.
        Senator Portman. You know, it is interesting you say that,
    Senator. They are fiercely independent. And you cannot tell
    them what you want. You have to ask them. And one of the things
    that my family and I--my wife and I look forward to in
    particular is getting a fair go by the people of New Zealand.
    What that means is a fair shot. Going down there, we are a
    clean slate. We want to be there. We are eager to go. We want
    to serve. We want to listen and learn and then bring that back
    to our citizens and to you as Senators.
        Senator Portman. You mentioned China. New Zealand and China
    signed a free trade agreement back in 2008. And since that
    time, the trade between the two has grown significantly. Now
    they are negotiating an upgrade to their FTA, their free trade
    agreement, and exploring how New Zealand can fit into China's
    One Belt, One Road initiative, sort of recreating the Silk
    Road.
        In your view, might this developing trade relationship with
    China be a problem for us? And what should the United States do
    in response to it? And how can we perhaps deepen our economic
    ties with New Zealand at this time?
        Mr. Brown. Well, as you referenced, Senator, they are
    renegotiating the free trade agreement, and if confirmed, I
    will learn more about that, obviously. But from all my
    research, we are in fact the number three trading partner. I
    would like to be number two and potentially number one. Can
    that happen? I am not sure, but I know that if there is an
    opportunity for a business in New Zealand to come into the
    United States and I am notified of it, I am going to notify the
    Commerce Department and the U.S. Trade Representative and make
    sure that we can make that happen. If there are opportunities
    and niches that we as businesses in the United States can
    actually do business in New Zealand like we do with planes and
    cars and now with NASA working on the weather balloon
    experimentation, I want to seek those opportunities out. I
    think that is part of a role of an ambassador is to work with
    the business leaders and civilian leadership to try to enhance
    those great relationships. I think there is a great
    opportunity, subject obviously to many factors, to work in that
    regard and improve that relationship.
        Senator Portman. Just one final question and give you a
    chance to talk about Samoa for a second because I know this is
    an ambassadorship actually to New Zealand and Samoa, as
    explained to me.
        Mr. Brown. Correct.
        Senator Portman. I did not know that previously.
        And then, of course, the special relationship with
    Australia in that region. As I said, you are going to be the
    first Ambassador confirmed and maybe the first one for a while
    in that region.
        But in terms of Samoa, what are your objectives there? What
    would be your hopes to be able to achieve with regard to our
    relationship with Samoa?
        Mr. Brown. As I said in my original testimony, Samoa--we
    share a border. They are 3,000 miles away from New Zealand by
    the way. So it is not like I am just going to hop on a plane
    and I will be there in an hour. It is going to be something
    that we are going to have to plan for a good week away.
        That being said, it is going to be very exciting to work
    with an island country that we actually share a border with and
    the fact that they have actually been subjected to a tsunami
    and had joint needs and we were able to come in and help with
    those needs.
        The Independent State of Samoa is just that. It is an
    independent state. It has a very strong and stable government,
    wonderful people who are looking forward to living and growing
    and taking care of their families like everybody else in the
    world. And they deserve the representation that they are going
    to get, just like New Zealand does, regardless of its size. So
    I anticipate going there and working with the consul general
    there. We have an embassy but there is one American
    representative, and we have a larger staff, obviously--if
    confirmed, going and listening and learning to what his needs
    are and then moving forward in trying to develop those
    relationships. I am excited to have two countries.
        Senator Portman. Well, we are excited that you are
    interested in serving, and we look forward to getting the
    confirmation process going here in this committee and then
    helping you on the floor and then seeing you serve our great
    country in that important region of the world.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Portman.
        Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And congratulations, Senator Brown. I certainly very much
    appreciate your willingness to continue to serve the country.
    And welcome to your family, to Gail. I know that when we you
    serve, Gail serves too. So we very much appreciate that joint
    effort.
        And thank you for taking some time to sit down with me and
    talk about how you view this position. I very much appreciated
    your insights into New Zealand. And as we said, you are going
    to a beautiful country that has been a very good friend of the
    United States for a very long time.
        And I want to follow up a little bit on Senator Portman's
    question about China and the trade relationship because, as you
    know, New Zealand was a founding member of the Trans-Pacific
    Strategic Economic Partnership, which was really the foundation
    for TPP. And without that, as you pointed out, there is a
    question about how New Zealand will continue to go forward with
    China.
        So I know you have talked about the potential trade
    opportunities between the United States and New Zealand. So can
    you talk a little bit about where you think some of those
    opportunities lie?
        Mr. Brown. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        As we discussed and as you just referenced, we have pulled
    out, it appears, from TPP. New Zealand has moved forward in
    that regard. I learned today that they are moving forward with
    Japan as well.
        So subject obviously to confirmation and getting the
    details of that particular relationship and what the
    opportunities are, through the research that I have actually
    been doing, I think there is a great opportunity actually to
    continue to work on the high tech, biotech areas that we really
    have expertise in. In addition, there is a wonderful
    opportunity I think to help them with their fishing and some of
    the illegal fishing that is happening there, to give them some
    guidance on what we have done in our region to protect fishing
    stocks and protect that livelihood. There are some potential
    opportunities dealing with climate. It is something that is
    very real and serious there. And I look forward to going and
    listening and learning and understanding what their challenges
    are, then conveying it back to you and the administration to
    see where we can find common ground.
        Without having been given the appropriate economic
    briefings yet, I can only guess and I think that would be
    inappropriate. But if there are opportunities, Senator, if
    there are opportunities in New Hampshire, for example, please
    note that you have my word that I will work very closely with
    you to make sure we create jobs in New Hampshire and make sure
    we can create an opportunity to grow and expand jobs in our
    State.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. And I
    know Senator Markey talked about your history in Massachusetts,
    but I would point out that you are currently a resident of New
    Hampshire. So I especially appreciate that.
        And you mentioned climate change. And I know that you have
    supported alternative energies, solar and wind and nuclear
    power, as a way to reduce our U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
    Can you talk about other potential areas of cooperation with
    New Zealand as we look at our alternative energy future and
    what we need to do?
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
        Yes. I am an all-of-the-above approach: wind, solar,
    nuclear, hydro, geothermal, siting, permitting. I think it is
    really an entire and total package. And if confirmed, I look
    forward to learning more about what New Zealand's needs are,
    but I know they have done a tremendous amount to try to reduce
    their use of fossil fuels and dealing with the issues that
    dramatically affect that region by using wind and solar.
        If there are opportunities, once again, in our country to
    bring those goods to New Zealand, I am all ears, and I will
    work with you and work with anybody in this building, to
    include the Commerce Department and the Trade Representative,
    to say, hey, by the way, we have a better way of doing it. Can
    we bring the people over to talk to you? And that is, I think,
    one of the most important jobs that an ambassador has is that
    facilitator to try to create economic opportunity.
        Senator Shaheen. Absolutely.
        Mr. Brown. So, Senator, I am all ears. If you have
    suggestions, when I find out, I am happy to personally brief
    you and see if there are any joint things that we can work on.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        And finally, you referenced this in your opening statement
    and some of your responses, but that is the important role that
    the New Zealand has in the South China Sea or in terms of what
    is happening in the South China Sea and what China is doing.
    How important is our relationship with New Zealand as we look
    at trying to continue to deter some of the expansionist
    tendencies of China and the concern that our other allies in
    the Pacific region have about what China is doing?
        Mr. Brown. I think the concern about China is real as I
    have said publicly when I was a U.S. Senator. We took action in
    dealing with the manipulation of China's currency. You were
    there. You voted on it. It passed 100 to nothing, if my memory
    serves me.
        Once again, if confirmed, I am going to immediately get the
    appropriate briefings as to the extent of what is really
    happening, but based on what I have seen and read, there is no
    real reason to be building islands and militarizing and
    changing the law of the air and law of the sea and changing
    potential trade and travel routes in that part of the world
    just because.
        And the thing that I love about what New Zealand has done,
    even though they have a very strong trading relationship with
    them, they were the first ones--one of the first countries to
    actually stand up and be counted and be noticed and point out
    their objections to those actions.
        In addition, when North Korea, as it is still lobbing
    missiles around the region--they were one of the first ones to
    say this is completely unacceptable. And I love the independent
    spirit of the New Zealand people based on what I have learned
    and heard, and I have been asking a thousand questions every
    day.
        So rest assured, they are a critical friend and partner
    when it comes to helping us understand what is going on in that
    region. And without Australia and New Zealand and our other
    partners in that part of the world, I think we would be at a
    tactical disadvantage. So I am excited to try to enhance and
    improve that relationship.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. And again,
    thank you for your willingness to serve. I look forward to
    working with you when you are confirmed.
        Mr. Brown. Same here, Senator. Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
        And, Senator Brown, I want to reiterate some of the
    comments that have been made as we look at the interests of the
    United States as it rests with the rest of the region, how we
    make sure that we are working with New Zealand in our interests
    and helping further their interests because they do overlap
    many times and making sure that we can coordinate that work
    together. Many of us on the committee are pursuing efforts in
    Asia that would help provide reassurance to the entire region
    and then, of course, New Zealand, Australia--the work that they
    can do in China and trade opportunities with our Asia partners
    to make sure that we are furthering interest in trade,
    furthering interest in security, furthering interest in
    economic opportunities. I look forward to the leadership that
    you are going to provide when this committee gives you that
    fair go for your nomination.
        And so I want to thank you for attending today's hearing,
    to everyone here, to Senator Brown for providing us with your
    testimony and responses.
        For the information of the committee members, the record
    will remain open until the close of business on Friday,
    including for members to submit questions for the record.
        I want to thank your family and to certainly kindly ask you
    to make sure that he gets his homework done on those questions
    for the record as soon as possible. Those responses will be
    made part of the record.
        And with that, thank you all. The committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 2:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Scott Brown by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democracy is something that I
    have taken seriously throughout my career and I am proud of my record
    on these critical issues. I am very proud to say that I helped rewrite
    the sexual assault regulations for the National Guard, while performing
    my National Guard service at the Pentagon. These regulations were
    implemented and are being used today with great success.
        Additionally, as a Member of the U.S. Senate, I was involved in
    supporting legislation and working with advocates to prohibit child and
    human trafficking. I am grateful to have been part of that legislation,
    and if confirmed, will continue to work to combat this battle as
    Ambassador.
        Finally, as someone who has endured hardships myself, I understand
    the need to make every effort to combat sexual abuse and protect the
    rights of victims. I have worked on these issues for a very long time
    and have been fortunate to be recognized and receive awards for my
    efforts. Should I be confirmed as Ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa,
    I would continue to prioritize this work.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in New
    Zealand and Samoa? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in New
    Zealand and Samoa? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. As I said in my hearing, New Zealand is a Tier 1 country
    with respect to trafficking in persons, and they have done great work
    so far to address this issue through legislation and stepped up law
    enforcement. In just this past year New Zealand has taken a number of
    additional measures to increase awareness, crack down on traffickers,
    and engage civil society. Samoa, as an island nation, faces similar
    challenges with respect to trafficking in persons. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with New Zealand and Samoan officials to continue
    addressing these issues and share best practices between our two
    governments.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response?

        Answer. New Zealand takes the issue of trafficking in persons
    seriously and I look forward to partnering with their authorities to
    find better ways to address it, as well as other human rights issues.
    Thanks to our close bilateral relationship and New Zealand's commitment
    to human rights, they are natural partners for addressing human rights
    issues not only in New Zealand, but in the wider Pacific region and
    beyond. I look forward to working with them to advance these issues.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in New Zealand and Samoa?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society, and non-governmental organizations in New Zealand and Samoa.

        Question 5. Will you engage with New Zealand and Samoa on matters
    of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with New Zealand and Samoa
    authorities to engage on matters of human rights, civil rights, and
    governance. I will also seek to exchange best practices between our
    governments.

        Question 6. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the executive branch?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do at the Mission to
    promote, mentor and support your staff that come from diverse
    backgrounds and underrepresented groups in the Foreign and Civil
    Service? What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at
    the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with all members of the embassy
    community to promote and foster an inclusive and diverse embassy team.
    Encouraging this type of community will foster creativity and
    productivity for our whole workforce.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Scott Brown by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. The environment in New Zealand continues to be
    challenging for U.S. innovative biopharmaceutical companies looking to
    invest and compete successfully. Specifically, significant challenges
    exist regarding intellectual property protections and transparency in
    decisions made by the Government. How will you work with New Zealand to
    improve the business environment to ensure that innovative industries,
    such as the biopharmaceutical industry, have the protections and
    security necessary to succeed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to increasing bilateral trade
    and commerce opportunities for all U.S. companies in New Zealand. As I
    said in my hearing, I look forward to working to ensure New Zealand has
    strong intellectual property protection and enforcement as we address
    our mutual priority intellectual property issues. The United States is
    an important trading partner for New Zealand, and I will work with USTR
    and other government agencies to ensure U.S. companies have all the
    support they need to succeed and thrive in the New Zealand market.

                                   __________

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 18, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker, Risch, Flake, Gardner, Young,
    Barrasso, Portman, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen, Coons, Murphy,
    and Merkley.

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

        The Chairman.  The committee will come to order.
        The ranking member and I will defer on our opening comments
    out of our tremendous respect for Lamar Alexander, senior
    Senator from Tennessee, our great friend. We appreciate him
    being here. Senator Alexander, please take your time in
    welcoming our distinguished guest today and our friend. When
    you are finished, you can certainly go about doing your other
    duties. You do not have to stay.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. LAMAR ALEXANDER,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

        Senator Alexander. Thank you, Senator Corker, Senator
    Cardin. It is kind of intimidating to be down here in the
    witness chair. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman.  Well, you have done it before.
        Senator Alexander. I have done it before, and I am sure
    this confirmation hearing will go better than mine did 25 years
    ago. [Laughter.]
        Senator Alexander. I am here today to strongly recommend
    and respectfully recommend to the committee that it approve the
    President's nomination of Bill Hagerty as Ambassador to Japan.
        In 2013, when Bill Hagerty was the Commissioner of Economic
    Development for Tennessee, he gave a speech entirely in
    Japanese at the American embassy in Tokyo. Now, I have looked
    it up. There have been 16 United States Ambassadors to Tokyo, a
    very distinguished group, since World War II: A five-star
    general, two former Senate Majority Leaders, a former Vice
    President of the United States, and a former Speaker of the
    House, the daughter of the former President. And so far as I
    know, none of them were able to do what Bill Hagerty did in
    2013 when he made a speech entirely in Japanese at the American
    embassy in Tokyo. That is just one reason why I think Bill
    Hagerty is one of President Trump's best appointments.
        He was born in Tennessee, graduated from Vanderbilt
    University. He was associate editor of the Law Review. He
    worked as a consultant for the Boston Consulting Group. During
    his final 3 years, he lived in Tokyo and he served as senior
    executive managing their clients around Asia. He was selected
    by President George H.W. Bush to be on his staff. There he
    worked on trade, commerce, defense and telecommunications
    issues. He was a White House fellow. He was founder and
    chairman of a company in private life that became the third
    largest medical research company. He founded his own private
    equity and investment firm.
        From 2011 to 2015, he was the Commissioner of Economic and
    Community Development for Tennessee. And in that role, working
    with Governor Haslam, secured $15 billion in capital investment
    and 90,000 jobs for our State. Two of those years, Tennessee
    was the number one State for economic development and number
    one State for job creation through foreign direct investment.
        He is a distinguished Eagle Scout. He was head of a capital
    campaign for the scouts. He served on the board of the Far East
    Council of the scouts, encouraging the growth of Boy Scouts
    throughout Asia. One way he intends to continue that mission is
    that his two sons, who are here today, will join their
    respective troops in Japan following his confirmation. And his
    wife Chrissy would want me to quickly add that there are two
    aspiring Girl Scouts in their family who will have their time
    to do that too.
        It is not only one of the best important, one of the most
    important. There is a reason why we have had such a
    distinguished list of Ambassadors since World War II, including
    our former Majority Leader Howard Baker from Tennessee. Mike
    Mansfield, another former Majority Leader who was Ambassador,
    used to say in every speech he made that the Japanese-American
    alliance is the most important two-country relationship in the
    world, bar none. Ambassador Mansfield said that so often that
    Americans in Tokyo used to refer to our embassy as the Bar None
    Ranch.
        If you will permit a little parochialism, Mr. Hagerty comes
    from a State, Tennessee, that has the most important
    relationship with Japan of any State, bar none. That began
    about 40 years ago. I remember President Carter saying to me as
    a new Governor and to the other Governors go to Japan, persuade
    them to make here what they sell here. Off we all went. During
    my first 24 months as Governor, I spent 3 weeks in Japan and 8
    weeks on Japan-American relations. I explained to Tennesseans
    that I thought I could do more good for our State in Japan than
    I could in Washington, D.C. That turned out to be true. Nissan,
    Bridgestone, Komatsu, other companies came. By the mid-1980s,
    we had about 10 percent of all the Japanese capital investment
    in the United States. This has continued. Nissan and
    Bridgestone have their largest plants--or North America's
    largest auto plants and tire plants in Tennessee. And with Mr.
    Hagerty's help, Bridgestone, as well as Nissan, has decided to
    locate its North American headquarters in our State.
        So Bill Hagerty, if approved by the committee, would go to
    Japan not only able to speak the language but having lived and
    worked there and understanding how close ties between Japan and
    the United States can create bigger paychecks for Americans, as
    well as for the Japanese.
        So my hope is that the committee will promptly approve his
    nomination and that he will soon be on his job and his children
    will be in their respective scout troop in Japan.
        Thank you very much for allowing me to come this morning.
        The Chairman.  Thank you so much for being here. That was
    an outstanding introduction. And certainly I know you know him
    well.
        I think that Lamar has done an outstanding job of laying
    out these outstanding credentials, and I agree that you are one
    of the most outstanding appointments that President Trump has
    made.
        The relationship between our two countries speaks for
    itself. And having Abe here as one of the first visitors I
    think speaks to how the Trump administration and our country
    feel about Japan. I do want to say that the Ambassador,
    Ambassador Sasae is here with us, a friend, someone that we
    work with constantly. We welcome him here to this hearing.
        To my friends here, I will speak on a little different
    level about this nominee. I have seen him in business and the
    outstanding things that he has done there. I have seen him
    represent our State and cause it to be the most important and
    most heralded State relative to job creation in our country.
        I have seen him come into an administration that had some
    really tough issues and cleanup that needed to be done on some
    economic issues. And I have seen him negotiate those in an
    appropriate and steadfast manner while at the same time
    bringing people together.
        I know his family. I know Lamar mentioned the Boy Scout
    issues. I was with Bill recently when he was at a weekend Boy
    Scout event, and it rained the entire weekend and he looked
    pretty haggard, a little different than he does today. But he
    is an outstanding family person. He and his wife Chrissy
    actually met in Japan, so they are coming back to the country
    in which they met and where he will be heralded much in the way
    Howard Baker was when he went to Japan.
        I visited Japan when Senator Baker was our Ambassador
    there, and I saw the tremendous ties between our countries. And
    the fact is that Tennessee is a place that has a very warm spot
    in Japanese hearts. It really does. And as good a job as
    Senator Baker did--and we were all so proud of his service--I
    have a feeling that Bill Hagerty is going to raise the bar. So
    I am really, really proud of this nomination and so glad that I
    believe he will be ascending to this position quickly. And I
    know he will represent the very best of our country.
        Senator Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Mr. Hagerty, welcome.
        Your two Senators are very well respected in this
    institution, and it is usually an obligation to introduce a
    person from the State. But we could tell by the way that
    Senator Alexander and Senator Corker have spoken about you that
    it comes from their heart and the deep respect that they have
    for you, which carries you a long way in this committee and the
    United States Senate.
        So welcome. It is wonderful to have you here. And we
    welcome your family because this is a family commitment--your
    public service. So we thank your entire family for being
    willing to join your venture on behalf of our country.
        You have heard the previous Ambassadors to Japan. And it is
    a very distinguished list. Mike Mansfield, one of the giants in
    American history, as well as Howard Baker from your own State,
    leaders in the United States Senate; Speaker Tom Foley; the
    Vice President, Walter Mondale; and Caroline Kennedy. So it is
    a distinguished group. So it is a distinguished group. I could
    go on.
        The reason is, as pointed out by Senator Alexander, the
    relationship between the United States and Japan is critically
    important to the United States. In the Obama administration, we
    had the rebalance to Asia because we recognized that the Asia
    region has always been important to the United States, but it
    is emerging as one of the most important strategic developments
    during this time as to America's role globally as to how well
    we deal with the Asia region. So you are going to play a very,
    very important role in that regard.
        The United States and Japan, the first and third largest
    economies. We have common values of democracy, human rights. We
    are going to be calling upon that relationship as we try to
    expand our influence in that region on labor issues, on
    environmental issues, on good governance, on human rights. All
    those matters will very much depend upon on how well the U.S.-
    Japan relations develop, as its influence in Asia and its
    global areas.
        You will have challenges. You know the challenges of North
    Korea and what recently has transpired, which has been building
    up for a long time. Your role as our Ambassador to Japan will
    play an important role as we try to deal with that challenge.
        The rise of China will very much be on your agenda.
        How Japan deals with South Korea, which has been a
    challenge over time. It has gotten better of late, but still
    not the close relationship we would like to see between two of
    our close strategic partners in that region in the world.
        Maritime security issues are very much dominant, and Japan
    is right in the middle.
        And of course, our security alliance and what we do with
    Okinawa and Guam are issues that we really need to focus on.
        So we welcome you to the committee and we look forward to a
    discussion as to how we can work together to strengthen
    America's national security interests.
        The Chairman.  Without objection, any written testimony you
    have will be entered into the record. If you would summarize
    your comments in about 5 minutes, that would be great. And then
    we look forward to questions. Again, thank you for your
    willingness to serve in this capacity and for being here today.

     STATEMENT OF WILLIAM FRANCIS HAGERTY IV, OF TENNESSEE, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
                       STATES OF AMERICA TO JAPAN

        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you, Senator. It is very humbling. I
    appreciate the hospitality.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, distinguished
    committee members, it is an honor to be with you today as
    President Trump's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Japan. I
    am humbled that the President has entrusted me with this
    opportunity to lead our engagement with such an important ally.
    Few nominees are fortunate to testify before their own Senator,
    and I am privileged to be here today before fellow Tennesseans
    and good friends, Chairman Corker and Senator Alexander.
        Knowing that I have not journeyed here alone, I would like
    to express my love and my gratitude to my family: my wife
    Chrissy and my children, William Hagerty, Stephen Hagerty, Tara
    Hagerty, and Christine Hagerty. In addition, I would like to
    acknowledge Chrissy's mother Terry, my mother Ruth, and our
    siblings who are watching from home today. Importantly, I would
    also like to share my gratitude to our fathers, Chrissy's
    father Bill Locke-Paddon; my father, Bill Hagerty, who are both
    with us in spirit here today in this room.
        I would also like to thank Ambassador Sasae and the many
    other friends in the audience today who joined and show their
    support.
        The Trump administration has made clear in words and
    actions the high priority it places on our alliance,
    partnership, and friendship with Japan. The President hosted
    Prime Minister Abe just 3 weeks after his inauguration. The
    Vice President visited Japan last month. Secretaries Tillerson,
    Mattis, and Ross traveled to Japan early in their tenures. This
    rapid, senior-level engagement underscores the strength and
    importance of our security alliance and overall bilateral
    relationship.
        Mission Japan is staffed by over 700 dedicated men and
    women working diligently to advance U.S. interests in Japan and
    throughout Asia. They support some of our Nation's most
    important partnerships, and I could not be more excited about
    the opportunity to lead this team, if confirmed. I also look
    forward to working with the leadership of our distinguished
    U.S. forces in Japan in managing our all-important alliance.
    Moreover, our bilateral relationship is supported by many men
    and women right here in Washington, whether it be our Japan
    desk at the State Department or the many departments and
    agencies that work with their counterparts at Mission Japan
    every day.
        This committee and other legislators and their staffs play
    an active and vital role in guiding this critical relationship,
    and I would like to underscore my deep appreciation for the
    leadership and engagement that go into making our relationship
    with Japan among the strongest any two countries might hope to
    achieve.
        I have seen firsthand the importance of this relationship
    with my own eyes. These personal connections began when I
    worked in Tokyo for 3 years in the 1980s and 1990s with the
    Boston Consulting Group. That time in Tokyo brought home to me
    our two countries' shared economic interests and security
    priorities, while affording me lasting friendships and a deep
    appreciation of Japanese culture.
        Years later, as Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of
    Economic and Community Development, I managed a number of
    offices overseas, including one in Japan, with a focus on
    attracting foreign direct investment, jobs and promoting
    exports. Our success there was unprecedented. Tennessee became
    the first State to be ranked number one in economic development
    2 years in a row in 2013 and 2014. We were also the top State
    for job creation from foreign direct investment during my
    tenure. 60 percent of that foreign direct investment was
    sourced in Japan.
        I hope to bring my experience to bear on a robust economic
    relationship with Japan. In particular, I intend to promote
    job-generating Japanese investment in the United States. I
    would also aim to support new trade opportunities and enhanced
    access for U.S. firms in the Japanese market to narrow the
    overall deficit with Japan.
        If confirmed, I would seek as well to advance the economic
    dialogue recently launched by Vice President Pence as a vehicle
    to strengthen the overall bilateral framework of our economic
    relations.
        While such trade and investment has been a professional
    focus of mine, I know that the anchor of the overall U.S.-Japan
    bilateral relationship consists of more than mutual economic
    benefits.
        Foremost in our relationship is the U.S.-Japan Alliance,
    the cornerstone of regional peace and security, as well as a
    platform for global cooperation. The deployment of our best
    military personnel and their best technology to Japan reflects
    the ironclad commitment of the United States to the alliance
    and to the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region. This
    commitment is more critical than ever in the face of fast-
    emerging security challenges, including North Korea's nuclear
    weapons and ballistic missile programs, as well as China's
    assertive behavior in the East and South China Seas.
        Just as we value the Japanese Government's support for the
    alliance, so too we must thank the localities that host U.S.
    forces, particularly in Okinawa. As Ambassador, I will continue
    to build strong relations with host communities while ensuring
    our continued capability to fulfill security commitments.
        The U.S.-Japan partnership enjoys strong bipartisan support
    in the Congress and in the Japanese Diet. Through exchange
    programs, cultural activities, and reconciliation efforts, the
    United States and Japan have developed a close understanding
    between our two peoples as an enduring foundation for a strong
    bilateral relationship. If confirmed, I would aim to strengthen
    our people-to-people ties even further.
        In closing, the U.S. partnership and alliance with Japan is
    a central pillar in our role in Asia and beyond. Drawing on the
    strength of the entire U.S. Government, including our
    outstanding military personnel, the dedicated officers of the
    U.S. Foreign Service, and the many talented men and women from
    multiple federal agencies that serve in Japan, I would, as
    Ambassador, endeavor to deepen our partnership and alliance
    with Japan so we may respond more effectively to regional and
    global challenges.
        I am honored to be considered for this critical post, and I
    will focus all my strength on improving the lives and security
    of my fellow Americans through engagement with our strongest
    ally in Asia.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [Mr. Hagerty's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of William F. Hagerty

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, Distinguished members of the
    committee, it is an honor to be with you today as President Trump's
    nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Japan. I am humbled that the
    President has entrusted me with this opportunity to work with the White
    House, Secretary Tillerson, and our talented and dedicated officers at
    the State Department and Mission Japan to lead our engagement with such
    an important ally. Few nominees are fortunate to testify before their
    own senators, and I am privileged to be here before fellow Tennesseans
    and good friends, Chairman Corker and Senator Alexander. Knowing that I
    have not journeyed here alone, I would like to take a moment to express
    my love and gratitude to my family who are with me today: my wife,
    Chrissy, and my children, William Hagerty, Stephen Hagerty, Tara
    Hagerty, and Christine Hagerty. Though they are not with me today, I
    would like to acknowledge Chrissy's mother, Terry; my mother, Ruth and
    our siblings who are watching from home. And importantly I would like
    to acknowledge our fathers Bill Locke-Paddon and Bill Hagerty who are
    with us in spirit today.
        The Trump administration has made clear in words and actions the
    high priority it places on our alliance, partnership, and friendship
    with Japan. The President hosted Prime Minister Abe just three weeks
    after his inauguration. The Vice President visited Japan last month.
    Secretaries Tillerson, Mattis, and Ross traveled to Japan early in
    their tenures. This rapid, senior-level engagement underscores the
    strength and importance of our security alliance and overall bilateral
    relationship.
        Mission Japan is staffed by over 700 dedicated men and women
    working diligently to advance US interests in Japan and throughout
    Asia. They support one of our nation's most important partnerships, and
    I could not be more excited about the opportunity to lead this team, if
    confirmed. I also look forward to working with the leadership of our
    distinguished U.S. forces in Japan in managing our all-important
    Alliance. Moreover, our bilateral relationship is supported by many men
    and women right here in Washington, whether it be our Japan desk at the
    State Department or the many departments and agencies that work with
    their counterparts at Mission Japan every day. This committee and other
    legislators and their staffs play and active and vital role in guiding
    this critical relationship and I would like to underscore my deep
    appreciation for the leadership and engagement that go into making our
    relationship with Japan among the strongest any two countries might
    hope to achieve.
        I strongly support the administration's approach, having seen
    firsthand the importance of this relationship through my own
    experiences with Japan. These personal connections began when I worked
    in Tokyo for three years in the late 1980s and early 1990s with the
    Boston Consulting Group. That time in Tokyo brought home to me our two
    countries' shared economic interests and security priorities, while
    affording me lasting friendships and a deep appreciation of Japanese
    culture.
        Years later, as Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of
    Economic and Community Development, I managed a number of offices
    overseas, including one in Japan, with a focus on attracting foreign
    investment and jobs to our state and promoting the export of Tennessee
    goods abroad. Our success was unprecedented. Tennessee became the first
    state to be ranked number one in economic development two years in a
    row, in 2013 and 2014. According to IBM's Global Location Trends
    report, Tennessee was also the top state in the nation for job creation
    resulting from foreign direct investment for two of the years that I
    served in the Governor's Cabinet.
        We were particularly effective in regard to Japan, as 40,000
    Tennesseans are now directly employed by Japanese firms. In fact, Japan
    accounted for 60 percent of the billions of dollars in total foreign
    direct investment we brought to our state, outpacing the investment of
    all other countries combined.
        Japanese firms invest in the United States because they see a
    strong workforce and long-term earnings potential. Likewise, American
    companies invest in Japan's large domestic markets. In certain sectors,
    like financial services, American firms generate a significant net
    surplus. I would also aim to support new trade opportunities and
    enhanced access for U.S. firms in the Japanese market to narrow the
    overall deficit with Japan.
        As a fellow champion of the rule of law and market principles,
    Japan has shown its willingness to work with the United States to
    ensure free, fair, and balanced trade that is governed by high
    standards. In 2016, the United States exported $45 billion in goods and
    $63.3 billion in services to Japan, our fifth largest export market.
    The Department of Commerce estimates that these exports supported over
    600,000 American jobs at U.S. companies.
        I believe we can do even better. If confirmed, I will support U.S.
    efforts to tap export opportunities in agriculture, defense,
    manufacturing, traded services, and what I see as a major emerging
    opportunity in the energy sector. During his recent visit to Japan,
    Vice President Pence launched a new Economic Dialogue as a vehicle to
    strengthen the bilateral framework for trade and investment. If
    confirmed, I look forward to contributing to this endeavor,
    particularly as a way to address our large trade deficit with Japan in
    goods. I would also strive to leverage my Tennessee experience to
    encourage more Japanese investment in the United States, with a view to
    generating even more jobs, particularly in high-skill sectors. Japanese
    companies has indicated a strong desire to invest in U.S. manufacturing
    and infrastructure. Our new Economic Dialogue under the leadership of
    Vice President Pence and Vice Prime Minister Aso should provide the
    critical groundwork to advance our joint success.
        While trade and investment have been a professional focus of mine,
    I know that the anchor of the overall U.S.-Japan bilateral relationship
    consists of more than mutual economic pursuits. This relationship is
    anchored by a shared commitment to the vision of democratic values. On
    any given day, you will find the United States and Japan cooperating
    closely on global priorities, as seen in our joint efforts with
    policing in Afghanistan, anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden,
    and humanitarian assistance in the Middle East. The U.S.Japan
    partnership enjoys strong bipartisan support in the Congress and in the
    Japanese Diet, making our bilateral ties even more deeply rooted.
        Foremost in our relationship is the U.S.-Japan Alliance, the
    cornerstone of regional peace and security, as well as a platform for
    global cooperation. The United States has more than 50,000 U.S.
    military personnel and some of our most advanced defense assets
    stationed in Japan. The deployment of our best people and our best
    technology to Japan reflects the ironclad commitment of the United
    States to the Alliance--and to the peace and stability of the Asia-
    Pacific region. This commitment is more critical than ever in the face
    of fast-emerging security challenges, both in the region and beyond.
    Most notably, North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs
    represent the region's most acute threat. We should continue to
    coordinate closely with Japan and trilaterally with the Republic of
    Korea in pressuring the Kim Jong-Un regime to abandon its unlawful
    nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation programs. We remain
    prepared to defend ourselves and our allies, including Japan. The U.S.
    commitment to defend Japan through the full range of U.S. military
    capabilities is unwavering.
        Japan has also worked closely with the United States to uphold
    freedom of navigation, overflight, and commerce. The evolving
    situations in the East and South China Seas represent a source of
    concern. Japan's commitment to assume larger roles and responsibilities
    in the Alliance and to play a more active role in international
    security activities is integral to the U.S. security posture. Japan's
    desire to do more is in keeping with the imperative to adapt our
    Alliance to changing times and threats.
        Just as we value the Japanese Government's support for the
    Alliance, so too we must thank the localities that host U.S. forces,
    particularly in Okinawa. For decades, communities across Japan have
    offered their friendship to our U.S. service personnel and their
    families, who aim to reciprocate by being the best neighbors possible.
    We have pursued measures to reduce the footprint of our military
    presence in Japan. Aviation training relocation, the transfer of assets
    to bases outside Okinawa, and the return of base properties are all
    indicative of this aim. As Ambassador, I would continue to build strong
    relations with host communities while ensuring our continued capability
    to fulfill our Security Treaty commitments.
        Through exchange programs, cultural activities, and reconciliation
    efforts, the United States and Japan have developed a close
    understanding between our two peoples as an enduring foundation for a
    strong bilateral relationship. As President Trump noted during Prime
    Minister Abe's visit in February, ``the bond between our two nations,
    and the friendship between our two peoples, runs very, very deep.'' If
    confirmed, I would aim to strengthen our people-to-people ties even
    further. In particular, I envision a revitalization of student
    exchanges, which have dropped almost 60 percent in the past two
    decades.
        In sum, the U.S. partnership and alliance with Japan is a central
    pillar of our role in Asia and beyond. Drawing on the strength of the
    entire U.S. Government, particularly our U.S. military personnel, the
    devoted officers of our U.S. Foreign Service and the many talented
    individuals representing multiple agencies of our federal government
    while serving as part of our Mission in Japan, I would, if confirmed as
    Ambassador, endeavor to deepen our partnership and alliance with Japan
    so as to respond effectively to regional and global challenges. I am
    honored to be considered for this critical post, and I will focus all
    my strength on improving the lives and security of my fellow Americans
    through engagement with our strongest ally in Asia.

        The Chairman.  Thank you very much.
        As is the norm, I will defer to our ranking member and save
    my time for interjections. I am going to step upstairs for a
    hearing just for a few minutes at about 9:58 and come back. But
    to our distinguished ranking member and my friend, Ben Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Hagerty, you have a very strong background, and you
    have been nominated to be Ambassador to a country that the
    United States has a very strong tie and relationship. So that
    makes this hearing a little bit more challenging for us. But we
    always find ways to try to inject some important discussions
    during these hearings.
        And as I mentioned in my opening comments, the United
    States and Japan working together can advance values that we
    have in common. So when we talk about trade, we can promote
    labor standards by working together. We can promote
    intellectual property protections. We can deal with currency
    manipulation, those issues where Japan and the United States
    should be able to advance causes together, including good
    governance and respect for human rights.
        So I just really want to mention two areas of concern on
    human rights. I try to focus on human rights wherever I can
    because I do think it is one of the real important values that
    America brings to the global community.
        We have had challenges between the relationship with Japan
    and South Korea in dealing with World War II issues. And I
    think advancements have been made by both countries, and I
    congratulate the leaders of both countries. Prime Minister Abe
    has made great advancements in dealing with South Korea, and I
    think that was encouraged by the United States and we need to
    continue those advancements.
        But in December 2013, Prime Minister Abe visited a
    controversial shrine to World War II, which included several
    class A war criminals. Our embassy spoke out against that visit
    as being insensitive. And I underscore that because that is a
    close friend, and yet what we do in our embassy, what our
    Ambassador does in Japan is an important message about where we
    need to make sure that we advance our values, even with a
    friend when we think they are doing something that is
    inappropriate.
        I would just like to get your views as to your role, if
    confirmed as our Ambassador, to be willing to advance our
    values even if at times we disagree with the Government of
    Japan, your willingness to speak out.
        Mr. Hagerty. Senator, I appreciate the challenge that you
    raise. My job will be to create a sense of trust and fair
    dealing with the Japanese Government and with the citizens, but
    also to be a steadfast supporter of our values as Americans and
    advance American interests. And I would have no problem
    speaking to the Japanese and conferring with them on issues
    that are contrary to our values at the appropriate time and at
    the appropriate conditions.
        Senator Cardin. Well, sometimes we can advance the agenda,
    but sometimes the agenda is advanced by the circumstances and
    requires us to be prepared to speak out even though it may not
    have been the time that we wanted to because of circumstances.
        I am going to be asking you, if confirmed as our
    Ambassador, to take on those challenges and to work with this
    committee. This has never been a partisan issue in this
    committee, our concern about human rights globally. And we will
    be looking to you to not only help us in regards to Japan, but
    in regards to the region since Japan is one of our closest
    allies and shares our values in the Asia-Pacific region.
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed, Senator, I look forward to working
    with you and the rest of the members of the committee on that.
        Senator Cardin. I appreciate that.
        I want to talk a little bit about Okinawa and Guam and the
    challenges we have had. Our committee has a direct interest.
    The Armed Services Committee has a direct interest in this.
    This is an area that requires diplomacy. The challenges here
    have grown over time. The base has been there for a long time.
    The problems have gotten more severe politically particularly
    for the Japanese politics.
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed.
        Senator Cardin. But we also have had American politics as
    to how we deal with where our base should be, what is in the
    best interests of regional security.
        So can you just share with us how you intend to advance
    that issue if you are confirmed as Ambassador?
        Mr. Hagerty. Senator, I spoke with Admiral Harris just
    yesterday on this topic. It is a slow advancing topic but one
    that is making progress in terms of our relocation of the
    Fatenma operation there. Things are moving slowly, but they
    have begun construction now out near Camp Schwab and I see
    progress moving in that direction.
        The challenge is significant, though. Okinawa has grown up
    around our base there, and it is now a heavily populated area
    where we see many military operations happening in a fairly
    densely populated area there in Okinawa. There are tensions
    between the Okinawa Government and central government in Japan
    that we have to be mindful of, but I intend to put my attention
    to that and work closely with our military forces there to try
    to continue to advance the cause.
        Senator Cardin. And you are prepared to give your personal
    time meeting with the community as well as meeting with our
    military so that we can have seamless communications between
    the U.S. presence and the local political leadership.
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations, Mr. Hagerty. Welcome to your family as
    well.
        I want to talk about trade, something that we mentioned
    when we visited with you in my office. The United States is the
    most competitive supplier of soda ash in the world because of
    the abundance of raw material, trona, in our country. U.S.
    natural soda ash is refined from the mineral trona. The Green
    River Basin in Wyoming has the world's largest known deposits
    of this naturally occurring trona. It is a key component of
    glass, detergents, soaps, chemicals. It is also used in many
    other industrial processes.
        American soda ash has long been regarded as the standard of
    quality, purity, and energy efficiency and production. But
    currently Japan, as we have discussed, has a 3.3 percent tariff
    on natural soda ash imports. Eliminating the tariff on
    naturally sourced soda ash would benefit Japanese
    manufacturers, as well as U.S. producers.
        So will you commit to me to work on eliminating Japan's
    tariff on U.S. natural soda ash and help make eliminating trade
    barriers and increasing exports to Japan for all U.S.
    industries a priority?
        Mr. Hagerty. I will certainly make that a priority, Senator
    Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. And next is Wyoming beef. Expanded trade
    is critical for the economic growth and competitiveness of our
    businesses, workers, farmers, ranchers.
        In December of 2003, Japan closed its market to U.S. beef
    imports after a Canadian-born dairy cow in Washington State
    tested positive for something called BSE. At the time, Japan
    was the largest export market for U.S. beef. It was valued at
    over $1.4 billion a year for the United States.
        In 2006, Japan partially reopened their market to U.S. beef
    that is aged 20 months or younger. They further erased
    restrictions--or eased restrictions in 2013 by increasing that
    age barrier to 30 months and younger. But despite the actions,
    American farmers and ranchers still operate at a competitive
    disadvantage in the Japanese markets.
        So again, American farmers and ranchers produce the highest
    quality beef in the world. They have clear, consistent
    standards. We do here at home for animal health, for food
    safety.
        So do you believe it is important to secure strong market
    access for U.S. beef and other important American commodities
    in Japan?
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed, I do, Senator Barrasso. As a boy, I
    raised cattle myself, and I appreciate the industry and the
    needs of the industry. When I lived in Japan, I appreciate the
    quality of American beef, and I would love to have the access
    to it. The tariff structure is complicated, and I would be
    delighted to work toward improving that situation.
        Senator Barrasso. And then the final question has to do
    with energy security. You know, after Fukushima, all of Japan's
    nuclear reactors were shut down. Since that time, Japan has
    been working to create a strategic energy mix. The country
    currently relies on imported coal, oil, liquefied natural gas
    for more than 80 percent of its energy supply. And as we
    talked, I was just there a couple of weeks ago talking about
    energy in Japan. Strategically Japan seeks to ensure its energy
    security by maintaining as diverse an energy portfolio as
    possible in terms of both fuels, as well as suppliers.
        So do you support the United States increasing our energy
    exports to Japan? And if confirmed, will you assist U.S.
    businesses and industries to gain greater access to Japanese
    markets?
        Mr. Hagerty. I will. And I see that both as an economic and
    a strategic opportunity, Mr. Senator.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch [presiding]. Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Hagerty, and your family. Thank you for your
    willingness to take your considerable talents and experience
    and apply them to representing the United States in sustaining
    and expanding our relationship with this absolutely vital ally
    that shares a lot of our values, a commitment to rule of law,
    to a market economy, to democracy in a part of the world where
    we have a lot of other competing and challenging interests and
    concerns.
        As I mentioned when we met before, I want to briefly touch
    on three different areas. You have just had to answer searching
    questions about American beef, and my State is very concerned
    about American poultry. So we want to make sure that chicken is
    on the menu at the same time that beef is.
        Mr. Hagerty. Understood, Mr. Senator.
        Senator Coons. And as we discussed, in trying to reach a
    fair trade relationship with Japan we have often struggled to
    get full market access for American poultry.
        Is that something you will make a priority in your service
    as Ambassador?
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed, I will, Mr. Senator. I look forward to
    doing that.
        Senator Coons. Any thoughts in particular about how we
    might address some of the non-tariff barriers faced by American
    poultry and other agricultural exports?
        Mr. Hagerty. Non-tariff barriers have been prevalent in
    Japan since I lived there more than 20 years ago. I spent a
    good deal of time then when I was on the American Chamber of
    Commerce in Japan working on those issues. I think they are
    still issues that impede the competitiveness of Japan industry,
    frankly, as well as impede our ability to export into that
    market. I look forward to continuing to work on multilayered
    distributions that are complex--overly complex, I should say--
    regulations and regulatory frameworks that are not harmonized.
    And there are many opportunities I think, a lot of low-hanging
    fruit, frankly, where we can make some advancements.
        Senator Coons. One area where China has made sort of
    striking recent decisions is in banning the trade in ivory. I
    worked across the aisle with Senator Flake to pass a bill that
    was signed into law in the last Congress, the End Wildlife
    Trafficking Act. Japan remains one of the world's largest
    markets for legal ivory. And I was hoping that you might spend
    some time on the international traffic in illegal wildlife
    products because in a number of hearings on this committee in
    the last two Congresses we have concluded that that helps
    finance terrorism and international criminal gangs. I just want
    to draw your attention to my concerns and others' concerns
    about illegal ivory traffic.
        Last, intellectual property is an area where there has been
    some disagreements between the United States and Japan over the
    years. Seeking their partnership in strengthening the global
    intellectual property system is a way both for us to partner as
    the world's largest and third largest economy and frankly a way
    for us to put pressure on other countries in the region that
    really do not respect intellectual property at all.
        How would you imagine our working in partnership with Japan
    to strengthen intellectual property protections? And how do you
    see our withdrawal from the TPP, especially when it was so far
    along in terms of ratification and conclusion, affecting our
    ability to be a successful advocate for protections like
    intellectual property protections with Japan and in the region?
        Mr. Hagerty. On intellectual property, I would say being
    from Tennessee, particularly the music producing industry that
    is so strong in our State, I am very sensitive to the issues
    surrounding intellectual property. And I think our interests
    with Japan are aligned. Japan exports more to China than any
    other country. They have very real concerns about intellectual
    property protections in that country, as do we. So I would look
    to continue to find areas of alignment with Japan and continue
    to push forward in international fora to advance intellectual
    property rights.
        On the TPP, I am well aware of the issues raised by our
    withdrawal. But I also am well aware of the progress that was
    made through the course of those negotiations. I would look to
    find areas of common ground that have already been established
    and try to build on those that make the most sense for America
    and for our joint relationship and continue in a bilateral
    framework to try to advance our Nation's interests.
        Senator Coons. I will take my last minute and ask what role
    you think Japan should play in helping our shared challenge in
    confronting North Korea's aggressive nuclear weapons program.
        Mr. Hagerty. Japan is a very important bilateral partner
    here, and there is an important trilateral relationship as well
    with South Korea. I think Japan is fully aligned, as we
    discussed privately in your offices. I do not see any daylight
    between our position and the Japanese position. They are
    obviously in closer proximity to the threat of North Korea and
    very concerned about it. But I think that we are completely
    aligned.
        As I mentioned a minute ago, I spoke with Admiral Harris
    yesterday, and this is one of the issues we spent a good deal
    of time talking about. And my sense from him as well is that
    there is great alignment there.
        Senator Coons. Good.
        Well, I look forward to supporting your service as our next
    Ambassador and appreciate that we are sending someone with your
    background and skill and expertise.
        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you very much, Senator.
        Senator Risch. Senator Portman, you are up.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And first, Mr. Hagerty, thanks for your willingness to
    serve. And I want to commend you for your statements you have
    made today about the importance of the relationship and how you
    intend to focus your efforts, should you be confirmed. I
    believe you will.
        Mostly, though, I want to commend William, Stephen, Tara,
    and Christine for their patience and their decorum this
    morning. They are going to be great in Japan as ambassadors for
    you. So you guys must be really proud of your dad.
        I was just in Japan on a congressional delegation trip. We
    had an opportunity to visit with a number of officials,
    including our military leadership there, including General
    Martinez. I also got a chance to meet with the trade minister
    who I have gotten to know a little bit over the years, Minister
    Seko, and also we met with the Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga who
    you probably know who is in an incredibly important position
    right now with relationship to the ongoing discussion between
    Vice President Pence and Foreign Minister Aso and the
    administration trying to rekindle some of these trade talks we
    talked about.
        I appreciate what you said about TPP. You know, one of our
    concerns about TPP, from those of us in auto-producing States,
    including Tennessee where you also have American manufacturers,
    is this notion of what the rules of origin would be, in other
    words, cars produced in other countries affect because of the
    number of parts that would come into Japan would be considered
    Japanese cars and would get the benefit of the TPP. So I hope
    you will focus on that issue if we continue negotiations with
    Japan, which I hope we will, on a bilateral relationship.
        Another one is just the frustration that we feel about
    Japan not opening their market to U.S. automobiles. This is
    something that I hope you will focus on in your new role. Let
    me give you some numbers about this. Japan is one of the
    largest auto markets in the world. In fact, it is the third
    biggest I am told, 5 million annual sales. It is the second
    only behind the United States and China, which is consistent
    with the size of their economy. Imports from the United States,
    Europe, and the rest of the world account for 6.7 percent--6.7
    percent of the cars in Japan. And by the way, the U.S. does not
    export as many cars as the Europeans do to Japan. So it is 6.7
    percent, a paltry amount, but if you go to the U.S. market, it
    is even smaller. Japan domestic automakers export about half
    the vehicles that they build, and this includes 1.6 million
    vehicles to the United States in 2015.
        So there is no other developed country in the world that
    has such a small share of import penetration. The U.S. is about
    45 percent imported automobiles. That is roughly equivalent to
    the other OECD countries.
        So, one, why do you think that penetration of U.S. vehicles
    is so low? Why are we not able to break through that market and
    have great automobiles produced in States like my home State of
    Ohio being driven in Japan? And what are you willing to do
    about it in what, again, I think will be an opportunity you
    will have both as Ambassador and as someone who has good
    relationships with the Government and has a business background
    to be able to be effective? What will you do?
        Mr. Hagerty. Well, Senator, it is a very complicated
    question you raise, and I appreciate the issue.
        I think it goes back to some of the structural barriers
    that we were discussing earlier. When I lived in Japan a number
    of years ago, the automotive market has a very complex
    distribution system there. There is also the harmonization of
    standards. That is an issue. Again, I think this is an area
    where we can find common ground.
        I am fortunate to have Nissan headquartered in our home
    State, their North American operations, and a very close
    relationship with their team not only in the U.S. but in Japan.
    And their president is the head of Japan Auto Association. I
    look forward to getting to work with that group there as well
    on harmonization issues and finding opportunities where we
    might be able to ease some of these structural impediments that
    exist. But I think it is not just tariff, but it is structural
    barriers.
        Senator Portman. You mentioned harmonization of standards.
    In their free trade discussions with the Europeans, my
    understanding is they have already agreed to accept the
    European safety standards as an example. We have the best
    safety standards in the world here in the United States of
    America. And yet, the Japanese will not accept our safety
    standards, which is a non-tariff barrier. And it makes it much
    more expensive for us to sell a car in Japan because it has to
    conform to different safety standards that we do not believe
    are based on good science.
        So that is an example where we would expect you to stand up
    for us and to open up that market more in the context of a
    bilateral trade negotiation certainly. But even in the absence
    of that, to be sure with one of our greatest allies in the
    world that we have access to their market as they have access
    to ours.
        Mr. Hagerty. Understood, Senator. Thank you.
        Senator Portman. Just briefly with regard to security
    relationship, again, incredibly important right now. And as you
    indicated, they are a force multiplier for us. And we have
    about 40,000 to 45,000 troops, I understand, in Japan today.
        One of the concerns that I have, having been there
    recently, is the degree to which we are able to protect our own
    troops. There are certain restrictions with regard to what we
    are able to do offensively, as an example, if we perceive a
    threat. Have you thought about that issue and do you have any
    suggestions as to how we can ensure that on all of our bases in
    Japan, we have the ability to help protect the Japanese people
    from potential threats from North Korea today, which has been a
    focus obviously, but also to ensure that we can protect our own
    troops from the possibility of conventional or even nuclear
    missiles?
        Mr. Hagerty. Well, Senator, if I am fortunate to be
    confirmed as Ambassador, my top priority is going to be safety
    and security of Americans on Japanese soil. And I was fortunate
    to speak with Admiral Harris yesterday about this, particularly
    about what might happen further if the deterioration and the
    situation in North Korea gets worse, how we might think about
    movement of Americans in that situation and the threat that
    exists. It is something that I need to study a good deal more
    to give you a definitive answer, but it is something that I
    will put my foremost attention to.
        Senator Portman. I was struck in my recent visit--I think
    you probably will be too--that we have an incredible military
    presence there of brave men and women in uniform who are there
    in part to defend Japan, and Japan is starting to step up more,
    which we want to see more of, to be able to protect themselves.
    But we also got to be sure that our own troops have adequate
    protection.
        And I thank you again for your willingness to serve and
    look forward to continuing the conversation in your new role as
    Ambassador to Japan.
        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you very much, Senator.
        The Chairman [presiding]: Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Thank you.
        Congratulations on your nomination. I appreciated your
    visit with me in my office.
        Japan is, as I said to you then, one of the most important
    strategic and economic partners that the United States has in
    the world. It is the fourth largest trading partner. It is the
    number one hold of U.S. treasuries. Always important. And
    obviously, particularly in the region, incredibly important to
    us.
        And since the end of World War II, the United States and
    Japan have built an important relationship that serves both of
    our strategic interests. And I am impressed with your
    background, certainly your knowledge of the language, and all
    of the commercial and trade issues that you have led there. But
    I want to explore with you a little bit of the non-commercial
    trade issues because those are equally important in this
    bilateral relationship.
        And as a prelude to that, I wonder if you can share with me
    when the President was a candidate, his assessment of Japan is
    that Japan has, quote, not taken care of us properly. Have you
    spoken with the President about his view of our relationship
    with Japan? And has that position changed since his taking
    office?
        Mr. Hagerty. I have spoken with the President about his
    views. Most of our conversations have focused on trade. The
    discussion that you raise I think has to do with our security
    and with the contributions and the relative contributions of
    American investment in that region, as well as the Japanese
    investment in the area.
        What I am heartened by is that the President, since making
    those comments that you reference, has spent a good deal of
    time with Prime Minister Abe. Vice President Pence has traveled
    over. We have had three cabinet members in country in Japan. So
    I think that we are working to get much closer in terms of our
    understanding of what needs to be done and what the
    opportunities might be.
        Senator Menendez. So you see that statement as more of a
    spending by Japan in the military context for their defense, as
    well as the joint defense with us, than anything else.
        Mr. Hagerty. That is my interpretation of it, Senator.
        Senator Menendez. Let me ask you the next question. On the
    campaign trail, the President as a candidate said in an
    interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News that North Korea has
    nukes. Maybe they would--meaning Japan--be in fact better off
    if they defend themselves from North Korea, including with
    nukes. As you go to a country that has a history here of not
    pursuing nuclear power for those purposes and considering the
    consequences of the potential of igniting a race for nuclear
    weapons in the region, what views do you take with a view to
    Japan as it relates to should they or should they not be
    pursuing nuclear weapons?
        Mr. Hagerty. Prime Minister Abe just very recently has made
    an unequivocal statement that they will not be pursuing nuclear
    weapons in Japan. And I respect that. They have a very unique
    history in Japan, having been the only country to receive the
    results of a nuclear weapon, and I think that sensitivity is
    something that I appreciate and hold close.
        Senator Menendez. And we are not going to be urging them to
    pursue nuclear weapons, I assume, if you are confirmed.
        Mr. Hagerty. I have no intention to do that.
        Senator Menendez. Now, with reference to Russia, Prime
    Minister Abe has pursued a closer relationship with Russia,
    including efforts to resolve some longstanding territorial
    disputes over islands in the Kuril chain and to conclude a
    peace treaty from World War II. They seem benign, but do you
    believe these efforts at reconciliation--Russia with Japan--or
    having a more strategic relationship between Japan and Russia
    is in the national interests and security of the United States?
        Mr. Hagerty. The situation with the islands I think is very
    close to the Prime Minister's heart, and I know he has invested
    a good deal of time on that territorial dispute. I also know
    that the Prime Minister, at least in what I have read, is
    concerned about the proximity of Russia and China becoming even
    more close. So I know that there might be many reasons for his
    engagement, but I know that we are very strong allies with
    Japan. And my sense is that they continue to support us in our
    position with Russia with respect to Ukraine and other vital
    strategic interests that are different. So I am not as
    concerned perhaps as others that we will not be able to get a
    good result with this.
        Senator Menendez. So you think that Abe is doing this
    beyond his affinity for the islands and the territorial dispute
    because he seeks to create a greater distance between Russia
    and China?
        Mr. Hagerty. I am not certain of that, sir. I am just
    interpolating from what I have read, but I would like to study
    that more.
        Senator Menendez. Yes. Well, I hope you will pay attention
    to that as we go along because so far, Russia has not proven
    itself to be anything but an adversary of the United States in
    a whole different sort of way, violating the international
    order, cyber attacking the United States in its elections, and
    a whole host of other things. So while I have a great affinity
    for Japan, I also want our people to be keeping abreast of what
    they are doing as it relates to what they may perceive as their
    national interests but may affect ours.
        Mr. Hagerty. I appreciate your sensitivity.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Merkley.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And thank you for your testimony today.
        I want to go back to the trade side. I caught a little bit
    of Senator Portman's comments as I was walking in the door
    related to autos. But I believe that the Trump team has
    announced that they would like to pursue a bilateral
    arrangement with the Japanese. At least that has been
    expressed. Is that correct?
        Mr. Hagerty. The structure that Vice President Pence has
    put in place is an economic dialogue. It is the foundation for
    a bilateral discussion. I do not think that we have gone to the
    point of assessing that we are going to an FTA at this point.
        Senator Merkley. So often in the conversation about trade,
    people ponder a lot about China, about Mexico. But the trade
    deficit with Japan is larger than that with Mexico, I believe
    the second largest in the world, about $69 billion last year.
    And they range from services and goods and ag all put together.
        Why have we allowed such a longstanding structural deficit
    in our trade with Japan, and what should we do about it?
        Mr. Hagerty. Senator, if confirmed, my hope is to focus a
    great deal of attention to closing that trade deficit barrier.
    I think as we discussed earlier, there are a number of not only
    tariff issues and harmonization issues but also structural
    issues within the country of Japan that make it hard for us to
    penetrate.
        When I was the Secretary of Commerce for my home State, I
    was responsible for an office in Japan. And we opened a new
    effort to try and expand trade. It is frustrating. It takes
    considerable investment to put in place customer service
    networks, distribution networks, and the type of facilities
    necessary to properly serve a market. Localization requirements
    are also challenging because of the language difference. But I
    think that those are all areas that I would like to see us make
    more gains on.
        Also, I would say I am very optimistic about the potential
    to export energy to Japan, and I think that could have a very
    immediate effect on our trade deficit.
        Senator Merkley. So the conversation about the barriers in
    the Japanese economy has gone on for decades. We push; they
    resist. We push; they resist. And essentially they get to
    continue running this vast advantage in trade with us.
        What can be done differently now that has not been done
    before?
        Mr. Hagerty. That I think will be the focus of the new
    bilateral relationship that Vice President Pence is
    establishing, and I look forward, if I am confirmed, to
    becoming a member of the team to work very hard on that.
        Senator Merkley. One of the things that you mentioned, when
    we were talking in my office, was that women in Japan are an
    underutilized part of the economic potential. Would you like to
    share any comments or thoughts or insights about that?
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed, Senator, we had a good conversation on
    that. An observation that I made some 20-plus years ago when I
    was with the Boston Consulting Group is working with Western
    companies in Japan. As we assessed the performance of those
    staff, we found that women employees did a very good job. We
    also found that it was difficult for Western companies to
    compete against traditional Japanese companies to recruit male
    graduates from the top universities. So we, in fact, put in
    place for many of the Western firms doing business in Japan a
    strategy to recruit women into the workforce, and that worked
    very well. I am pleased to see that that is now migrated all
    the way into the broader workforce there because I think it has
    great opportunity.
        Senator Merkley. Another area that we pay some attention to
    is the conflict between Japan and China in regard to islands in
    the East China Sea. And we have recognized that the islands
    were covered by article 5 of the U.S.-Japanese treaty. The
    Chinese do not recognize that.
        What is the status of that dispute? And do any new efforts
    need to be made in that area?
        Mr. Hagerty. I was speaking with Admiral Harris yesterday
    about article 5, our responsibilities to that area in the East
    China Sea. I think we certainly have been unwavering in our
    commitment under that security treaty and our willingness to
    support Japan against any sort of unilateral effort to disrupt
    their administration of that island. I think the concern comes
    and probably will come later this summer as fishing season
    approaches, and that is something that we will watch very
    closely as we see more activity in those waters.
        Senator Merkley. One of the things that we were involved in
    recently was a joint exercise with Japan at the same time we
    were doing a joint exercise, a sea exercise, with South Korea
    to essentially draw attention to our military presence in the
    context of pressure being applied to North Korea. Do you
    anticipate there will be more joint, if you will, efforts to
    draw attention to the strength of the connection between U.S.,
    South Korea, and Japan as we attempt to persuade North Korea to
    abandon its nuclear program?
        Mr. Hagerty. Senator, I commend the exercises that took
    place. I think they achieved a very strong purpose. I look
    forward to studying that more because I am not certain what our
    future plans are, but I look forward to working very closely
    with our military command in the area to get a better
    assessment of that.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you.
        Senator Risch [presiding]. Thank you very much.
        Senator Young.
        Senator Young. Mr. Hagerty, thanks so much for your
    interest in serving. I really enjoyed our time together in the
    office. Just a few questions based on your written statement
    here today.
        You indicate that you strive as the Ambassador for the
    United States to Japan to encourage more Japanese investment in
    the United States with a view to generating even more jobs.
    Indiana, as we mentioned when we visited, is home to major
    Japanese brand automakers, Subaru, Honda, Toyota. Thousands of
    Hoosiers are employed there. They are really the centerpiece of
    many of our communities.
        And so I would just like to get your thoughts. You are on
    the record about what specific recommendations you have about
    how the United States and Japan might work in a more effective
    manner together to increase Japanese investment in the U.S.
        Mr. Hagerty. Well, Senator, thank you very much for raising
    that. I think we could not have a better person in Vice
    President Pence to help advance this cause. As you mentioned,
    he certainly gets it, and his success in Indiana is renowned
    around the country, if not the globe.
        So I think with the Vice President at the point of this, we
    have opened a new door, and we have the ability to take
    ourselves to a new level in terms of attracting more foreign
    direct investment because the Vice President understands, as do
    I, that we can build not only important economic ties but
    important strategic ties by increasing that foreign direct
    investment.
        There is an excess of capital in Japan, and I think the
    opportunity to earn returns in a market like the United States
    is very positive. I think that makes sense for their pensioners
    and their economy. I also think it helps the Japanese economy
    to expand more to the markets where they sell their goods. It
    helps to erase trade deficits. Localization lowers cost. It is
    better for consumers. There are many, many good reasons to do
    this.
        The Japanese are practicers of the Kanban, the just-in-time
    technique of managing their supply chain. And it is very
    obvious the closer you can get your suppliers to the OEMs, the
    shorter your supply chain, again the lower your cost. This is
    how we sold it in Tennessee. I am sure this is how Vice
    President Pence sold it in Indiana, and I think we can do a lot
    more of that.
        Senator Young. Do you see opportunities in the area of
    infrastructure? There is a lot of talk around this town about a
    major infrastructure package. Would this be one of the major
    targets of opportunity where a lot of Japanese capital, which
    is on the sidelines or earning learning a very low rate of
    return, might be put to a higher value use to the benefit of
    Americans?
        Mr. Hagerty. I think that is a great opportunity. It has
    certainly been something that has been discussed a good deal
    recently, whether it be a maglev train or other types of
    infrastructure investment where Japanese technology and capital
    could both be brought to bear in this country.
        Senator Young. Very well.
        You just invoked our Governor, now our Vice President, Mike
    Pence. I am glad you did that because as you know, he, along
    with Deputy Prime Minister Aso, has played a very important
    role in establishing this U.S.-Japan economic dialogue. As you
    know, it has three pillars of activity: common strategy on
    trade and investment rules and issues; cooperation in economic
    and structural policies; and lastly, sectoral cooperation. In
    your prepared remarks, you state that you look forward to
    contributing to this endeavor.
        How do you envision this program being carried out? What
    are top U.S. priorities? And what do you expect maybe some
    points of contention might be with respect to this?
        Mr. Hagerty. Probably the biggest opportunity would lie in
    looking to those things that have already been negotiated and
    advanced through some of the TPP discussions to determine which
    of those elements might make a good bilateral foundation for
    our ongoing arrangements.
        I would also look to the sector-specific opportunities
    because I think when you can take an industry-specific
    situation and then begin to work through it, you actually have
    a chance to make real progress as opposed to having more
    hypothetical approaches.
        Energy is an area that I see great potential. We have the
    opportunity to work with liquid natural gas, with other exports
    now we did not have before. And Japan is the number one
    importer, for example, of LNG. I think it is the number three
    importer of oil. But the United States has resources there that
    I think can very quickly be put into place. We need to invest
    in infrastructure on our side and on the Japanese side to make
    that happen. But I see that as a big and immediate opportunity.
        Agriculture has been a concern since I was there 25 years
    ago. It is going to remain a concern. It is something that I
    intend to focus on intently while I am there.
        Senator Young. Hoosiers farmers will be very happy to hear
    that. So thank you so much.
        And with that, I yield back.
        Senator Risch. Jeanne, welcome. Senator Shaheen, you are
    up.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Risch.
        Welcome, Mr. Hagerty. Congratulations on your nomination.
    We all appreciate your willingness to serve the country.
        I wanted to follow up a little bit. I think Senator Young
    was asking about trade and what areas might be ripe for trade.
    I did not hear the beginning of that question. But I wanted to
    follow up on some of those trade issues.
        I heard that a number of the TPP countries are meeting
    actually today to talk about where to go given the U.S.
    withdrawal from that effort. Can you talk about if our
    withdrawal from the TPP has affected our relationship with
    Japan and what the perceptions are of what opportunities might
    still exist with the countries that we had been negotiating
    with?
        Mr. Hagerty. I appreciate your concern, Senator, and I
    think the Japanese Government has invested a lot of political
    capital in terms of bringing the TPP forward that relate to the
    negotiations, but I think Prime Minister Abe took it on and
    worked very hard to advance those discussions within his own
    country. They are in a position now where the United States has
    withdrawn from the TPP, but I am encouraged.
        The reason I am encouraged is that the Prime Minister and
    President have both met early on within 3 weeks I think of the
    inauguration. The President hosted Prime Minister Abe here in
    the United States. Vice President Pence has begun an economic
    dialogue with the Vice Prime Minister of Japan. We have had
    three cabinet members, Mattis, Tillerson, and Ross, all visit
    in country already. So at a personal level, at a relationship
    level, I see advancement taking place that encourages me that
    we will be able to still achieve a good deal of what we had
    hoped to accomplish in the TPP, what might have been hoped
    before, but also to find other areas, perhaps structural areas,
    that we can add to that and make significant advancements that
    work in a more bilateral framework.
        Senator Shaheen. And how important is it for us to continue
    to do that given China's growing role in many of the Southeast
    Asian countries?
        Mr. Hagerty. Evermore important I think. My hope is that we
    can continue to strengthen our alliance. Japan and the United
    States together, I think we are about 30 percent of the world's
    GDP. What concerns me is that China continues to flex its
    economic muscle, its strategic muscle in the area, and the last
    thing I think we want is the Chinese to be setting the rules of
    the road in Asia.
        Senator Shaheen. Absolutely. I certainly agree with that.
    We want to be part of that discussion.
        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. We all are very aware of the growing
    threat that not only the United States faces but certainly the
    Asian region that Japan is in from North Korea's continued
    nuclear efforts. So can you talk about how we might better
    leverage our relationship with Japan to address what is
    happening in North Korea? Are there things that we can be doing
    to better engage Japan in trying to address what is happening
    in North Korea?
        Mr. Hagerty. I feel that that is underway, Senator. I had
    the benefit of speaking with Admiral Harris about this
    yesterday. Our coordination with Japan is getting ever tighter.
    They have undertaken new interpretations of their constitution
    to enable them to work more closely with our military
    exercises. I think that what we see is not only an increase in
    military spending but also--and I think more important in my
    view--an increase in the interdependency and the coordination
    that is happening with our own forces. That I think yields
    great opportunity. The movements that have most recently
    occurred in the area of the Korean Peninsula with the U.S.
    military vessels, as well as Japanese, I think show a lot in
    terms of our combined strength and our partnership. And I think
    we will probably see more of that.
        Senator Shaheen. And are there ways in which Japan can be
    helpful working with us on engaging China in trying to
    encourage them to recognize that it is in the region's
    interests to demilitarize North Korea--denuclearize North
    Korea?
        Mr. Hagerty. I am certain that that is the case. China is
    Japan's largest export market. They have a very vested interest
    in that region. Japan certainly is closer to the threat in
    North Korea than we are, but they have very close economic ties
    with China as well. So I think together Japan and the United
    States can act as a unified front in moving China in the right
    direction in this situation.
        Senator Shaheen. And can you give us any update on any
    efforts so far that Japan might have engaged in with China on
    North Korea?
        Mr. Hagerty. I need to study that further, Senator, to give
    you a more definitive answer.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        And just a final question. I know that Japan's Government
    is engaging in efforts to increase women's economic empowerment
    and participation. Can you talk about what impact these efforts
    have had and what you will do as Ambassador to try and
    encourage Japan to continue to move in this direction?
        Mr. Hagerty. Senator, I have seen the impact of women
    engagement in Japan on a firsthand basis. More than 20 years
    ago, I was living in that country working with the Boston
    Consulting Group and working very often with Western companies,
    who then, at that time, found it very difficult to recruit top
    male graduates from the top universities, but they were able to
    recruit female graduates. As we evaluated their performance, we
    realized that female graduates could perform as well or better
    in many cases than their male counterparts. So we put together
    a concentrated program to help Western companies recruit
    females in that market more than 20 years ago. So it comes as
    no surprise to me that they are adding a great deal to the
    economy and I think the potential there is even greater.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Mr. Hagerty, thank you so much for being
    here, and I really appreciate you coming by the office so we
    could talk about the parochial Idaho questions. We are amused
    in Idaho when we see the stories about the potato chip
    shortage. I do not know if you have ever been to Idaho. We got
    potatoes.
        Mr. Hagerty. I have been fortunate to be in Idaho, sir, and
    I love the potatoes there.
        Senator Risch. Well, and my family is in the ranching
    business. So beef has also been an important issue for us. We
    had a good discussion about those things. And those trade
    issues are certainly important.
        You bring really unique qualifications to this job, and I
    really appreciate your willingness to take this on. Our
    relationship with Japan is so good, and it really is
    aspirational I think for all of us to have that kind of a
    relationship with every country in the world. We get along so
    well.
        And your counterpart, Ambassador Sasae, thank you so much
    for being here today. The Ambassador has been incredibly
    gracious and a great host when we have visited with him. So I
    know you represent us the same way when you are in Japan.
        Mr. Hagerty. Indeed. I am privilege to have a colleague
    like Ambassador Sasae to look to.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Let me just say that we look forward to--and there is
    absolutely no reason why our relationship with Japan will not
    continue as it is. But as with any country, every country looks
    after its own interests first. That is particularly true when
    it comes to trade. And so these are delicate trade issues that
    need to be resolved, but it is in the interest of both
    countries to resolve trade issues between the countries. And
    after listening to you, I have every confidence that you will
    be able to do that.
        Finally, let me say there has been discussed here briefly
    the difficulties in the neighborhood with the North Koreans.
    You have instability and the insecurity and just misbehavior
    and bad things that that country is doing--its administration,
    its current regime. It cannot go on. I mean, this is going to
    be resolved, and I suspect it is going to be resolved on your
    watch one way or another, particularly with the President that
    we have is dedicated to bringing it to some kind of a
    resolution. We, obviously, hope it can be done peacefully.
    There are certainly some signs that we can be some--there would
    be some optimism that that can happen. Obviously, the Chinese
    are going to play an important role it. But then so will the
    Japanese play an important role. Again, I have every confidence
    that you can thread that needle.
        So thank you so much. Anything else you want to say for the
    record, the microphone is all yours.
        Mr. Hagerty. Thank you very much for the opportunity,
    Senator. I appreciate being here, and if I am confirmed, I look
    forward to advancing our relationship with the most important
    relationship that I can imagine abroad.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Hagerty.
        Kids, are you ready to go the lunch? Yeah, I bet you are.
        All right. With that, the record will stay open until close
    of business on Friday for questions for the record. Mr.
    Hagerty, I know you know that the quicker you can get those
    back, the quicker this committee can act.
        Mr. Hagerty. Understood.
        Senator Risch. And the more we can stand this government
    up, the better off we will be. And we are going to make every
    effort to do that as quickly as we can.
        So with that, again, thank you again to you for your
    willingness to serve. Thank you to your family for taking this
    on because there are obviously sacrifices that go with that.
        And with that, I will declare the meeting adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 10:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to William F. Hagerty by Senator James E. Risch

        Question 1. In 2005, the United States and Japan signed an
    agreement that allowed the import of chipping potatoes from about a
    dozen U.S. states. However, for more than ten years, Idaho has been
    denied access to the Japanese market while all other states in the
    agreement have had access. For the past two years, Idaho worked with
    Japanese officials to finally resolve any concerns they had about the
    import of Idaho potatoes. Having met all of their requirements, Idaho
    growers have waited for months for final approval from the Japanese
    Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries.

       If confirmed, what will you do to ensure Idaho is able to receive
            the same market access that the other states in the agreement
            enjoy?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to expand market access for U.S.
    agricultural exports to Japan, including for Idaho potatoes. I believe
    the Japanese market presents important opportunities for U.S.
    exporters. Furthermore, I would support pursuit of these opportunities
    and enhanced market access for U.S. firms in the Japanese market as
    part of the administration's broader effort to reduce the overall trade
    deficit with Japan. I will make this particular matter a priority.

        Question 2. For the past two years, Japan and South Korea have held
    a series of meetings and signed agreements in order to deepen
    cooperation and improve their relationship including establishing a hot
    line between their minsters of defense, reinstituting civil servant
    exchanges, and restarting a trilateral summit with China. However,
    there are concerns that with new political leadership in Seoul some of
    this rapprochement may slow down or stop.

       Do you believe there are valid concerns about South Korea stepping
            back from any of these agreements? If so, which agreements do
            you believe are the most crucial for continuing to move
            forward?

        Answer. I was heartened to see media reports of the Republic of
    Korea's President Moon's phone call with Japanese Prime Minister Abe,
    in which the leaders reaffirmed the need for close coordination in
    response to North Korea's unlawful ballistic missile, nuclear, and
    proliferation programs. Japan and the Republic of Korea are two of our
    most important allies in the Asia-Pacific region, and we recently have
    seen significant progress in our trilateral cooperation. Our three
    countries have carried out trilateral military exercises, and the
    General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) recently
    signed by Japan and the Republic of Korea has established a new basis
    for sharing defense-related information. I believe there is scope to
    strengthen our security cooperation further, and if confirmed I will
    work to that end.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
         Submitted to William F. Hagerty by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. On a volunteer basis, I have worked hard to instill the
    values of American democracy in our youth. I have served for decades as
    a volunteer leader in the Boy Scouts of America organization. This
    service included my role on the Board of the Far East Council in Japan,
    where we delivered a first-rate values-based program to youth in Japan.
    I have served as a BSA merit badge counselor for Scouting's Citizenship
    in the Community, Citizenship in the Nation and Citizenship in the
    World programs. By instructing American youth in the fundamental
    precepts of citizenship, it is my hope that the principles of American
    democracy permeate their lives and their future impact on humanitarian
    issues as they may encounter them around the globe.
        Over many years as a donor, I have been privileged to support my
    friend who is a world-leading urologic surgeon, Dr. Jay Smith
    (Vanderbilt University Medical Center). Dr. Smith travels annually in
    Africa with the Urological Cancer Foundation, a 501(c)3, to perform
    complex urinary reconstruction for women who are victims of extreme
    sexual violence in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Jay and his
    team have worked with victims of Joseph Kony and the Lord's Resistance
    Army.
        The Foundation also works to stand up durable training programs in
    countries vastly underserved with surgical specialists. The most
    successful programs have been in Liberia and Malawi.
        Dr. Smith and his colleagues have performed hundreds of operations
    for patients who had no other options for surgical care. The foundation
    has sponsored 23 different surgical mission trips to Africa. In the
    process, they have trained local surgeons and there are 7 surgeons
    practicing in those countries whose training has been greatly
    facilitated by their efforts and there are currently more in the
    pipeline.
        My recent public service as the Tennessee Commissioner of Economic
    and Community Development was largely focused on advancing the
    interests of Tennesseans across our state, the nation and the world.
    The overseas offices/representatives under my purview were advocates
    for Tennessee interests. A derivative of promoting Tennessee presence
    in other countries is that American values can translate through
    American economic engagement overseas.

        Question 2. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Japan?

        Answer. Yes. As Ambassador, I would look forward to establishing
    robust relations with human rights groups, civil society, and other
    non-governmental organizations both in the United States and in Japan.
    I understand Mission Japan has built a great network of relationships
    with many different groups across the spectrum of human rights issues,
    and I would look to build upon that cooperation.

        Question 3. Will you engage with Japan on matters of human rights,
    civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. The U.S.-Japan relationship is anchored by a shared
    commitment to democratic values and human rights. As Ambassador, I
    would look to coordinate closely with Japan in promoting human rights
    regionally and globally, including with a focus on the dire human
    rights situation in North Korea.

        Question 4. Over the past several years China has made frequent
    incursions into the Japanese-claimed territorial waters around the
    Senkaku Islands in an apparent escalation of pressure by Beijing. What
    is the U.S. Government's position on the Senkaku Islands and how can we
    support a peaceful outcome while standing by our alliance commitments
    to Japan?

        Answer. The United States' position on the Senkaku Islands is clear
    and longstanding and was reaffirmed by President Trump in February.
    While the United States does not take a position with respect to
    sovereignty, the Senkaku Islands have been under Japanese
    administration since the reversion of Okinawa in 1972; as such, they
    fall within the scope of Article 5 of the 1960 U.S.-Japan Treaty of
    Mutual Cooperation and Security. The United States opposes any
    unilateral action that seeks to undermine Japan's administration of the
    Senkaku Islands. If confirmed, I will diligently continue to monitor
    the situation in the Senkakus and consult closely with Japan as allies.

        Question 5. Earlier this week, Pyongyang announced that it had
    conducted another ballistic missile test. As you know, North Korea's
    provocations threaten Japan as much as they do South Korea. A
    successful policy requires sustained diplomatic engagement to
    strengthen our alliances and partnerships with Japan, which would
    bolster our deterrence capabilities and help achieve our goal of a
    denuclearized Peninsula. How would you assess the threat North Korea
    poses to Japan? How would you advise the Trump administration to
    clearly define our bottom lines with Pyongyang and to effectively
    leverage a multidimensional approach that knits together military
    pressure, alliances, economic sanctions, human rights and diplomatic
    engagement?

        Answer. North Korea's nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation
    programs represent a direct threat to Japan and U.S. troops stationed
    in Japan. North Korea openly states that its ballistic missiles are
    intended to deliver nuclear weapons to strike cities in the United
    States, the Republic of Korea, and Japan. The potential for a North
    Korean attack on South Korea or Japan is real. If confirmed, I will
    work to coordinate closely with Japan to align our diplomatic,
    military, and economic response to North Korea's bellicose behavior,
    with the goal of pressuring the regime in Pyongyang to abandon its UN-
    proscribed nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation programs. I
    will also continue to promote trilateral cooperation among the United
    States, Japan, and South Korea, as well as diplomatic coordination with
    partners around the world, to counter the threats posed by North Korea
    to international peace and stability.Questions for the Record Submitted
    to

        Question 6. Helping to support Japan and South Korea as they have
    sought reconciliation over ``history issues'' and the Comfort Women has
    been an important priority for the United States over the past several
    years, especially given the importance of deepening trilateral
    cooperation to deal with North Korea and other regional security
    challenges. How do you see your role, if confirmed, in helping to
    continue to support reconciliation between our two allies, friends and
    partners?

        Answer. Japan and the Republic of Korea are two of our most
    important allies in the Asia-Pacific region, and our trilateral
    cooperation is critical in responding to the North Korean threat. If
    confirmed, I would encourage all parties to work together to address
    history issues in a way that promotes healing and reconciliation.

        Question 7. What specific steps, if any, will the Trump
    administration take to help Tokyo and Seoul put their often-tense
    relations on a sounder footing, especially on security issues?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support stronger relations between
    Tokyo and Seoul, particularly as a basis for deeper trilateral
    cooperation among our three countries. Close trilateral coordination is
    crucial in particular to address threats posed by the DPRK. I think
    there is scope to strengthen our security cooperation, through
    information sharing and joint exercises. I would also push for closer
    collaboration on other regional and global issues, such as humanitarian
    development and women's empowerment, which will allow us to leverage
    the efforts of two of our allies while building working-level contacts
    and patterns of cooperation between the Japanese and South Koreans.

        Question 8. Your two immediate predecessors, Caroline Kennedy and
    John Roos, both visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the anniversaries of
    the atomic bombing of those cities. In 2016, Obama became the first
    sitting U.S. president to visit Hiroshima. If confirmed, do you plan to
    continue the practice of visiting these cities on the anniversary of
    the bombing?

        Answer. I understand Ambassadors Kennedy and Roos' attendance at
    these anniversary commemorations was very positive and promoted
    reconciliation efforts. If confirmed, I would confer with the White
    House and Department of State in considering the benefits of my
    participation.

        Question 9. After the nuclear disaster at Fukushima, the United
    States provided Japan with various means of assistance to help contain
    the damage, dispose of radioactive waste, and remediate the area. And
    in the years since, we have continued to work with Japan on ways to
    promote methods of energy production that do not carry the risk of
    polluting our air, land, or oceans. Given the increased emphasis on
    clean energy following the Fukushima disaster, how will you prioritize
    clean energy cooperation with our Japanese allies and ensure that U.S.
    exporters and innovators in the industry take full advantage of the
    related commercial opportunities?

        Answer. U.S.-Japan cooperation on clean energy is wide-ranging and,
    if confirmed, it will continue to be a priority of mine. The initiation
    of U.S. LNG exports to Japan has created a significant new link between
    our counties in the energy sector. I support increasing energy exports,
    to include clean energy solutions, to Japan and see energy cooperation
    as economically and strategically advantageous. I also welcome, Prime
    Minister Abe's efforts to restart Japan's nuclear reactors on a safe
    and sustainable basis, and as Ambassador I would seek ways to assist
    this. Energy has also been identified as a focus area for cooperation
    under the recently launched bilateral economic dialogue.

        Question 10. What is the appropriate role for the Japanese
    Government to play in addressing gender issues in the workplace? If
    confirmed, do you plan to support this campaign, known as
    ``womenomics''?

        Answer. Women's issues have long been an area of interest and
    effort for me. The United States and Japan have cooperated in promoting
    women's economic empowerment in our two countries and beyond. We have
    supported Tokyo's annual World Assembly for Women (WAW), sending
    substantial U.S. delegations, both from Washington and from our Embassy
    in Tokyo. The U.S. Government also welcomed Japan's identification of
    women's empowerment as a priority during its G-7 chairmanship year in
    2016. Through the Asia Pacific Economic Forum, moreover, our two
    countries are actively elevating the role of women in the economy. If
    confirmed, I would continue to support healthy cooperation in this area
    and look for new opportunities.
        I have seen the impact of women's economic empowerment in Japan on
    a first-hand basis. During my time with the Boston Consulting Group in
    Tokyo, more than 20 years ago, we put together a focused program to
    help Western companies recruit Japanese women. It comes as no surprise
    to me that women are adding a great deal of value to Japan's economy.
    We know that even greater potential exists with women's sustained
    participation in the workforce, in leadership positions, and in the
    science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.
    Government efforts to raise awareness of the challenges women face in
    the workplace, together with continued private-sector coordination,
    should enable more women to enter, remain, and advance in the
    workforce.

        Question 11. Prime Minister Abe has pursued a closer relationship
    with Russia, including efforts to resolve a longstanding territorial
    dispute over four islands north of Hokkaido in the Kuril Chain (known
    in Japan as the Northern Territories) and to conclude a peace treaty
    from World War II. Do you support these efforts at reconciliation with
    Russia? Is it in the U.S. strategic interest for Japan and Russia to
    develop a closer relationship?

        Answer. Japan opposes Russia's attempted annexation and occupation
    of Crimea and its acts of aggression in eastern Ukraine. Together with
    the United States, European Union, and the G-7, Japan has taken the
    position of maintaining sanctions against Russia until it implements
    the Minsk agreements in full. Japan also has its own bilateral concerns
    with Russia and its own geostrategic concerns in the region. As PM
    Abe's Government attempts to achieve progress with Russia on the
    longstanding Northern Territories dispute, I will make it a priority to
    ensure that U.S. and Japanese policies toward Russia remain closely
    coordinated.

        Question 12. The Trans-Pacific Partnership would have set regional
    ground rules on issues such as intellectual property, currency
    manipulation, and labor and environmental standards, and would have
    resulted in increased market access for American firms in Japan.
    Without TPP, what avenues will you use to engage with your Japanese
    counterparts on these issues, and how soon can we expect results?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to advance the U.S.-Japan
    Economic Dialogue recently launched by Vice President Pence as a
    vehicle to strengthen the overall bilateral framework of our economic
    relations, covering trade, macroeconomic, and sectoral issues. I will
    support efforts by the administration to seek freer and fairer trade
    with Japan.

        Question 13. Is the administration's position that it still intends
    to seek bilateral deals to replace the TPP?

        Answer. The administration's overall goal is to advance free and
    fair trade and investment that promotes U.S. economic and job growth.
    The President and senior officials believe this goal can be more
    effectively achieved through a bilateral approach, and, if confirmed, I
    will engage with Japan to achieve this important outcome. I defer to
    administration officials on whether or not that would include
    negotiations on a bilateral free trade agreement.

        Question 14. Have any countries agreed to engage with the US
    bilaterally?

        Answer. I defer to current administration officials on the status
    of bilateral trade discussions with foreign governments.

        Question 15. What is Japan's current position on this issue?

        Answer. I defer to current administration officials on the status
    of Japan's current position on this issue.
        I will note that our two countries share many economic interests,
    as seen over many decades of extensive trade and two-way investment.
    Our new U.S.-Japan Economic Dialogue under the leadership of Vice
    President Pence and Deputy Prime Minister Aso should provide the
    critical groundwork to strengthen the bilateral framework for trade and
    investment and to promote our joint prosperity.
        As President Trump and Prime Minister Abe said during their
    February Summit, we ``share an interest in sustaining a strong global
    economy, ensuring financial stability, and growing job opportunities.''

        Question 16. Since the TPP agreement was premised on cross-cutting
    concessions among the twelve parties, how can the US convince
    individual countries to return to the table for a series of smaller
    deals, without the regional rule-setting that was the hallmark of the
    TPP?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Secretary Tillerson and
    other U.S. agencies to support the President's commitment to expand
    economic opportunities for American businesses in Japan and throughout
    the region, including by addressing candidly any issues that present
    obstacles to that objective. I would look to identify and build upon
    areas of common ground that would benefit the United States in
    advancing our economic relationship.

        Question 17. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the executive branch?

        Answer. I will comply with the law regarding all such issues and
    will provide information to Congress when appropriate.

        Question 18. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do at the Mission to
    promote, mentor and support your staff that come from diverse
    backgrounds and underrepresented groups in the Foreign and Civil
    Service? What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at
    the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. I agree that well-managed diverse teams perform better, and
    I understand the Department of State is committed to recruiting and
    retaining a diverse, talented workforce that advances U.S. values,
    interests and goals around the world.
        If confirmed, I will seek through the Foreign Service assignments
    process to promote the recruitment of under-represented groups for
    Mission Japan. In addition, I will take my role as a leader and mentor
    of all employees seriously. I will ensure that all employees are aware,
    understand, and abide by Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) principles
    and that managers receive mandatory EEO training. This is an important
    issue, and I look forward to working with you and the committee to
    advance this shared objective.

        Question 19. In 2016, Japan adopted The Convention on the Civil
    Aspects of International Child Abduction. This international treaty,
    which the U.S. has also ratified, provides a civil mechanism to
    promptly return children who have been taken out of the country of
    habitual residence in violation of custodial rights. It is my hope that
    through this mechanism we will be able to quickly resolve international
    abduction cases between the United States and Japan. However, there are
    more than 30 pre-Convention abduction cases that remain unresolved. If
    confirmed, will you assure me that you will seek to engage with your
    Japanese counterparts to resolve these pre-Convention cases?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will seek the Japanese
    Government's most robust efforts to resolve pre-Convention cases. The
    resolution of these, and all parental child abduction cases, will be a
    top priority.

        Question 20. As Commissioner of Economic and Community Development
    from 2011 to 2015, you oversaw Tennessee's Department of Economic and
    Community Development, which administers the state-funded TNInvestco
    program. Did you play a role in the establishment of TNInvestco?

        Answer. I did not play a role in the establishment of this program.
    It was established by statute, designed and implemented under the
    administration of then-Governor Phil Bredesen (D) in 2009.

        Question 21. What were the goals of TNInvestco, and were those
    goals met?

        Answer. The program was designed to increase the flow of capital to
    companies in Tennessee in the early stages of their development. Since
    the program's implementation, Tennessee has moved up the league tables
    in early stage risk capital deployment from #45 in 2010 to #22 in 2016,
    according to the Milken Institute State Technology and Science Index.

        Question 22. What was your role in providing oversight and
    monitoring of TNInvestco?

        Answer. While I had responsibility for the Department of Economic
    and Community Development, all day-to-day responsibility for oversight
    and monitoring of the TNInvestco program was delegated to department
    officials. As such, I had no direct role in oversight or monitoring
    this program.

        Question 23. In July of 2016, you took a leave of absence from
    Hagerty Peterson to serve as Director of Presidential Appointments for
    the 2016 Trump Presidential Transition Team. This position involved
    oversight on the first group of prominent board, commission, Cabinet
    and other appointments that President-elect Trump would make. What role
    did you play in the decision to bring on Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn to
    serve as National Security Advisor?

        Answer. I served prior to the President's inauguration as a
    volunteer in the role of Director of Presidential Appointments for the
    transition team, which was a separate legal entity from the campaign.
    My team and I were primarily focused on candidates for Cabinet
    positions. The selection of members of the White House staff was
    generally handled separately.
        In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to executive
    branch decision-making, I am unable to answer this question further.

        Question 24. Were you aware before President Trump's inauguration
    that Lt. Gen. Flynn was under federal investigation for secretly
    working as a paid lobbyist for Turkey during the 2016 presidential
    campaign, or the nature and extent of his contacts and financial
    arrangements with Russia?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision making, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 25. What role did you play in the decision to bring on
    Sebastian Gorka as deputy assistant to the president?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making, I am unable to answer this question.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to William F. Hagerty by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. Do you support the renegotiation of our civil nuclear
    cooperation agreement with Japan to put greater constraints on Japanese
    reprocessing of U.S.-obligated spent fuel?

        Answer. The United States has a long history of productive
    cooperation with Japan on nuclear safety, nuclear security and
    nonproliferation. If confirmed, I am committed to maintaining this
    cooperation. The United States has a longstanding policy that has
    generally sought to prevent the spread of enrichment and reprocessing
    technologies to states not already possessing them.

        Question 2. If confirmed, will you regularly convey to Japanese
    leaders that reprocessing is dangerous for Japan and dangerous for
    global nonproliferation?

        Answer. It is my understanding that since reprocessing leads to
    separated plutonium and, in principle, separated plutonium can be used
    to make nuclear weapons, generally less reprocessing in the world is
    better than more. If confirmed, I will indeed share this concern in the
    course of regular discussions on such matters with Japanese leaders.

        Question 3. If confirmed, will you make clear to Japan that there
    are safer and more economical alternatives to disposing of spent-fuel?

        Answer. I understand that the United States has concluded that
    reprocessing in the United States is not desirable at present, neither
    from the perspective of energy security, nor that of commercial
    competitiveness. Rather, U.S. industry has been able to rely on interim
    dry storage of spent fuel. If confirmed, I will share the views of the
    United States and our conclusions with Japan.

        Question 4. If confirmed, will you work with the Secretary of State
    and with the U.S. Ambassadors in China and South Korea to coordinate a
    multilateral ``pause'' on commercial spent-fuel reprocessing by Japan,
    China, and South Korea?

        Answer. I understand that the United States has in recent years
    maintained ongoing dialogues with Japan, China, and South Korea in the
    interest of limiting the spread of fissile materials and their
    production. I support the continuation of these dialogues.

        Question 5. If confirmed as ambassador, will you work to
    incorporate Japanese input into U.S. diplomatic strategy, and to gain
    Japan's support for direct negotiations between the United States and
    North Korea aimed at securing the peaceful denuclearization of the
    Korean peninsula?

        Answer. The administration is in close coordination with Japan on
    our approach to the DPRK. If confirmed, I will work with Japan to align
    our diplomatic, military, and economic response to North Korea, with
    the goal of pressuring North Korea to abandon its UN-proscribed
    nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation programs. I believe that
    Japan is in agreement with the administration's current policy
    approach--North Korea must take concrete steps to reduce the threat
    that its unlawful weapons programs pose to the United States and our
    allies, including Japan, before we can even consider talks.

        Question 6. If confirmed as Ambassador, how will you work with
    Japan to reduce whaling in accordance with international standards?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I would continue to support the
    moratorium on commercial whaling adopted by the International Whaling
    Commission as a necessary measure for the conservation of large whales.
    I would welcome the opportunity to discuss with Japan and other
    interested governments ways to improve the International Whaling
    Commission and seek ways to cooperate on initiatives to conserve and
    recover the world's large whales.

        Question 7. If confirmed, what will you do to assure Japanese
    leaders that the United States will protect any sensitive information
    they provide to us?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the U.S.
    intelligence community to ensure that our Japanese partners can be
    confident that the United States will safeguard their sensitive
    information. I will continue to emphasize the long-standing and close
    working relationship and trust developed between our military and
    intelligence communities, and will consult at the highest levels to
    ensure that sensitive information critical to the security of both of
    our countries is protected.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to William F. Hagerty by Senator Cory Booker

    Extent of Mr. Hagerty's knowledge of Flynn's Russian and Turkish
            dealings a senior transition official responsible for personnel
        Question 1. After Vice President Elect Pence received the November
    18, 2016 letter from Congressman Cummings regarding Flynn's lobbying
    for Turkish interests and paid appearance with Russian President
    Vladimir Putin, were you made aware of this letter?

        Answer. I served prior to the President's Inauguration as a
    volunteer in the role of Director of Presidential Appointments for the
    transition team, which was a separate legal entity from the campaign.
    My team and I were primarily focused on candidates for Cabinet
    positions.
        In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to executive
    branch decision-making and communications with the Vice President-
    elect, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 2. Did you ever discuss Ranking Member Cummings November
    18, 2016 letter to Vice President Pence with Vice President Pence? If
    so, when? Please provide details on the nature of those conversations
    if they took place.

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making and communications with the Vice
    President-elect, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 3. Were you ever in contact with Vice President elect
    Pence, transition official Marshall Billingslea or other transition
    officials about Flynn's work on behalf of Turkey or Russian payments?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making and communications with the Vice
    President-elect, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 4. Did you ever speak to transition official Marshall
    Billingslea about his meeting with Flynn in late November 2016 where
    Billingslea expressed concern to Flynn about his contacts with Russian
    ambassador Sergey Kislyak?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 5. Did you participate in any transition team meetings
    with Obama officials regarding Flynn?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making, I am unable to answer this question.

        Question 6. Were you aware of Flynn's conversation with Russian
    ambassador Sergey Kislyak on December 29, 2016 at any point before Vice
    President Pence's interview with CBS' ``Face the nation' on January 15,
    2017? If you were aware of Flynn's conversation with the Russian
    ambassador prior to Pence's interview, did you discuss Flynn's contact
    with Kislyak with Pence or any other senior transition officials?

        Answer. In light of the confidentiality interests that attach to
    executive branch decision-making and communications with the Vice
    President, I am unable to answer this question.

    TN InvesCo Fund

        Question 7. What was your role in the establishment of TN InvesCo
    Fund?

        Answer. I did not play a role in the establishment of this program.
    It was established by statute, designed and implemented under the
    administration of then-Governor Phil Bredesen (D) in 2009.

        Question 8. Were you involved in the legislation that created the
    TN InvestCo fund?

        Answer. No, the legislation that created the TN InvestCo fund was
    passed, signed into law and implemented in 2009, prior to my government
    service, which was from 2011-2015.
        Question 9. Did your private investment fund--Hagerty Peterson--
    benefit financially from the TN InvestCo Fund?

        Answer. No. In 2009, I became a limited partner with a minority
    stake in one of the ten funds that were selected under the TNInvestco
    program. That fund was separate from Hagerty Peterson and made no
    investments in any Hagerty Peterson portfolio companies. Nor did any of
    the other funds selected under the TNInvestco program. Prior to my
    entering government service in 2011, Hagerty Peterson became inactive.
    When I entered government in 2011, my interests in the fund were placed
    into a blind trust. In addition, all responsibility for oversight of
    the TNInvestco program was delegated to other officials, in
    consultation with the Governor's counsel.

        Question 10. Did the companies that received money through InvestCo
    have any oversight, reporting, or other monitoring and evaluation
    protocols?

        Answer. The reporting requirements for the companies that received
    funds were specified by the legislation and had to do with the location
    of the companies, the capital invested and associated employment. All
    day-to-day responsibility for oversight and monitoring of the
    TNInvestco program was delegated to department officials. As such, I
    had no direct role in oversight or monitoring this program.

        Question 11. What were the goals of the InvestCo Fund? Were those
    goals met? Was there any reported accounting of the activities that
    found this program created jobs or contributed to economic development
    for TN?

        Answer. The program was designed to increase the flow of capital to
    companies in Tennessee in the early stages of their development. Since
    the program's implementation, Tennessee has moved up the league tables
    in early stage risk capital deployment from #45 in 2010 to #22 in 2016,
    according to the Milken Institute State Technology and Science Index.

            Response to Follow-up Question for the Record Submitted
                  to William F. Hagerty by Senator Cory Booker

    Extent of Mr. Hagerty's knowledge of former National Security Advisor
            Michael Flynn's Russian and Turkish dealings as a senior
            transition official responsible for personnel.
        Question 1. Thank you for your response to the questions for the
    record I submitted on May 18, 2017. In reference to your knowledge of a
    November 18, 2016 letter from Congressman Cummings regarding Michael
    Flynn's lobbying on behalf of Turkey and a paid appearance with Russian
    President Vladimir Putin, you replied that you were unable to answer
    the question, ``in light of the confidentiality interests that attach
    to executive branch decision-making and communications with the Vice
    President-elect.''
        You also cited confidentiality interests that attach to executive
    branch decision making as the reason you opted not to answer my
    questions about discussions you may have had with Vice President-elect
    Pence about Congressman Cummings' letter as well as any discussions you
    may have had with other transition officials regarding former National
    Security Advisor Michael Flynn's communications and relationships with
    Russia and Turkey. All of the discussions or other information that I
    asked you about took place prior to President Trump and Vice President
    Pence taking office on January 20, 2017.
        Accordingly, below are a few follow-up questions to clarify the
    reasons why you are choosing not to answer my initial questions for the
    record.

       Please identify the legally recognized privilege (or privileges)
            that you are asserting as the basis for your refusal to answer
            the questions regarding your contacts with Vice President-elect
            Pence?
       If you are citing executive privilege (or any other privilege held
            by the chief executive or federal agencies), please explain the
            legal basis for claiming that privilege as a private citizen
            who was volunteering on a transition team prior to
            inauguration.
       If you are not citing executive privilege, please specify in detail
            the legal theory upon which you are basing your refusal to
            answer these questions.
       If upon reflection and legal review, you recognize that you do not
            have a sound legal theory upon which to rely, please provide
            full answers to the aforementioned questions for the record
            from my May 18 submission.

        Answer. I served in the role of Director of Presidential
    Appointments for the transition team, which was a separate legal entity
    from the campaign. My team and I were primarily focused on candidates
    for Cabinet positions. The selection of members of the White House
    staff was generally handled separately. As noted in my responses to
    your earlier questions, I was unable to respond in light of the
    confidentiality interests that attach to executive branch decision-
    making. Given those interests, I am unable to respond further to your
    follow-up questions.

                                   __________

                                   NOMINATION

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:14 a.m. in
    Room 419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Johnson,
    Gardner, Young, Isakson, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen, Coons,
    Murphy, Markey, and Booker.
        Also Present: Senator Baldwin.

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

        The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        And as a courtesy to three very distinguished guests this
    morning, Senator Cardin and I will defer our opening comments.
    We know that each of you have important business to deal with.
        We are honored to have Senator Johnson and Senator Baldwin
    introduce our outstanding nominee for this position, and we are
    especially honored to have the Speaker of the House of
    Representatives here, who I thought yesterday delivered some
    well-needed, unifying comments in a time of need, and I thank
    him for that and thank him for his leadership.
        And with that, knowing that you in particular have a lot of
    duties to deal with, Speaker Ryan, why do you not begin the
    process.
        Senator Cardin. And let me just join our chairman in
    thanking the Speaker for his comments yesterday. You spoke for
    all of us, and it was an incredibly difficult time, and we are
    very proud of your comments. Thank you.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL RYAN,
                    U.S. CONGRESSMAN FROM WISCONSIN

        Speaker Ryan. Thank you. Thank you for that, and thank you
    for your prayers. We have friends and colleagues in surgery
    right now, so we need our continual prayers. And I felt like we
    can speak for all of our colleagues in saying that this is a
    time for us to unify, and it is a time for us to reflect and I
    appreciate that.
        Let me on a lighter note thank you for having me here this
    morning. It is not often or ever a Speaker comes to the Senate,
    so thanks for letting me come over here----
        [Laughter.]
        Speaker Ryan [continuing]. To what we call the high-rent
    district.
        The Chairman. There is good reason for that.
        Speaker Ryan. That is right. That is right. Yes, I have not
    been over here in a long time.
        I appreciate the opportunity to say a few words about a
    good, close, old friend. Mark Green needs no introduction to
    this panel. He has long been a forceful advocate for American
    leadership in global development. He undoubtedly possesses the
    expertise and the experience. He is the perfect person for this
    job to lead USAID and to fulfill its mission.
        He is going to deliver the utmost transparency and
    accountability for taxpayers. The President certainly made the
    best possible choice.
        I have known Mark Green for 20 years. We were both elected
    together in the same election in 1998, along with Tammy, to the
    House. Our offices were next door to each other. Our staffs
    were closely related and integrated. We went to Bible study
    together every single week. We rose through the ranks in
    Wisconsin politics together.
        It was clear to me back in those days that Mark Green had a
    higher calling. His heart was always set on making a difference
    for people in need. You could see it when he talked about his
    time in Africa when he and Sue lived in a tent and were
    missionaries and working in Peace Corps work. You could see it
    when his choice to get on committee was the Foreign Affairs
    Committee because he wanted to work on things like PEPFAR and
    the Millennium Challenge Account law. He was so passionate
    about those issues. I was over working on budget spreadsheets;
    Mark Green was working on Millennium and PEPFAR and these
    issues.
        You could see it in just the passion that he has for
    advocating for the people who cannot advocate for themselves.
    This is his north star. This is his life's work. This is what
    he does. And so the endorsement I have for Mark Green is not
    merely personal; it is the fact that you could not have a
    better person to lead this kind of an organization.
        The work done by USAID, funded and overseen by this
    Congress, is critical to advancing security and democracy
    around the world, even more at this time at the moment we are
    in than ever before, I would argue.
        I think Mark understands as well as anyone that the
    strength and clarity of America's leadership is vital to our
    interests and our overall global security and stability. We are
    going to be very fortunate to have Mark Green as our voice and
    representative to the developing world.
        As administrator of USAID, he will do what he always has
    done. He has an uncanny ability to bring people together of
    differing views, of differing backgrounds, and to get them to
    work on the same page. He is a person who knows what it takes
    to improve and transform the lives of others.
        And so I just could not give a better unqualified
    endorsement of a finer person to lead a very important agency
    at a very important time than Mark Green, so thank you for
    having me. I appreciate it.
        The Chairman. Well, thank you. And thank you for being
    here. And for what it is worth, my sense is your very sincere
    comments reflect the feelings of I think most people here who
    have spent time with him, and I thank you for that. And we will
    not be offended if you go back to the superior side of the
    building and begin your work. So, thank you so much for being
    here.
        Senator Johnson, with great leadership on this committee,
    we are thankful that you are here to do the same thing and look
    forward to your comments.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Johnson. Well, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member
    Cardin, first of all, I want to join you in thanking the
    Speaker for his unifying comments yesterday as well and a day
    of just beyond disturbing event, so, you know, thank you, Mr.
    Speaker.
        And I am also honored to join the Speaker introducing
    former Ambassador and Congressman Mark Green as the nominee to
    be the next administrator of the U.S. Agency for International
    Development.
        We are at an important juncture for the future of U.S.
    foreign assistance, and Mark's exemplary character and unique
    qualifications make him an inspired choice to lead USAID into
    the future.
        Prior to serving in the State Assembly and in Congress
    representing Wisconsin's 8th District, Mark taught English in
    Kenya as a volunteer with WorldTeach. As a Member of Congress,
    he was instrumental in the passage of PEPFAR and the Millennium
    Challenge Corporation, which has helped save millions of lives
    and spurred global development.
        After serving in Congress, Mark became U.S. Ambassador to
    Tanzania and served as executive director of Malaria No More
    and is a board member of Millennium Challenge Corporation. He
    did this at great personal expense, having contracted both
    malaria and typhoid while serving others.
        Today, he serves as a senior director of the U.S. Global
    Leadership Coalition and as President of the International
    Republican Institute, a nonprofit organization that works to
    bring democracy and freedom to all corners of the world.
        Mark has repeatedly set his personal well-being aside in
    order to make the world a better place for countless others. He
    understands that compassion for those in need is an essential
    and galvanizing component of USAID's mission, and he also
    understands that foreign assistance is a strategic investment,
    which must be integrated with national strategy at the
    policymaking level. Most of all, Mark is a respected servant-
    leader with high moral character who will do an outstanding job
    of representing America's compassion and decency throughout the
    world. I have no doubt that he will lead USAID with dedication
    and distinction.
        I strongly endorse Mark's nomination and urge my colleagues
    to support him as well.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        Senator Baldwin, I have not had the opportunity to serve on
    a committee with you, but I thank you so much for what you
    bring to the United States Senate and for being here to show
    the strong bipartisan support for this nominee.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Baldwin. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Ranking Member Cardin and members of the
    committee.
        I, too, want to thank Speaker Ryan for his comments
    yesterday and today. It is time for more than just moments of
    unity.
        And I am proud to be sitting here with my colleagues in
    unity behind the nomination of Mark Green to be the leader of
    the United States Agency for International Development.
        I have known Mark--I hate to say this--for a quarter-
    century. Not only, as Speaker Ryan said, did we have the
    pleasure of being elected, all three of us, to the House of
    Representatives in the same year, but Mark Green and I were
    elected to the Wisconsin State Assembly together in 1992 and
    have had an opportunity to serve together and work across party
    lines for the people of Wisconsin for many years. I also had
    the pleasure of serving with Mark on the House Judiciary
    Committee for many years.
        I applaud the President's nomination of Mark Green to serve
    America in this position. He not only has the exemplary
    experience and qualifications to take on this responsibility;
    as you have heard, he has the deep personal passion and
    commitment to do this job, as shown through years of work in
    advancing our common good on the international stage.
        As we all confront the reality of an increasingly
    interconnected world that presents both challenges and
    opportunities, I have no doubt that Mark Green understands that
    America is always best served when we lead and reach out to the
    rest of the world, not turn inward.
        Senator Johnson, Speaker Ryan and I know and agree Mark
    Green is the right person for this mission, and I hope that our
    joint support sends a very strong message to this committee and
    the entire United States Senate that he is the right choice for
    the USAID administrator. I am hopeful that this committee and
    the full Senate will confirm Mark's nomination so that he can
    begin the work that he has been committed to do throughout his
    entire life, serving and making a difference in people's lives.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much for those comments and
    all three of you for being here. And what you have said, in
    many ways I feel like we could adjourn the meeting right now.
        [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. But I would say to each of you, please,
    again, feel free to leave. As a matter of fact, I am going to
    pause for a moment so it will not be awkward so that you can do
    so appropriately. Thank you so much for being here and for your
    role in making our country what it is.
        Ambassador Green, thank you so much for joining us today.
    This is not the first time we know that you have testified
    before this committee, and you are certainly no stranger to the
    halls of the Capitol. You have a long and diverse history in
    both public service and international development, and I am
    very pleased with your nomination to be the next USAID
    administrator and know that you will bring significant
    expertise and understanding to this new role.
        With a budget of over $25 billion, USAID represents about
    46 percent of our international affairs activities but just
    over half of 1 percent of the total U.S. Federal budget. USAID
    has an important mission, and many of its programs have
    stabilizing effects in regions of the world where we have
    national security interests.
        And while I know there has been much discussion about the
    President's budget request and, as I have said before, it is
    the role of Congress to fund the Federal Government, not the
    administration. So instead of focusing on that, I think we
    would be better served to shift our focus from what can be done
    towards what should be done. Instead of what can be done, we
    should focus away from what can be done towards what should be
    done.
        I am reminded of something Secretary Tillerson said at
    Tuesday's budget hearing: ``Funding does not equal results.
    Show me results, and I will tell you your commitment.'' And I
    just want to say I know that that is something that you are
    very focused on, and that is why we are all so proud that you
    are our nominee.
        That is why I am encouraged by the statement in your
    testimony that you, as USAID administrator, would set a higher
    standard for accountability and achieving results. I agree with
    you that we can create significant change by focusing on
    economic growth in a developing world. We should look for
    appropriate ways to leverage shared private and public sector
    interests and eliminating constraints to trade and investment,
    creating business environments that will attract investment in
    the developing world should be our priority.
        This commitment has a long history of bipartisanship, which
    we are going to demonstrate in a really sound way today on the
    Floor when it comes to oversight of our foreign assistance with
    the passage of legislation enacting important reforms such as
    the Global Food Security Act, Electrify Africa, and Water for
    the World Act. Should you be confirmed, I am confident that we
    would find a willing partner in our oversight and reform
    efforts.
        To that end, I want to highlight today one of the most
    impactful aid reforms that is achievable during this Congress,
    modernizing our food aid. Food for Peace has been operating
    under decades-old requirements to use 100 percent U.S. farm
    commodities, 50 percent of which must be shipped on overpriced,
    uncompetitive U.S.-flagged vessels. If we could modernize the
    program with increased flexibility in food aid delivery while
    still maintaining a significant role for the U.S. farmer who
    cares deeply, deeply about people in need, we could feed 5 to 8
    million more people a day with the exact same funding. I know
    you are very aware of that, and I really feel the time is here
    for us to address that issue.
        Food for Peace is authorized in the farm bill that is being
    reauthorized next year, and if you are confirmed as
    administrator, I would seek your commitment to working with us
    and the Ag Committees and others to modernize the program for
    the 21st century.
        Thank you for coming here today. I know you have important
    family members who we were honored to meet back behind the
    podium, but we look forward to you introducing them. We look
    forward to your testimony. We look forward to you serving in
    this important role.
        And with that, let me turn to my friend, the ranking
    member, Senator Ben Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for
    convening this hearing. And I will call you Congressman Green
    because I think being in Congress is more important than being
    an ambassador, but we can argue that issue later.
        But, Ambassador Green, thank you for your willingness to
    serve your country at this critical moment and one of the most
    important national security posts that we have in America. And
    I thank your family because this clearly is going to be a
    family sacrifice. You know that, your family knows that, and we
    thank them for joining you in this commitment for public
    service.
        I will acknowledge that I am not objective on your
    nomination. I have known you for a long time. I am very
    impressed by what you did when you were in the House of
    Representatives. I know your service that we saw in the
    Ambassador in Tanzania, what you did with Millennium Challenge
    Corporation and the NGO community. You have incredible
    endorsements from stakeholders who I deeply respect and the
    importance of the mission of USAID. And in our conversations,
    you were extremely passionate about the values that I think are
    critically important for America's security. So, you come to
    this day with a strong record and passion for this position,
    and I join the chairman in believing that there will be a very
    smooth confirmation process for you to assume the office as
    director of USAID.
        I say that recognizing that you have accepted a position
    during a very challenging moment. When we take a look at the
    conflicts globally and what these conflicts have meant as far
    as humanitarian crises in so many spots in the world where
    voids have been created, where we see extremist groups and
    terrorist organizations that are able to take advantage of that
    insecurity, that is your commitment to try to deal with both
    the humanitarian problem and to avoid the voids that allow
    terrorist groups and oppressive regimes to be able to function.
        You also understand the importance of United States
    leadership. It has been U.S. leadership that has provided the
    world direction, that deals with issues such as health
    epidemics that we have dealt with to dealing with good
    governance, anticorruption, and the creation and support of
    democratic institutions.
        And we are going to see that. The chairman alluded to that.
    You are going to see that leadership today in the United States
    Senate at 11 o'clock when we start voting on a bill that
    expresses not only our commitment as a Congress to take on the
    aggression of Russia and Iran but also our commitment to
    support democratic institutions and to have appropriate
    congressional review of executive actions so we can speak with
    a stronger united voice in this country. That to me is exactly
    what we need to do for our national security.
        But I need to point out that there are some self-inflicted
    challenges that we are imposing on ourselves. And we need to
    recognize that because we need to overcome these challenges. We
    have budget cuts that are being recommended that would make it
    virtually impossible for USAID to carry out the missions that
    we expect you to be able to carry out.
        The budget would withdraw U.S. aid missions from 37
    countries. That presents a very, very--if you do not have
    people on the ground, it is very difficult to be able to
    understand the circumstances. Having been on the ground, you
    understand that.
        The OMB directive reducing personnel could very well
    cripple the ability of carrying out missions. How the State
    Department reorganizes--and we had a hearing Tuesday with
    Secretary Tillerson. The jury is out on that. I agree with the
    chairman. Let us wait to see. We can always do things better.
    But I know how important it is for USAID's independence within
    the State Department family, and that is an issue that we are
    going to be looking to you, so this hearing is an opportunity
    for you to present your vision as how you see USAID fitting
    into our national security and to American values.
        I also will ask you to do two other things. One, assure us
    that you are going to be an effective voice within the Trump
    administration as it relates to these key decisions that are
    being made, recognizing that development assistance is
    critically important to our national security. How do you weigh
    in effectively within the Trump administration to carry out
    that commitment?
        And the second and equally as important, you have Democrats
    and Republicans on this committee that are dedicated to working
    with you in a bipartisan manner. The chairman mentioned some of
    these programs, and historically, we are proud of PEPFAR and
    how that changed the world landscape on HIV/AIDS. We know that
    what with did with Power Africa, what we have done with Feed
    the Future, what we have done with the water, so many different
    issues we have worked together as a team in order to advance
    U.S. leadership in national security matters.
        There are many areas that we want to work together on. I
    will just mention one. We are working on using the successful
    model of the trafficking in persons, our commitment to end
    modern-day slavery, which is a commitment which is continuing,
    and we will need your help in order to make sure we continue
    down that path because there are still way too many people
    being trafficked around the world, but to use that model to
    fight corruption. And I want to work with you and I want to
    work with Secretary Tillerson and members of the committee to
    figure out how we could be more effective in our international
    leadership to stop the rise of corruption in so many countries.
    And today, we are taking a major step in that direction against
    Russia, but we need to have an overall strategy on how to do
    that.
        So today gives you a chance to go over with this committee,
    the committee wants to work with you, your vision of USAID, how
    we can work together to promote your mission and how we can be
    effective in regards to the Trump administration so that we
    could have more unity in this country, recognizing how
    development assistance is critically important to our national
    security. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. [Presiding] Thank you, Senator Cardin.
        Mr. Green, I am sure Senator Corker has apologized to you.
    He has an important matter on the Floor he has to attend to.
    But he did not leave you to chance. I grew up in Wisconsin. I
    was born in Wisconsin. I received part of my higher education
    at the University of Wisconsin. Both sides of my family
    immigrated to Wisconsin. I see you are a latecomer, having been
    born in Massachusetts, but I am going to overlook that.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Risch. So with that, the floor is yours and we will
    be glad to hear from you.
        Senator Johnson. Just a quick interruption, though. You
    forgot to mention you are a Green Bay Packer fan.
        Senator Risch. I am a Green Bay Packer fan.
        Senator Johnson. As is Ambassador Green.
        Senator Risch. Thank you. The floor is yours.

          STATEMENT OF MARK ANDREW GREEN OF WISCONSIN, TO BE
      ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
                              DEVELOPMENT

        Ambassador Green. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
    Ranking Member, and thanks to the members of the committee. I
    am honored to come before you as President Trump's nominee for
    USAID administrator, and I am truly grateful to both the
    President and to Secretary Tillerson for their trust and
    support and confidence.
        You heard from the introducers. I am grateful to them, to
    you for the friendship and the kind words. Speaker Ryan, Paul,
    he and I do go back a long ways. As we were noting before we
    came out, Paul famously would walk back and forth from votes
    reading, you know, numbers tables from ways and means, and I
    was the guy that would talk about Africa. I think we were both
    pretty boring people at the time.
        I want to thank my family for their unwavering support, my
    parents, born South African and British but now proud Americans
    of more than 20 years; my wife Susan, who is here today, and
    our three children Anna and Alex, who are also here; and
    Rachel, who is back in Minnesota where she teaches.
        Mr. Chairman, 30 years ago this August, Sue and I began a
    journey as volunteer teachers in Kenya. That journey has taken
    me to five continents walking hospital wards in Tanzania,
    observing elections in Jordan and Burma, talking with young
    political leaders in Europe and Eurasia, meeting with community
    leaders in Central and South America and so much more. Back
    here, I have had the honor of helping to craft PEPFAR and MCC
    and working with a number of truly great organizations.
        Along the way, I have learned a lot about what is working
    in development and what can work even better. But more than
    anything else, this journey has driven home for me that America
    and our development tools can be an irreplaceable force for
    good in this world.
        Now, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, you have
    asked me for my priorities for USAID. I can best sum them up
    like this: Every President in modern memory has suggested that
    the purpose of foreign assistance should be ending its need to
    exist. If confirmed, I will make that our organizing principle.
        And that means three things. First, I will work to make
    sure that our programs respect our taxpayers. Our foreign
    assistance funds come from hardworking families all across this
    great country. I think we all realize that we have to use these
    dollars as efficiently and as effectively as we possibly can.
    If confirmed, I will focus our limited resources on what is
    working and end what is not. I will scrutinize every program to
    ensure that we are maximizing value, minimizing waste, and
    always advancing America's interests.
        Second, I will make clear to our partner countries that our
    assistance is not open-ended or inevitable or, most important,
    a substitute for what they must take on themselves. Every
    program should look forward to the day when it can end. And I
    will ask our missions to evaluate how each dollar moves a
    country closer to that day.
        To be clear, USAID will not walk away from our humanitarian
    commitments and will always be there when disaster strikes
    because that is who we are as Americans. But I believe the
    truest sense of compassion comes from helping people and
    countries to take care of themselves and to craft their own
    bright future.
        Finally, third, I will work to reshape our assistance tools
    and programs to better reflect our evolving relationship with
    the developing world. When USAID was first created some 55
    years ago, about 80 percent of the money flowing from America
    to the developing world came from the Government, ODA, official
    development assistance. Today, that figure is under 10 percent.
        International commerce, remittances, private philanthropy
    are now transformational forces. Added to that, we see new
    technologies emerging each and every day that create marvelous
    new opportunities. All of this suggests we should change our
    approach to supporting development. If confirmed, and working
    with all of you, I will pursue ideas for reforming our policies
    and procedures, rethinking our structure, and retooling how we
    engage with our development partners. I will also work hard to
    strengthen our interagency cooperation because I saw as
    Ambassador to Tanzania how that can be a truly effective force
    multiplier.
        Mr. Chairman, the same passion that carried me to East
    Africa 30 years ago still drives me today. I believe in the
    power of compassion. I believe in the power of development. My
    journey has reminded me over and over again that fostering
    development is hard work, but also, if done right and led well,
    it can not only lift lives and strengthen communities but also
    help America achieve many of her most important strategic
    priorities.
        And so with your support for my confirmation, I commit to
    working with USAID's talented team all around the world to make
    smart choices and take on important work that will lead, I
    believe, to an even stronger, more effective agency in the
    years ahead. Thank you for considering my nomination, and I
    look forward to your questions.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [Mr. Green's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Mark Andrew Green

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the committee, I
    am honored to come before you today as the President's nominee to lead
    the U.S. Agency for International Development.
        And I'm grateful to President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for
    their trust and confidence.
        Senator Baldwin, Senator Johnson, Speaker Ryan, thank you for your
    friendship, your years of support, and that gracious introduction.
        To those with whom I consulted in preparing for today, thank you
    for your counsel and guidance.
        I also want to express my personal gratitude to Wade Warren, who
    has done an outstanding job leading the Agency these last months as
    Acting Administrator.
        Finally, but most importantly, I want to thank my family for their
    unwavering support. My parents, born South African and British, but
    proud Americans for twenty plus years.
        My wife, Susan, who is here today, and our three children Rachel,
    Anna and Alex. Thirty years ago this August, Sue and I began a journey
    as volunteer teachers in Kenya. We never could have imagined it would
    bring us to this day and to this great honor.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, should I be confirmed,
    it is lessons from that journey, touching five continents and working
    with countless development leaders, that I will bring to my work at
    USAID.
        While teaching in rural Kenya, I learned how desperate so many
    families are for a taste of the opportunities we as Americans usually
    take for granted. Many of my students walked miles, barefoot and ill-
    nourished, to attend class. Never mind that there weren't enough
    textbooks or that during the rainy season holes in our tin roof and
    lack of glass in our windows disrupted lessons. When some of the
    students were sent home for falling behind on school fees, I often
    caught them trying to sneak back INTO my class. Their determination,
    their passion, has never left me.
        Years later, on September 11th, 2001, while serving the good people
    of Northeast Wisconsin in Congress, like you, I learned painfully just
    how small the world had become.
        After 9-11, I was part of the team that crafted key development
    initiatives like the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
    (PEPFAR) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), programs that
    have transformed U.S. development assistance, brought about remarkable
    changes in many parts of the world and taught us lessons that we apply
    to this day.
        Later still, while serving President Bush and the American people
    as our Ambassador to Tanzania, I saw first-hand how those same tools
    actually worked in the field, and what could be done to make them even
    better. I learned additional lessons too numerous to count.
        I saw how important our civil-society partners can be, both faith-
    based and secular, in reaching out to people and communities in need. I
    learned how important it was to tackle bureaucracy and prevent turf
    battles, and worked to mobilize every agency and every partner's
    particular capacities and strengths.
        I was so often impressed by the skills and talent of our
    development professionals, particularly those who powered USAID. And
    each day, as I drove to my office in Dar es Salaam, past the memorial
    to those who lost their lives in the 1998 Embassy bombing, I was
    reminded both that there are forces out there seeking to harm us, and
    that our diplomacy and development teams are often among the first in
    harm's way.
        Mr. Chairman, my journey in development didn't end with my time in
    Tanzania, nor did the lessons I've learned. Back here in the States,
    I've been blessed to work with important organizations that are
    mobilizing resources, policies and ideas to make our development work
    in the field so much more effective.
        My work with Malaria No More and the U.S. Global Leadership
    Coalition taught me the importance of bringing together voices from all
    sectors -- business, civil society and defense -- to educate voters and
    their representatives on the importance of American leadership. My
    activities with the International Conservation Caucus Foundation have
    shown me how bipartisan coalitions can be forged for important causes
    like common-sense conservation.
        My work with the Consensus for Development Reform and my time on
    the Board of the MCC drove home the importance of monitoring and
    evaluation, and focusing on outcomes. These last three-plus years as
    President of the International Republican Institute have shaped my
    views in so many ways. I've traveled to places like Mongolia, Ukraine
    and Colombia, and I've seen how vitally important good governance is to
    sustainable development outcomes.
        All of these experiences, from working in classrooms in Kenya, to
    walking hospital wards in Tanzania, to observing election halls in
    Jordan and Burma, have shown me that the American people and our lead
    development agency, USAID, can be an irreplaceable force for good in
    the world.
        It would be an extraordinary honor to lead the men and women of the
    U.S. Agency for International Development.
        From responding to disasters and pandemics, to feeding the
    desperate and healing the sick, opposing extremism, strengthening
    governance, and creating opportunity for children, small business
    owners, and rural farmers, USAID's work is broad and its impact is
    growing.
        Early results show that in the last six years, USAID's food-
    security efforts have helped save nearly one million children from the
    lifelong effects of chronic malnutrition, and helped at least nine
    million more people live free from extreme poverty.
        USAID has helped save almost seven million lives through the
    President's Malaria Initiative, supported life-sustaining HIV
    treatments for 11.4 million more through PEPFAR, and our humanitarian
    assistance has reached more than 350 million people suffering through
    disasters and food emergencies.
        USAID isalso pioneering new technologies to help entrepreneurs gain
    access to financing, combat diseases like Zika and Ebola, and bring
    reliable electricity to whole communities and countries.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I know that, if
    confirmed, I will take the helm during a time of unique challenges for
    the Agency, the wider development community and those of us working to
    ensure our nation's security.
        International development needs have always outstripped resources.
    Yet, the needs facing us today are nearly unprecedented. We will need
    to make tough, smart choices in order to best advance our interests and
    values.
        Violent extremism in many parts of the world, hostility to civil
    society and attacks on values we hold dear are making our work more
    dangerous and more expensive.
        On the other hand, there are reasons for great optimism.
    Innovations like SMS and smartphone applications are connecting the
    developing world. Research is hastening the eradication of scourges
    like Ebola and malaria. These are just a few of the advancements that
    hold great promise for our work.
        International development is one of those quiet places where
    Republicans and Democrats have long come together on a bipartisan
    basis. It was, after all, President Bush who created MCC and PEPFAR,
    and then President Obama who launched Power Africa and Feed the Future.
        If confirmed, I will do my best to work in this bipartisan spirit
    and apply the many lessons I've learned since first arriving in that
    East African classroom.
        Mr. Chairman, you've asked me for my priorities for USAID. I can
    best sum them up this way: every President in modern memory has
    suggested that the purpose of foreign assistance should be ending its
    need to exist. If confirmed, I plan to make that our core organizing
    principle.
        That would mean pursuing three overarching priorities.
        First, I will make sure that our programs respect our taxpayers.
        I will set a high standard of accountability for USAID and our
    partners. Our foreign assistance funds are precious: they come from
    hard-working families all across this great country. We owe it to them
    to use these as efficiently and effectively as possible.
        I will focus our limited resources on what is working, and end what
    is not. I will scrutinize every program and every expenditure to ensure
    that we are maximizing value, minimizing waste and always advancing
    America's interests. But I will need your advice and counsel on how to
    do this best, and I commit to consulting with you as we move forward.
        Second, I will make it clear to our partners that our assistance
    isn't open-ended or inevitable or, most important, a substitute for
    what they must take on themselves. Our support must never be seen as a
    gift or a handout, but instead as the proverbial hand UP.
        Every program should look forward to the day when it can end. So I
    will ask every USAID mission to evaluate how each program dollar moves
    a country closer to that day.
        We should emphasize programs that incentivize local capacity-
    building and implementation, mobilize domestic resources and ensure
    that our host-government partners have ``skin in the game.''
        To be very clear, USAID will NOT walk away from our commitment to
    humanitarian assistance, and we will always stand with people
    everywhere when disaster strikes, for this is who we are as Americans.
        But I also believe that the truest sense of American compassion
    comes from helping people and countries take care of themselves and
    craft their own bright futures.
        Third, and finally, I will work to reform our assistance tools and
    reshape our programs to better reflect America's evolving relationship
    with the developing world.
        When USAID was first created, about 80 percent of the money flowing
    from the United States to the developing world was government money --
    ``official development assistance.'' Today that figure is less than 10
    percent.
        International commerce, remittances and private philanthropy have
    become transformational forces that are creating unprecedented
    opportunities for improving the human condition. There are more
    American companies investing in Africa and more faith-based
    organizations serving communities across Latin America than ever
    before.
        We are living in a remarkable time of innovation and
    entrepreneurship. When Sue and I lived in that Kenyan village, only one
    wind-up telephone served the entire neighborhood. Visiting that same
    village just a dozen years later, all the teachers had cell phones.
    These days, just a dozen years after that, these same teachers are
    paying their bills, accessing electricity and connecting to banks --
    all on their smartphones.
        These changes have upended the development landscape. There are
    literally trillions of dollars that could be mobilized for development
    if we learn to better leverage partnerships, catalyze private-sector
    investments and amplify the efforts of foundations and non-profits.
        If confirmed, and working with you, I will pursue ideas for
    reforming USAID's offices and procedures, rethinking its structure and
    changing the way it engages with the many players in the development
    space to better tap into new financial flows, catalyze mutually
    beneficial investment and remove unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles to
    private-sector participation.
        I will consult with a wide range of partners, public- and private-
    sector, commercial and non-profit, to ensure that we are engaging them
    in the most-effective way possible.
        Of course, while USAID is America's lead development Agency, many
    other Departments, Agencies and offices provide some aspect of foreign
    assistance. I will work hard to strengthen our interagency cooperation,
    because I saw firsthand in Tanzania how it can be an effective force-
    multiplier.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the Departments of State and
    Health and Human Services and other colleagues across the interagency
    to ensure that USAID's unique development tools are addressing our most
    significant foreign-policy and national-security challenges.
        I will also work to strengthen the Agency's relationship with the
    Department of Defense, especially in crisis states, where the military
    and USAID work side-by-side toward that shared goal of building a more
    peaceful future.
        Mr. Chairman, the same passion that carried me to East Africa 30
    years ago still drives me today. I believe in the power of compassion
    and the power of development.
        But today, I know what I didn't know then. Years of experience and
    learning have shown me that fostering development is hard. But if done
    right, and led well, it can not only help lift lives and strengthen
    communities in far off lands, but also help America achieve many of her
    strategic priorities.
        USAID has done amazing work over the past 55 years, but we can and
    must do even better. If confirmed, I commit to consulting with you when
    there are hard decisions, and working side-by-side to strengthen the
    Agency.
        Mr. Chairman, I believe that USAID is an asset to our national
    security and the global face of American generosity. With your support
    for my confirmation, I commit to working with the talented men and
    women of USAID to build up what is working, change what is not, and
    deliver an Agency that is even stronger and more effective tomorrow
    than the one that exists today.

        Senator Risch. Great. Thank you very much for presenting.
        Senator Isakson. Mr. Chairman?
        Senator Risch. Thank you for presenting what I think is a
    clear vision for the agency and where you want to take it and
    drive it. I am going to--I am sorry. Senator Isakson?
        Senator Isakson. I want to do something that is very rude
    and apologize in advance. I have to go chair the Veterans
    Committee, which is my committee, but I came to Washington at
    the same time Mark Green did. I have known him all 20 years. I
    have never known a better public servant, a better member of
    Congress. I have been to Africa and seen firsthand what he has
    done, and I just wanted to give him my unqualified endorsement
    and thanks for all the leadership he has demonstrated for me
    over the years and wish him the very best.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator Isakson.
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Coming from you, that means a lot.
        So, with that, the chairman is going to reserve his time,
    and, Senator Booker, I am going to recognize you for questions.
        Senator Booker. I am going to reserve my time as well and
    defer to Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Booker, Senator Risch.
        Karibuni. Welcome, Ambassador. And as we had a chance to
    discuss, I am grateful for your willingness to serve as USAID
    Ambassador. And you and Susan have had a remarkable journey in
    service and faith and have made a great difference for the
    people of Wisconsin and for our nation. And I am thrilled to
    have someone with the depth of your experiences in Kenya, in
    Kakamega. As a teacher, you were mwalimu. I was mwanafunzi at
    the time. As a Member of Congress, helping develop some of the
    most innovative and effective programs in American development
    history with MCC and PEPFAR, as Ambassador to Tanzania and in
    leadership roles of IRI and USGLC. All of these will serve you
    well in this role.
        And it is my hope that you will also be an effective voice
    for U.S.-Africa policy within the administration since we still
    have very few signals about how the Trump administration
    intends to engage in a continent with enormous potential and
    where we have a lot of good but hard work to do.
        USAID spends about half of all its money in sub-Saharan
    Africa, and it is a continent that really needs our effective
    and engaged partnership. We talked about the Young African
    Leaders Initiative, or YALI, a relatively small and inexpensive
    program but that I think has a dramatic impact.
        When I visited Liberia during Ebola, I had a chance to meet
    with the returned YALI volunteers who had spent a summer in the
    United States and were now back in Liberia, every one of whom
    was doing remarkable things, leading or starting volunteer
    organizations or embedded into government ministries that
    really needed their professionalism and service.
        As administrator, will you advocate for programs like YALI
    and YSEALI that are, I believe, both low-cost and high-impact
    people-to-people programs to continue? And I wondered if you
    are familiar with the regional leadership centers that the
    USAID currently runs in partnership with the Mastercard
    Foundation and whether you think continuing to support not just
    the summer program here in the United States but building this
    network of highly motivated, promising young Africans is a good
    investment of U.S. dollars.
        Ambassador Green. Senator, thank you. Thanks for the
    question and the kind words.
        I cannot say that I have been fully briefed on the regional
    centers, but I can say I am very familiar with YALI and YSEALI.
    My current organization, the International Republican
    Institute, has hosted YALI interns and we have hired a YALI
    intern, who now works for us in Mali. And we have also done
    extensive work with YSEALI in southeast Asia.
        Your question gets to something that you and I discussed
    briefly that I think is on one hand potentially a challenge but
    on the other an enormous opportunity, and that is the changing
    demographics in the world. The median age of a Tanzanian is 17,
    and it is going down. In Uganda, it is 16. And so we see
    millions of young Africans who are looking for opportunities,
    and I think it is important for us to help them find those
    opportunities, economic opportunities, but also democratic
    opportunities, helping them to engage in institutions so that
    they are invested in the survival of the system, so they are
    making important contributions.
        I believe that the area that we are talking about,
    development from MCC to Power Africa, is one of those
    increasingly rare places in this town that is truly bipartisan.
    Every administration makes contributions in terms of the tools
    that we are able to use in our state craft in this space. MCC
    we were talking about but Feed the Future obviously, YALI,
    Power Africa, I think they are great. I think we should
    continue to build upon them, to find ways to refine them, but I
    think they are great contributions and so I commit to working
    with you on these.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. I am excited to do that, work
    together. I have one more minute so I will ask one more
    question if I might.
        Democracy and governance is an area I am very concerned
    about, I think has been underfunded because those funds were
    used for important programs that I think have shown promise,
    Feed the Future and Power Africa in the last administration.
    And in your testimony you note the importance of good
    governance to sustainable development outcomes and of working
    together to promote values like free speech, free press, and
    fighting corruption. How do you intend to speak up for these
    values as USAID administrator? How can we better address issues
    like corruption and security sector abuse through foreign
    assistance? And frankly, given that there is across Africa a
    competing narrative from China of sort of an authoritarian
    approach to development, how do we make this a higher priority
    and more visible in the Trump administration?
        Ambassador Green. Senator, thank you for the question.
    Democracy and governance is obviously a topic I am passionate
    about and something that is I think an important distinction.
    We often hear about the importance of governance, and
    governance is important, but I think democratic governance is
    awfully important. For the investments that we are all talking
    about to be sustainable over the long haul, what has to go with
    them is citizen-centered, citizen-responsive political systems.
    Otherwise, what happens is we tend to be in a pendulum and
    these investments only last as long as a particular regime
    does.
        It is in our interest to create and to foster and to
    reinforce democratic citizen-centered systems. I do not see a
    dichotomy between emphasizing our values and the other
    development tools. MCC is built upon the premise that they have
    to go hand in hand. There is a certain bundle of values and
    principles that a country must succeed at if it is going to
    rise, and democracy is at the heart of that, so I look forward
    to working with you. You can count on me to be a forceful
    advocate for prioritizing democracy.
        Senator Coons. Well, thank you. If I might, in conclusion,
    I just appreciate your whole family, your children, your wife
    Susan being here and their support of your lifetime of service.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I cannot think of a better opportunity today
    for us to have a truly bipartisan confirmation hearing than
    this, and I look forward to supporting your nomination and to
    working with you as USAID administrator. Thank you very much.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        Senator Johnson?
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Now that I am on this side of the dais, let me also say
    thank you for your past service. Let me thank your family for
    your past service, as well as your future service. You
    probably, because of his service, have seen less of your dad,
    less of your husband, and you will probably see a little less
    of him now that he takes on this very important role.
        I really have two questions, Mark, dealing with your
    testimony. And this is really tying in with what you were just
    talking with Senator Coons about as well. I think you
    realizing, having been in the political realm, there is nothing
    more unpopular than foreign aid. As a fiscal conservative, I
    have always talked about that if it is spent well, it is money
    well-spent, and so it is incredibly important that we hold
    recipient nations accountable.
        How familiar are you with the work of, for example, people
    like Bjorn Lomborg and the Copenhagen Consensus that, very
    similar to your testimony, says, ``We have limited resources;
    we must allocate those in a prioritized fashion to do the most
    good for the most people''? Can you just kind of speak to that
    issue?
        Ambassador Green. Senator, I cannot say that I am
    completely familiar with the particular report or point of
    view. What I can say is that I think our development
    assistance--prioritized, deployed accurately and effectively--
    helps keep us safer. I think we are seeing tremendous challenge
    and turbulence around the world, and I think our development
    tools can help provide some stability of institutions so that
    institutions and governments are able to deliver for their
    people. I think development can be a helpful tool in our
    efforts to counter and prevent violent extremism.
        I think it also helps us to keep the economy growing.
    Ninety-five percent of the world's population is outside the
    U.S., so our farmers and producers are looking for markets. I
    think if we are able to use these tools well, they help to
    build those markets and advance those markets.
        Some of our tools, like Feed the Future and Power Africa
    help us to mobilize and tap into the private sector here, the
    entrepreneurial spirit that this country is famous for. It is
    part of our foreign policy. It is also good for us.
        So, we do have to prioritize, absolutely. I just believe
    that many of these tools, if pointed in the right way, and
    evaluated well, help us as they help others.
        Senator Johnson. I think one of the more destructive
    aspects and really harms our ability to sell foreign aid to the
    public is when funds are abused. Can you speak to that?
        Ambassador Green. Great question. You are right. Diversion
    of funds, poorly spent funds, whether it be fraud, waste, or
    abuse or just inefficient spending undermines people's faith in
    what we are doing. And so you can count on me to place a
    premium on transparency, on accountability. In the lead-up to
    today's hearing, I met briefly with the USAID inspector
    general, just getting to meet her and introduce myself. I look
    forward to working with her. We have to squeeze these dollars,
    we have to have good vetting systems, and we have to make sure
    that these monies do not go astray.
        It may not be a lot of money in terms of the overall
    Federal budget. It is precious money. It is precious money that
    comes from taxpayers who, in my experience, are willing to see
    those dollars go to good causes in the right places, if we do
    not waste it and do not take them for a fool. And so my
    commitment to you and to the members of the committee is to
    scrutinize, evaluate, and constantly be measuring what we are
    doing and make sure that we do not have the kinds of abuse and
    fraud that we hear about, fortunately rarely, but we do hear
    about and we have to take care to avoid.
        Senator Johnson. I appreciate that. And finally, in your
    testimony I thought it was interesting you used the phrase
    ``irreplaceable force for good.'' Since I have entered this
    realm and as a fiscal conservative defending foreign aid, I
    always talk about America has been a phenomenal force for good,
    you know, how proud we all must be when there is devastating
    floods in Pakistan, it is American foodstuffs; when devastating
    tsunamis in Indonesia, it is America's fleet that goes steaming
    to the rescue; and when AIDS devastates Africa, it is a program
    like PEPFAR and billions of dollars spent by America that do so
    much. And as Secretary Mattis said, you know, you either spend
    it here or give me 10 times more for bullets.
        I have heard you speak with real passion because not only
    did you help craft and were instrumental in the passage of
    PEPFAR but you were there on the ground and you have borne
    witness to how powerful an example that is. I just wanted to
    give you the last moments of my time to just describe that to
    the committee.
        Ambassador Green. Well, thank you. Thank you, Senator.
        The story I often tell comes from my time in Tanzania as
    America. So, 1998, Tanzania was a non-aligned nation, which
    means it was sort of looking more the other way towards the
    East. On that terrible day in 1998, the Embassy was bombed
    essentially by al-Qaida. It was a devastating blow to a country
    that had not had that kind of violence.
        In the rubble and in the ashes, it was America, the
    American people who went to work shoulder-to-shoulder with the
    Tanzanians to take on many of their poverty-enhanced
    challenges. And in the span of 10 years, they became a very
    close ally because, as they looked around, who was it that was
    helping them take on AIDS, take on malaria, take on poverty,
    take on educational challenges? It was the American people.
        When I served as Ambassador in 2008, President Bush became
    the first sitting President to visit Tanzania. And what he was
    struck by as we were driving the streets, the crowds were 10-
    deep. And President Bush, to his great credit, said, look, it
    is not about me; it is about PEPFAR. It is about the
    President's malaria initiative. It is through these tools they
    understand that American people care.
        That is about the best brand I can think of. If we are able
    to project that brand to people saying, look, when disaster
    strikes, we are there, we are with you, we do not waste the
    money and, we will help your ability to take care of
    yourselves--because you do need to take care of yourselves--but
    in those challenging times we will be there. And, again, I
    think is our great value.
        Final point, sort of where you began, there are challenges
    in the world, and I know sometimes people get tired that it is
    always America that gets called in to help out. All I know is
    the world does not get better if America recedes into the
    shadows. There is just no way the world gets better. And so we
    have to be a force in the world stage, and we have to be a
    force for good. And I think these tools, crafted in bipartisan
    way with tremendous bipartisan support, that is a key part of
    who we are and a key part of our foreign policy.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mark. The President has
    nominated a very good man. I just want to say I appreciate the
    expressions of bipartisan support.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I could not agree more with both you and Senator Johnson.
    As you know, many of us are deeply worried that we are right
    now in a period of massive withdrawal, America, from the world,
    and it seems that we have been presented with a budget that is
    a blueprint for America walking away from all of these
    leadership positions that we have put ourselves in.
        And I always love listening to Senator Johnson talk about
    his support as a fiscal conservative for foreign aid because I
    hear that back in Connecticut all the time. The, you know,
    folks who support Democrats, folks who support Republicans,
    they understand why we need to be forward-deployed to protect
    ourselves but also to do good. Folks in Connecticut are really
    proud when it is America that is coming to the rescue of people
    who have been devastated by famines and floods.
        You know, and the polling is so interesting because it
    tells you that most Americans think that, you know, about a
    third of the budget that we appropriate every year is spent on
    foreign aid when the reality is it is around 1 percent. But the
    most interesting piece of those polls is that when you ask
    Americans how much they think we should be spending on foreign
    aid, they tell you about 10 percent of our budget. And so it is
    interesting the disconnect that exists between the debate here
    and especially the budget that the President has proposed to us
    and where our constituents are.
        I am just so glad you are willing to serve in this
    position, and my hope is that not only will you be an effective
    administrator but that you will be a political power for good
    inside this administration, that you can help explain to this
    President and his national security team how we are cutting off
    our nose to spite our face if we proceed with 30-plus percent
    cuts to these programs.
        And in that spirit, let me--I know you are not here to
    defend the budget, but let me just talk to you about one of the
    facets that worries me about it and get your comments. I think
    if you look at the budget that is presented to us, you can make
    an argument that this administration is proposing to stay in
    the game of trying to put broken countries back together but is
    proposing getting out of the game in terms of preventing
    fragile states from becoming broken. So, we are spending money
    in this budget in Iraq and Syria and Libya, but we are
    effectively gutting funding for places like Jordan, Lebanon,
    Tunisia, and places further afield like Bangladesh and Mali and
    Nigeria.
        You know, in your experience, you know, talk about the
    importance of spending a little bit of money to help fragile
    states hold it together rather than waiting until they fall
    apart to spend a whole bunch of money later on.
        Ambassador Green. Senator, thank you. I think you are
    asking one of the key questions that we all need to take on.
    You are right; as I have been preparing for today, I have been
    startled by just the sheer need that is out there in the
    immediate sense. A famine was already declared in parts of
    South Sudan. We have three other countries that are teetering
    on famine and unfortunately may fall into famine in 2017, which
    would be the first time since World War II where four countries
    will simultaneously be in famine. And obviously, the
    humanitarian needs that go with that are enormous.
        The United States is the largest bilateral donor and the
    largest provider of such assistance, and I think we will
    continue to do our part.
        But you are right; you have the immediate, but you also
    have that which is at risk. You have parts of the world that
    are either newly post-conflict or fragile, and it is important
    that we find the resources to strengthen those fragile
    institutions, helping people--for example, we spoke earlier
    about that demographic of young people who may feel
    marginalized, who may feel alienated, who may have less than
    the economic opportunity that they might want. Those are areas
    where I think we do have to make some investments to prevent
    longer-term conflicts.
        Senator Murphy. One final quick question about that, and
    that is flexibility of funds. One of the complaints that I have
    heard over and over again at State and at USAID is that we box
    funds in on a country-by-country and capacity-by-capacity basis
    whereas it might make much more sense to give the administrator
    or an Assistant Secretary the ability to quickly deploy funds
    to an area that needs them.
        Do you have thoughts on this and recommendations that--
    maybe not today but you might be willing to give us as to how
    we grant you and your team that you will have between USAID and
    State, the ability to move funds a little bit more
    expeditiously?
        Ambassador Green. Well, Senator, I have to confess to you
    that the staff who was preparing me for today said for goodness
    sakes, do not bring that up, but you brought it up.
        Senator Murphy. I did.
        Ambassador Green. You are right. So, the numbers that I
    have seen suggest that, of the most recent, the fiscal year
    2017 budget, only 7 percent of that is flexible as opposed to
    29 percent back in 2009. Obviously, that limits the ability of
    USAID, the administrator, working with all of you to adjust to
    changing circumstances. So, I will come to you with some
    specific ideas, but obviously circumstances are changing so
    rapidly these days that flexibility would be tremendously
    helpful, and I thank you for raising the point.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
        Ambassador Green, I just cannot tell you how excited I am
    to support your nomination today. I cannot think of a better
    person for this position. I really enjoyed our visit in the
    office again this week to discuss the future of USAID and how
    we might reform it. As I mentioned to you in the office,
    Senator Shaheen and I have convened a bipartisan commission, a
    task force working with CSIS, and the purpose of this
    commission is to help you. As you step into your new role, we
    will be providing some actionable recommendations on what
    optimal development reform--how to achieve a more optimal
    development reform and reorganization, something you are
    focused on.
        We have brought in former Bush and Obama administration
    officials, retired Foreign Service officers, former
    Ambassadors, former National Security Council staffers. We have
    met twice. We are going to meet one more time, perhaps two more
    times, and we intend to issue a public report in mid-July.
        Ambassador Green, after our report is released, would you
    be willing to meet with me and Senator Shaheen, as well as some
    of these top development experts, to hear our recommendations
    related to reform and reorganization of USAID in our nation's
    development enterprise?
        Ambassador Green. Thank you for the question and the
    opportunity, very much so. I would be quite interested. Again,
    I think this is an area of foreign policy that is not partisan.
        Senator Young. Right.
        Ambassador Green. And so the fact that you are able to
    bring together members of the committee from both sides of the
    aisle I think is great. I will look forward to the report and
    discussing it with you, and I am very interested in what you
    will be putting together.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you for your indulgence on that.
        Would you agree that U.S. development efforts can and
    should be better coordinated across agencies? I think you have
    already spoken to this.
        Ambassador Green. Yes.
        Senator Young. Yes.
        Ambassador Green. Yes. I think foreign assistance is right
    now implemented by 60 different offices, departments, and
    agencies throughout the executive branch, so sure, I think that
    makes sense.
        Senator Young. Would you also agree that USAID's operations
    would be more efficient, more effective if they are informed by
    a fresh strategic analysis that includes the establishment of
    specific development priorities, objectives, milestones, and
    metrics supporting the national security strategy and also
    coordinated with the national defense strategy, while balancing
    ends and means and identifying risks along the way?
        Ambassador Green. Senator, I think these challenging times
    that we see in so many parts of the world require us to ensure
    that our development tools are coordinated with other parts of
    our broader national security strategy, so I think that makes
    sense, and I look forward to following up with you and seeing
    how we can help inform that and participate.
        Senator Young. Well, that is encouraging. At an earlier
    hearing before the full committee some weeks ago, former
    Secretary of State Madeleine Albright indicated this very sort
    of strategic analysis is needed. In fact, she said it would
    make an important difference. And at that same hearing, former
    National Security Advisor Hadley said, quote, ``I think it is a
    terrific idea, and we need the kind of process you described.''
        So, Ambassador Green, do you agree with the assessment of
    Secretary Albright and Advisor Hadley that our nation's
    development efforts would benefit from this strategic analysis?
    This is what we call a leading question in the business.
        Ambassador Green. Senator, if confirmed, I will look
    forward to working with you on it, and I do think that such a
    national security development strategy makes sense and is a
    useful contribution as we look to craft long-term policy.
        Senator Young. Well, I of course agree, and that is why on
    May 24, Senator Shaheen and I introduced S. 1228. It is the
    National Diplomacy and Development Strategy Act of 2017, and I
    look forward to working with this committee to pass the
    legislation, and once it is passed, look forward to working
    with you to ensure that our development reform and
    reorganization efforts, as well as the operations of USAID, are
    guided by current and careful strategic analysis.
        In the remainder of my time I would like to pick up on an
    issue that my team and I have worked very hard on in recent
    months, and it pertains to the situation in Yemen, the largest,
    the most serious humanitarian crisis in the world. I know you
    are well aware of it. The port of Hodeida in the Red Sea
    processes between 70 and 80 percent of the incoming cargo,
    critical imports into the country of Yemen historically. And a
    large portion of the individuals in most desperate need of food
    and medicine are right near that port within the country.
        For a variety of reasons, we are seeing bottlenecks and
    delays at Hodeida. There are life-and-death implications. In
    fact, two-thirds of Yemen's population is at risk of starvation
    or succumbing to disease in coming months by some accounts.
        To increase the port's capacity to deliver these supplies,
    USAID spent roughly $4 million of our tax dollars through the
    World Food Program to procure four cranes. Roughly speaking,
    these cranes would double or triple the capacity of the port to
    offload humanitarian supplies. Unacceptably, these cranes were
    on their way to Hodeida but the Saudi-led coalition revoked the
    clearance.
        Ambassador Green, once confirmed, will you work with me to
    look into this issue and see how we can resolve it?
        Ambassador Green. Senator, thank you for the question. Yes,
    I will. Obviously, access for humanitarian reasons is crucial.
    Yemen is one of the four nations that is either in famine or on
    the verge of it. Sadly, it is manmade. These are political-
    driven famines, and so they need political solutions, and I
    look forward to working with you on it.
        Senator Young. Ten seconds with your indulgence, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Ten seconds.
        Senator Young. I want to give a shout-out to James Bever,
    Acting Assistant Administrator for Legislative and Public
    Affairs at USAID, he responded to my request for action on open
    GAO recommendations. And we have drafted legislation working
    with Senator Menendez on this. And with a little prompting he
    was able to assure us that these recommendations will be
    complied with, these open recommendations. So well done, Mr.
    Bever, if you are watching this.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Senator Risch. Ambassador Green, I apologize. We have got--
    as always, we are running over the top of ourselves, and we
    have got to run down and vote or we are going to miss the vote.
    So, we are going to take a short recess as quickly as we can go
    down. I know the Senators have some really important issues
    that they want to take up, and so we are going to make it
    happen, but we are going to have to be patient with it.
        So, the committee will be in recess subject to the call of
    the chair. [Recess.]
        Senator Risch. The committee will come to order.
        And we apologize for the interruption, but when they call
    the votes, you have got to go, so thank you very much.
        And, Senator Menendez, you are up.
        Senator Menendez. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ambassador, congratulations on your nomination. I am sure
    that--while I was at another event while the bulk of the
    testimony was going on there, I am going to join the many who
    commend and respect your work and public service as a
    Congressman, as an ambassador, and, most recently, at the
    International Republican Institute. And I say that as a
    Democrat.
        So, I have full confidence in your experience and
    commitment to the mission of USAID, and I believe the agency
    and the American people will be well-served by your leadership.
        However, my concern for USAID, however, is that your
    passion for public service and what I take to be your
    fundamental belief that the United States should be a leading
    advocate on the world stage for democracy, human rights, and
    the values we champion here at home is not necessarily shared
    by some leading figures in the administration.
        Earlier this week, Secretary Tillerson came before this
    committee to explain indefensible cuts to critical American
    foreign policy and foreign assistance initiatives, programs in
    support of democracy, economic development, lifesaving
    humanitarian and health initiatives, and unfortunately did
    nothing in my mind to assuage the concerns that I share with
    others that USAID and the institutional knowledge, the
    technical expertise, and the long-term programming it houses
    would be folded into a weakened and less-effective State
    Department.
        Now, I do not believe USAID is perfect, but I do--and I
    certainly welcome reforms that promote best practices,
    efficiency, and transparency, but its mission is fundamentally
    different from the State Department and critical to United
    States national security.
        So, with that, a few questions in mind. Do you believe that
    USAID should remain an independent entity from the State
    Department?
        Ambassador Green. Thank you, Senator. We had a brief
    opportunity to discuss this before today. First off, I can tell
    you about the conversations that I have had with the Secretary
    on the subject. The Secretary has assured me that he has an
    open mind as to what the relationship is or should be between
    USAID and State and also what each internal structure should
    be.
        I have indicated that I have a great passion in reforming
    foreign assistance, some of the things that you have made
    reference to in trying to make them stronger, and he said he
    looks forward to my leadership on reform and otherwise will
    keep an open mind.
        Specific to the question of the structure, to me it is less
    a question of where boxes should be and what they should look
    like and more a question of taking a look at what the mission
    is and how do we organize around it. And to be honest, it is
    premature in the sense that we have not really gotten into that
    yet, so I cannot answer you in terms of what I think it is
    going to look like.
        Senator Menendez. I did not ask you that question. I asked
    you a very specific question, which--and I respect what you
    were telling me and I appreciate our private conversation that
    we had. But the question is in all of these things, if you are
    confirmed by the Senate, you will be in a position to be an
    advisor, an advocate. You may not always win on your views, but
    you are going to be in that position.
        What I want to know before I vote for somebody, as
    distinguished as I think your service is, is whether you
    believe--you may not win at the end of the way--but whether you
    believe AID should remain an independent entity from the State
    Department?
        Ambassador Green. I believe that the State Department and
    USAID need to be closely aligned, but I believe that they have
    different cultures within each institution, what that alignment
    looks like. To be honest, I do not know at this point.
        Senator Menendez. Do you believe it is in the United
    States' interest to actively support democracy and human
    rights?
        Ambassador Green. I do.
        Senator Menendez. Will you be an advocate for maintaining
    democracy assistance in governance programs?
        Ambassador Green. I will be.
        Senator Menendez. Where do you think USAID's missions
    differ from that of the State Department?
        Ambassador Green. I think the biggest differences are in
    how they go about their work. USAID is an operational agency.
    It is not so much a diplomatic agency, a policy-setting agency,
    as it is one that uses soft-power tools to advance ends and
    priorities identified by the State Department and by the White
    House, so that to me is the fundamental difference between the
    two.
        Senator Menendez. And one is also a diplomacy effort and
    the other one also, as USAID, has very specific programmatic,
    development, democracy, and whatnot that it moves into effect,
    and so I hope you will be able to maintain those.
        Let me make one final overarching question. You and I
    talked about that there are a number of very interested
    organized constituencies in our country who find USAID in that
    respect ineffective and nepotistic. Haiti is an excellent
    example of that but there are others. I have also heard from
    U.S. and New Jersey companies, some of them who are leaders in
    the world in their fields, who cannot get past first base with
    USAID. And it seems to me that, certainly under the President's
    made-in-America, America-first efforts and whatnot, that at
    least when you are the global leader and you are a United
    States company, then you should have an opportunity at USAID
    because at the end of the day, I do not know how--you become a
    global leader in the marketplace itself, and then you cannot
    get one of your governmental agencies to consider you.
    Something is wrong with that. Would you agree to look into that
    if you were to be confirmed?
        Ambassador Green. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. All right. Thank you very much,
    Ambassador.
        Senator Risch. Thank you very much.
        Senator Gardner?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Ambassador Green, for the opportunity,
    Congressman, for us to be here with you today. I truly
    appreciate your work and your willingness to serve.
        And I think one of the most telling ways to learn about a
    person's capacity, intelligence, understanding in any position
    is to look at whether they understand our dairy policy. And we
    have one of the few individuals before us today who actually
    understands this country's dairy policy.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Such as it can be understood.
        So, on a serious note, I want to thank you for your
    leadership. You and I had a great conversation about Southeast
    Asia as a number of countries that I continue to work with
    through the East Asia Subcommittee. We had a conversation about
    Aung San Suu Kyi's party, the National League of Democracy, and
    the fact that after basically 60 years of military rule, Burma
    has entered into a stage of civilian leadership, given some of
    the constitutional restraints that still remain and how they
    are going to have this new democratic government address
    challenges and how they have promised to address some of the
    challenges that they face.
        As we know, Burma is one of the least-developed countries
    in Southeast Asia. About 25 percent of the people in Burma live
    under or below the poverty line. Only 30 percent, only 30
    percent in the entire country have access to reliable
    electricity, and the United States and international community
    has to do more to help support this democratic effort and
    success of this new transition and to make sure that we have a
    country that continues to grow and trade and opportunity
    aligned with America's interests.
        So, last year, I introduced the Empower Burma Act. It was
    directed at engaging the United States, the administration to
    produce a comprehensive multiyear strategy to help address a
    sustainable economic development in Burma, which includes
    helping to meet the Government of Burma's stated goal of
    universal access to electricity by 2030, one of the key
    objectives that government policy leaders have said in Burma is
    one of the most important things to be accomplished by this new
    government.
        And so can I get your commitment that you would help
    prioritize this Burma democratic development at USAID?
        Ambassador Green. Thank you, Senator, for the question, and
    yes. I had the opportunity to observe elections in Burma, and
    it was one of the most uplifting experiences seeing what people
    do to exercise their right to vote standing in the hot tropical
    sun for that chance to have the first real free election in
    generations. There is enormous potential in Burma and enormous
    need for help.
        It is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the
    world, and there are challenges in terms of building the social
    compact, but I think there are opportunities, business
    opportunities, educational opportunities, opportunities to
    strengthen civil society, create a more vibrant democracy--I
    think the sky is the limit for Burma.
        Senator Gardner. And thank you. And we also in our
    conversation had a chance to talk about the goal of a program
    or foreign assistance is not designed to create a permanent
    crutch, but it is to create opportunities for that country to
    develop the capacity for trade, the rule of law, to be able to
    be a stronger nation through the work and partnership that the
    United States can pursue with them.
        And so as you look at areas in Southeast Asia like Burma,
    perhaps others, what do you think the most significant rule-of-
    law challenge is that you will face at USAID through these
    nations?
        Ambassador Green. Of course, it varies country by country,
    but I think we have the opportunity, through technical
    assistance and also incentivizing, to help these countries
    undertake certain policy reforms such as protection for
    intellectual property that will create enormous economic
    opportunities for them, as well as for American companies that
    are seeking to partner.
        So, I think it is a part of the world where there is
    tremendous opportunity there, but they do need our assistance.
    These are young democracies in many cases, and the technical
    assistance which we can provide, which is a very modest
    investment, I think can pay off huge dividends to mutual
    benefit.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Ambassador. I unfortunately
    have another committee to go to so I will let you off the hook.
    Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Ambassador Green, congratulations on your nomination,
    and thank you for being willing to take on such a critical post
    at such a significant time in the world. I very much
    appreciated the time we had to sit down together to hear a
    little more of your views.
        And one of the things that I am very concerned about and
    you expressed your concern about, the humanitarian crises that
    we are seeing in the world, particularly in Syria, Nigeria,
    South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen. We know that women and girls are
    disproportionately impacted during humanitarian crises and that
    sexual violence, exploitation, child early enforced marriage
    often increase significantly, while access to services,
    including maternal child health, drastically decreases.
        Now, despite America's longtime leadership in addressing
    these issues, the State Department determined back in April to
    withhold funding from the United Nations Population Fund, the
    leading and sometimes only provider of maternal health
    services, post-rape care, and other vital reproductive health
    services in humanitarian crises.
        So, we discussed the whole issue of reproductive rights,
    and I appreciate that we have different personal views, but I
    am sure you would agree with me that it is unacceptable to
    place vulnerable women and girls in a situation where they lose
    their only access to health care, basic services. So, can you
    talk about how you will work, if confirmed, with the State
    Department to ensure that the needs of these women and girls in
    crisis situations are being met?
        Ambassador Green. Senator, thank you for your question.
        I enjoyed our conversation very much. You are a forceful
    advocate for programming that rightly involves women and
    children, girls in particular, and as we discussed, I believe
    from a development perspective, it is vitally important that we
    integrate women and girls into all of our programming for lots
    of development reasons. You get the best development outcomes
    that way, including in terms of our shared goal to have more
    responsive citizen-centered democracy. No democracy can succeed
    if it is not listening to all of its voices. In too many parts
    of the world, women's voices are not heard and not welcomed at
    the table, and I am certainly committed to taking it on.
        The specific question that you asked, as I mentioned, it is
    my understanding that the State Department is undertaking a
    six-month intensive review to study the impacts of the expanded
    policy and whether it leads to interruption of services on the
    ground. As I mentioned to you, I know that USAID will be part
    of that review, and as I committed to you, we will play that
    straight. We will look to see what those impacts are and be
    very clear and transparent about what our findings are so you
    can count on us to be sort of honest brokers in that process.
        Senator Shaheen. I very much appreciate that. There are two
    issues here. One is the one you just referenced about the
    expansion of the Mexico City policy. The other one that I was
    clearly not direct enough about referring to is the decision to
    stop funding UNFPA by the United States. And so how will you
    address that issue within the State Department?
        Ambassador Green. In that separate issue I understand the
    State Department issued the finding that you referenced. What I
    do not know is how those monies are being reprogrammed; I
    simply do not know that at this point. I would be happy to get
    back to you as I learn more about that process and what is
    happening there.
        Senator Shaheen. I would appreciate that. I will continue
    to advocate that that is money well spent that is a benefit to
    us here in America if we make sure that women and girls who are
    vulnerable around the world get the health care that they need.
        Another issue that has been very troubling has been the
    violations of LGBTQ rights around the world from Africa to
    Asia, and it is not just discrimination. That in and of itself
    would be bad enough, but it is beating, jailing, terrorizing,
    and often killing people who are identified as being LGBTQ.
    Again, the United States has had a very important leadership
    role in working with other countries around the world to urge
    them to protect the human rights of all of their citizens. So,
    can you tell me how, as administrator of USAID, you would
    handle situations where you have countries that are
    discriminating and terrorizing members of their LGBTQ
    community?
        Ambassador Green. Thank you, Senator. And it is a very
    important issue, increasingly important issue. As you may be
    aware, last weekend, the State Department put out what I
    thought a very appropriate statement. And it said violence and
    discrimination targeting any vulnerable group undermines our
    collective security, as well as our America values,
    specifically about LGBTI, and I think that is a very important
    policy for us all to follow.
        Senator Shaheen. I agree.
        Ambassador Green. Again, the way I look at our work at
    USAID is that we need to make sure that our programming reaches
    all marginalized communities, and in many parts of the world,
    LGBT marginalized communities, and that is something that we
    will continue. It is important. No country can rise if it is
    discriminating against any marginalized community. No country
    can be a vibrant democracy if it is not listening to all of its
    voices. So that is certainly something that I plan on
    continuing. It is important.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I very much appreciate
    that and will look forward to working with you as you continue
    to be a voice to prevent discrimination not just against women
    and girls but against all members of our global world.
        Senator Risch. Thank you very much, Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Booker, did you have anything else that you wanted
    to add?
        Senator Booker. Okay. I just wanted to do two quick things
    if you do not mind.
        Senator Risch. Sure.
        Senator Booker. I have a lot of concerns, as I know you do,
    about the Kenyan elections coming up in early August. We have
    about 1,000 people in the U.S. mission that are on the ground
    doing incredible work in Kenya right now, again, as I know you
    are aware of. I just have some concerns about this election and
    fear that a lot of our personnel will actually be at risk at
    the Kenyan election, sees kind of the related violence we saw
    back in 2007. I just wonder if you have any thoughts about what
    we can do there, especially and very frankly when I see the
    budget proposed by the administration's fiscal year 2018, which
    is almost a 40 percent cut in sort of governance and democracy
    work.
        Ambassador Green. Senator Booker, thank you for that
    question. It is a very important question. I, too, worry about
    Kenya. I was Ambassador in Tanzania during that horrendous
    election and fallout in Kenya. In fact, then-Secretary Condi
    Rice, who was with us in Tanzania, had to fly back and forth
    trying to deal with the fallout from those terrible, terrible
    days. I share your concerns. USAID is, as I understand it, at
    this moment trying to help in a number of ways. There are the
    obvious preparations for an election and the integrity of the
    process and the voter rolls and the Independent Election
    Commission, but also there are the investments around--God
    forbid--knock on wood, but the post-election violence and USAID
    is working on reconciliation tools. Violence is something that
    we all need to keep a close watch on. Those 2007 elections that
    led to all that violence were horrendous, and I am not sure we
    even have an accurate measure as to how many lives were lost.
        Senator Booker. So I just want to say, first of all, I
    appreciate that. I am encouraged by who you are, what you stand
    for, what you have advocated for in your leadership roles,
    especially the most recent one. I do really worry, and the
    wisdom of--we are both acting chair and ranking, but the wisdom
    of Senator Risch about creating a balance, we all want to be
    fiscally responsible and make sure--to steal a metaphor that
    was just told to me--when we throw stuff against the wall, that
    the stuff sticks and it is not wasted money and resources. I am
    very sympathetic to that as a guy who ran a local government
    and saw a lot of waste, increase efficiency and effectiveness.
    But I do know that we are in this global competition in many
    ways, and the rise of China concerns me not just for my
    children but my grandchildren and my great grandchildren.
        China's development assistance to Africa has increased 780
    percent since 2003. They have now pledged $124 billion more at
    a time that we seem to be receding in our investments. We lead
    with our values in countries like that. China seems to have
    overt utilitarian purposes for their investments. And so I just
    worry as a country who is beating us on infrastructure
    investment in their country, stepping up to compete with us in
    investments in information technology, beating us with
    education investments, now on the global stage, they seem to be
    advancing in terms of their investments as we are announcing
    receding.
        So, I know this is something that you are now smackdab in
    the middle in one of the most important jobs that I have seen
    as I have traveled around the world, see these amazing USAID
    workers right there putting themselves at risk, doing critical
    work, building democracies, leading with our values. And so I
    just wanted to--I think that we are going to close this hearing
    momentarily, but I just want you to know that I have grave
    concerns about a retreat of American leadership at a time that
    our globe severely needs it.
        I know from being a mayor that your budget reflects your
    values, and I have a lot of concerns that the values you have
    expressed, that I have read about, the reason why I think you
    have so much bipartisan support, I worry that those values that
    you are expressing might not be expressed and seen within our
    budget. Thank God article 1 branch of government sets the
    budget, and I have great leaders on the Republican side here
    who understand that.
        So, I just want to thank you for your leadership. I want to
    thank your family especially for their commitment to you and
    empowering you. Clearly, from a few moments with your wife, I
    see that you married up, sir. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Senator, we all did.
        Well, thank you very much. And Senator Booker is in on
    something that does not get a lot of ink yet, but it is going
    to get more, and that is those of us on this committee,
    everywhere we go, we cut the Chinese path. They are everywhere.
    They do things differently than we do. They do have a lot of
    investment that they are putting in place on the ground. They
    do not have anything like USAID, and we Americans should be
    very proud of that.
        Well, I am going to keep the record--there are a couple
    Senators I think that have other questions, but I am going to
    keep the record open until close of business tomorrow for
    questions for the record that you may or may not get.
        Mr. Green, very seldom do we get people that have the
    support you do for this from both sides of the aisle. I think
    the world is going to be a better place when you are confirmed,
    and I am absolutely confident you will be confirmed. Thank you
    to you. And just as importantly, thank you to your family for
    their support.
        So, with that, the meeting will be adjourned.
        Ambassador Green. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. You bet.
        [Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                 Submitted to Mark Green by Senator Bob Corker

        Question 1. The Electric Africa Act directs existing U.S.
    Government resources from many agencies to encourage the installation
    of 20,000 megawatts of additional electrical power and to promote
    efficient institutional delivery of electrical service to rural and
    underserved areas. This law improves access to affordable and reliable
    electricity in order to unlock the potential for inclusive economic
    growth, job creation, food security, improved health and education and
    environmental outcome and poverty reduction.

       Do you agree that the provision of electricity throughout Africa
            and the world is a top development priority and in the national
            interest of the U.S.?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. How will you work and engage with USAID and partners to
    ensure that the law is carried out and support this law and to advance
    the goals of the Electrify Africa Act?

        Answer. If I am confirmed, I will work with Power Africa's many
    partners, public and private, to carry out the Electrify Africa Act,
    recognizing that every U.S. taxpayer dollar spent on Power Africa
    leverages investments from the private sector, national governments and
    others. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that USAID continues to tap
    into and coordinate the work of Power Africa's more than 150 partners.

        Question 3. Any reorganizing should eliminate duplication and
    maximize efficiency. There are three offices that handle overlapping
    pieces of our humanitarian assistance, two at USAID and one at State.
    We are told USAID commissioned a study of the impact of consolidating
    its two offices and found up to $130 million in basic savings. Should
    you be confirmed, will you provide the committee with a briefing about
    this study and ensure this is considered during the administration's
    reorganizing plans?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will provide the committee with a
    briefing on the study you mentioned regarding potential consolidation
    options within USAID.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Mark Green by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

        Question 1. If confirmed, how will you engage with Secretary
    Tillerson, the OMB Director and the President to best represent and
    protect USAID's equities in U.S. foreign policy planning and
    administration?

        Answer. As I stated in my written testimony, I believe that USAID
    is an asset to our national security, and the global face of American
    generosity. If confirmed, I will work closely with Secretary Tillerson
    and other relevant colleagues to ensure that USAID's unique development
    tools are addressing our most significant foreign-policy and national-
    security challenges.

        Question 2. If confirmed, will you commit to consulting with
    Congress and the development community on the development and
    implementation of the reorganization process?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. Which regions or sectors should USAID prioritize and
    what criteria should be used to inform how priorities are set?

        Answer. There is no one measure that we should use, but instead a
    combination of factors. Criteria would include, but not be limited to,
    overall strategic considerations (the country's importance in U.S.
    foreign policy); the cost and effectiveness of the interventions and
    programs under consideration; the immediacy and severity of the needs
    to be addressed; the opportunity for advancing America's economic
    interests; the opportunity for advancing America's security interests;
    the potential for conditions in a particular country or setting to
    create dangerous conditions in another; the potential for a particular
    project or intervention to serve as a model that can enhance our
    overall development knowledge; and, of course, the security situation
    for USAID personnel and partners.

        Question 4. USAID was made a regular member of the National
    Security Council Deputies Committee earlier this year. What role do you
    expect to play in the NSC? Given USAID's permanent participation on the
    NSC committee, how will you assert USAID's presence on the NSC and
    ensure development is well integrated into the NSC's planning
    processes?

        Answer. USAID will continue to engage at all levels of the National
    Security Council (NSC) policy process. If confirmed, I expect to attend
    Principals and Deputies Committee meetings regularly, and to be an
    advocate for USAID.

        Question 5. Do you believe, as was stated in the 2010 Quadrennial
    Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), that development is an equal
    pillar in American foreign policy to defense and diplomacy?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 6. What, in your view, does an ``America First'' policy as
    declared by President Trump mean for an agency whose work focuses
    entirely on other countries?

        Answer. I believe that ``America First'' means ensuring that our
    policies and programs are focused on advancing America's interests
    above all others. I also believe that USAID has a key role to play in
    advancing our interests. First, many of the agency's tools (both
    humanitarian and development-oriented) can help address conditions in
    other parts of the world than can create fertile ground for violent
    extremism and conflict. Second, many of USAID's development initiatives
    (specifically including Power Africa and Feed the Future) can
    strengthen market opportunities for our goods and services, as well as
    give rise to closer trade relationships. After all, ten out of
    America's 15 top trading partners are former recipients of U.S.
    Government economic assistance. Finally, highly visible efforts, such
    as global food security and Power Africa, as well as our predominance
    in humanitarian assistance, contribute to America's global leadership
    and reputation as a force for good in the world.

        Question 7. In your view, what have been the most lasting results
    of the USAID Forward reform effort launched by Administrator Rajiv
    Shah? What further reforms are needed to make USAID the world's premier
    development agency, as called for in the 2010 and 2015 QDDRs?

        Answer. In my opinion, Administrator Shah's most lasting
    contributions were in the area of enhanced monitoring and evaluation.
    While there is always room for improvement, we know more about the
    efficacy of our approaches to development because of these improvements
    in our ability to measure outcomes.
        As I indicated in my written statement, I believe we are living in
    a remarkable time of innovation and entrepreneurship, which has upended
    the development landscape. While the agency has made strides on
    reforming itself, it must continue to learn how to better leverage
    partnerships, catalyze private-sector investments and amplify the
    efforts of foundations and non-profits.
        If confirmed, I will pursue ideas for reforming USAID's offices and
    procedures, rethinking its structure, and changing the way it engages
    with the many players in development to better tap into new financial
    flows, catalyze mutually beneficial investment, and remove unnecessary
    bureaucratic obstacles to private-sector participation. I will consult
    with current and potential partners, as well as the Congress, to ensure
    that the Agency is working in the most effective way possible. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with the talented men and women of
    USAID to build upon what is working, change what is not, and continue
    to strengthen the Agency and improve its effectiveness.

        Question 8. How will you prioritize the U.S. Global Development
    Lab's work on innovation?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to exploring the opportunities that
    technology and entrepreneurship present by turning to the broad network
    of USAID teams--from the U.S. Global Development Lab to the keenest
    minds we have in our field Missions and offices, and with our many
    partners. Such a spirit of innovation is what I like to call the
    ``software of development,'' and it represents America's advantage in
    shaping development outcomes across the globe.

        Question 9. What lessons learned from your service on the MCC Board
    of Directors will best serve you as USAID Administrator? How would the
    MCC lessons and innovations be applied to broader development and/or
    humanitarian assistance? Would you recommend Congress set no sector
    funding mandates for USAID in the same way there are no sector mandates
    set for MCC?

        Answer. I believe there are many lessons from my service on the
    Board of Directors of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) that
    could help me in my tenure with USAID, should I be confirmed. Perhaps
    the most important one is the effectiveness of incentivized policy
    reform and strategic human capacity-building. I visited with several
    leaders of a particular African country not long after it completed an
    MCC Compact. I will never forget what one leader told me: in essence,
    she said that it was not so much the road built through the Compact
    that was important, but the experience of building it and managing the
    resources. She said the country now had tangible proof that it could
    build a public work, on time, on budget, to world-class standards and
    without corruption. More important, the country had a large group of
    young leaders who gained experience by carrying out the project,
    experience they could apply to other national needs.
        The MCC model has many strengths, including the indicators that are
    a starting point to assess countries' capacity and commitment to good
    governance. For example, the democracy and corruption indicators are
    hard hurdles to eligibility that can incentivize reforms and strong
    policies. USAID has a complementary role to play in helping to move
    countries along the continuum of development so they can qualify for
    eligibility for the MCC. If confirmed, I look forward to working
    closely with MCC in a manner that complements USAID's strengths.
        In terms of sectors and mandates, the subjects of each MCC Compact
    are largely determined through the constraints-to-growth analysis
    performed in advance of negotiations. I believe that development-
    assistance priorities should reflect the greatest need, and that it is
    always helpful if those needs can be determined in an objective,
    measurable manner. It would be useful for USAID to have the same sort
    of flexibility to determine allocations to sectors that Congress has
    granted the MCC.

        Question 10. What will you do at the agency to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign and Civil Service?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to working to ensure that
    USAID's workforce reflects America's diversity.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the agency are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the workforce of
    USAID reflects America's diversity, including appropriate training of
    supervisors.

        Question 12. The Payne Fellowship in particular has been a hallmark
    recruitment tool for diversity at USAID. What will do you to ensure the
    success of the Donald Payne Fellowship program and ensure they receive
    the support necessary from the agency?

        Answer. Congressman Payne was a personal friend of mine. If
    confirmed, I will welcome the Donald M. Payne International Development
    Fellowship Program's contribution to attracting outstanding young
    people interested in pursuing careers in the Foreign Service.

        Question 13. What do you believe is the appropriate way for the
    U.S. Government to help countries transition from aid recipients to
    self-sustaining partners of the United States?

        Answer. We must make it clear to our implementers, especially
    national governments, that our assistance is not open-ended or
    inevitable or, most important, a substitute for what they must take on
    themselves. Our support must never be seen as a gift or a handout, but
    instead as the proverbial hand up. Every program should look forward to
    the day when it can end. So, if confirmed, I will ask every USAID
    Mission to evaluate how each program dollar moves a country closer to
    that day.
        There are three approaches we should take. First, we should
    prioritize programs that foster local capacity-building and
    implementation, mobilize domestic resources and ensure that our host-
    government partners have ``skin in the game.'' Second, we should
    incentivize policy reforms that give rise to the conditions that
    experience tells us improves economic growth and opportunity. Third, we
    must work with partner countries to increase their own domestic
    resource-mobilization.

        Question 14. If confirmed, how will you maintain and build upon
    USAID's effectiveness in lifting countries out of extreme poverty and
    set on paths towards self-sustained development with a budget proposal
    that would cut 37 percent from the International Affairs Budget?

        Answer. USAID needs to be as efficient and effective as it can with
    its budget, regardless of the level of funding. The work USAID does
    must align with U.S. national-security interests, and advance the
    strategic priorities of the current administration and Congress.
        If confirmed, I will do my best to ensure USAID works in the most
    accountable and efficient manner possible. Furthermore, I will advocate
    in the interagency for better coordination of tools and efforts to
    maximize outcomes and also reduce duplication. Finally, I will work to
    better leverage other sources of support, from the American private
    sector to other donors and partners.

        Question 15. If confirmed, will you work to protect and restore
    USAID's budget and preserve resources for its critical development
    efforts?

        Answer. If confirmed, my first obligation is to the American
    people. They have many priorities that the President is working
    diligently to address with limited resources, but certainly, I'll be
    committed to ensuring that USAID operates in the most effective,
    efficient way possible; raises the bar even higher on accountability
    and transparency; and preserves development gains. While recognizing
    that we will never have enough resources to do everything we would
    like, I commit to working with you, if I am confirmed, to build support
    and resources for critical development priorities.

        Question 16. What do you believe the impact would be to USAID's
    global health, food security and humanitarian programs if the FY18
    budget cuts to these programs were realized?

        Answer. I was not involved in the creation of the Fiscal Year (FY)
    2018 budget request. However, if I am confirmed, I look forward to
    being briefed on the specifics of the request, as well as how the
    administration is looking to prioritize efficiencies and preserve
    development gains. As I mentioned in my written statement, I also have
    my own ideas on efficiency and effectiveness, and look forward to the
    opportunity to be able to bring them to the discussion. Moreover, if
    confirmed, I commit to working with you to address these and other
    critical development needs as effectively and efficiently as we can.

        Question 17. How would you seek to mitigate the consequences of the
    FY18 budget's proposed closure of 37 USAID missions around the world?
    What are the legal steps required to close a Mission?

        Answer. As you are aware, USAID is rightly being asked to do more
    with less. We need to focus on our core priority--advancing America's
    interests through foreign assistance. Everything USAID works on should
    directly improve humanitarian and development outcomes, and be designed
    to lead to the day when each recipient country can take responsibility
    for its citizens' wellbeing. We also need to continue partnerships with
    other donor countries, and develop new partnerships with the private
    sector to leverage additional resources. I understand that no final
    decisions have been made with respect to the closure of specific
    Missions, and I have not been briefed on what legal steps would be
    required to close a Mission. Nonetheless, in the event of the closure
    of any Missions, I commit to following all legally required steps to
    accomplish that goal.

        Question 18. How would you propose the U.S. maintain its
    commitments to the countries where the budget proposes to end USAID
    missions? How would you seek to transition countries off of U.S.
    assistance?

        Answer. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 budget acknowledges that our aid
    must be more effective and efficient, and that advancing the national
    interests of our country must always be our primary mission. To that
    end, if confirmed, I commit to working with my colleagues at the
    Department of State and throughout the inter-agency to ensure that we
    maintain U.S. leadership in the world, and that everything we do
    advances our national interests.
        As indicated in my written statement, I also believe we need to
    signal to our implementing partners that U.S. assistance is not open-
    ended or inevitable or, most important, a substitute for what they must
    take on themselves. Every program should look forward to the day when
    it can end. So, if confirmed, I will ask every USAID Mission to
    evaluate how each program dollar moves a country closer to that day. We
    should emphasize programs that incentivize local capacity-building and
    implementation, mobilize domestic resources, and ensure that our host-
    government partners can take control of their own futures.
        USAID has transitioned or closed a number of Missions in the past
    and I will review what has previously been done. However, if I am
    confirmed, and in consultation with members of the committee, I would
    look to craft plans for sustainability that provide for an ongoing
    partnership between USAID and any host country in which we move away
    from our traditional foreign-assistance model.

        Question 19. If confirmed, will you prioritize funding for
    democracy promotion and human rights?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 20. Do you believe it is in the U.S. national interest to
    fund foreign assistance programs intended to mitigate conflicts and
    prevent mass atrocities? What will you do to strengthen existing
    atrocity prevention initiatives within USAID?

        Answer. Yes, I believe it is in the U.S. national interest to
    support such programs. If confirmed, I will support current programming
    that mitigates atrocity risks and builds resilience in fragile states.
    But, I will also support new approaches based upon quantitative and
    qualitative analyses of the drivers of such conflicts. Furthermore, I
    will continue to support USAID's leadership in responding to atrocity
    situations with life-saving humanitarian assistance.
        I understand that USAID's leadership participates in interagency
    policy processes that monitor and address the warning signs for mass
    atrocities through both diplomatic and development channels. If I am
    confirmed, I will ensure USAID continues to strengthen collaboration
    with interagency partners and multilateral institutions in this regard.
    With these combined efforts, USAID can reduce the risks of future
    crises before the options narrow and costs increase, saving, I hope,
    millions of lives and billions of dollars.

        Question 21. How will expand USAID's current initiatives to ensure
    that people with disabilities remain at the forefront of the global
    development agenda?

        Answer. It is critical that inclusive programming remain at the
    forefront of USAID's work, as fifteen percent of the world's population
    has a disability, and 80 percent of this population resides in
    developing countries. To be effective, USAID programs must provide
    equal access to resources and opportunities, and all persons need to be
    able to participate meaningfully in their communities, without facing
    discriminatory practices. If confirmed, I will continue USAID's efforts
    to advance these goals by providing technical assistance to our field
    Missions, strengthening the local capacity of organizations of people
    with disabilities to expand their reach, and collaborating with host-
    country governments, civil society and multilateral institutions to
    improve national disability laws and policies, as resources allow.

        Question . What will you do to ensure that USAID is reaching
    vulnerable LGBTQ populations in the areas where USAID is doing its
    work?

        Answer. I share your concern, and I am troubled by the violence
    against LGBTQ and other marginalized communities around the world. As I
    said in my hearing before the committee, USAID needs to ensure that its
    programming reaches all marginalized people. No country can be a
    vibrant democracy if it is not listening to all of its voices. If
    confirmed, I will continue USAID's long tradition of advocating for the
    human dignity and peaceable treatment of all people, especially
    marginalized and vulnerable populations.

        Question 23. As USAID Administrator, will you support U.S. food
    assistance programs utilizing various modalities, including, when and
    as appropriate, monetary transfers, vouchers, and in-kind contributions
    from the United States, in order to assist hungry people around the
    globe with the most appropriate and timely means available?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 24. The President's budget request and its proposals to
    eliminate entire accounts that reduce food insecurity--such as Food for
    Peace Title II and McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program--comes at a
    time when famine conditions threaten 30 million people in Africa and
    the Middle East. These different accounts reflect different contexts--
    such as development and humanitarian assistance--as well as different
    modalities that can prove especially useful in certain contexts. How
    would you ensure we have access to the greatest number of modalities,
    and the flexibility to use the tools most appropriate when needed to
    address these challenges?

        Answer. I understand that, in response to situations of food
    insecurity, USAID aims to use the right tools, in the right place, at
    the right time, and that the Agency's food-security team relies on the
    flexibility provided by Congress to pursue this approach so that the
    choice of tool in any given situation depends on what they deem most-
    effective based on the conditions on the ground. By way of
    illustration, in recent years, USAID has utilized U.S.-purchased
    commodities in Yemen, locally procured grains in Uganda, and electronic
    vouchers for Syrian refugees in Jordan.
        Market-based interventions can help promote recovery, strengthen
    and expand market linkages, encourage local trade, and stimulate an
    appropriate production response from farmers in developing countries.
    For example, the food-voucher program for Syrian refugees not only
    provides food to those who need it, but also has a crucial secondary
    benefit of helping the local economy and creating jobs. As I understand
    it, food-voucher program for Syrian refugees has injected more than
    $1.7 billion into the economies of Syria's neighbors, and has created
    more than 1,300 new jobs since it began.
        Under the President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 budget request, I
    understand the International Disaster Assistance account will provide
    support for the local and regional procurement of agricultural
    commodities, the procurement of U.S. commodities, cash transfers, food
    vouchers and complementary activities that support the relief, recovery
    and resilience of populations affected by food crises. Given the
    growing complexity and the current number of global humanitarian
    crises, having the flexibility to choose among a range of authorized
    tools will ensure USAID responds most effectively, with the greatest
    impact.

        Question 25. If confirmed, how will you bring to bear the expertise
    of USAID to address longer term issues that present the potential to
    destabilize communities, such as drivers of conflict, drivers of
    migration, and food insecurity?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to using and building on the
    tools USAID has to identify and address the drivers of conflict and
    fragility, and to mitigate them before they destabilize communities. I
    understand that in the leadup to the 2016 elections in Kenya, USAID
    worked throughout the country to prepare for potential violence by
    designing and implementing programs to help address a range of
    identified drivers, reduce inter-communal conflict, and build
    confidence in local governments. I am told that USAID believes these
    efforts helped lower the risk of post-election violence in an important
    U.S. national-security partner in the Horn of Africa.
        Interventions such as those used around the Kenyan elections seek
    to address root causes upstream, and to bolster communities against the
    dysfunction, instability and conflict that can emerge in fragile
    states. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen and further refine
    these tools, and to invest resources into enhancing USAID's ability to
    analyze and assess the unique drivers in each country's context.
    Preventing conflict is obviously preferable to responding after
    conflict is well underway.

        Question 26. How will you balance prevention efforts, such as
    building resilience and conflict mitigation, when the humanitarian
    needs are enormous?

        Answer. This is a challenge, but prevention investments in
    agriculture, food security, health, and human capital, as well as the
    management of disasters, natural resources, and conflict can be cost-
    effective means of reducing future humanitarian needs. A recent study
    in Kenya and Ethiopia by the Department for International Development
    of the United Kingdom found that every $1 invested in resilience will
    result in $2.90 in reduced humanitarian spending, as well as improved
    poverty, hunger, and malnutrition outcomes.
        For example, in one community in Malawi, responding to urgent,
    life-saving needs cost an average of $390 per person during the 2016
    drought induced by the El Nino weather phenomenon. By contrast, a
    community in which USAID invested roughly $376 per person over five
    years did not require food assistance. Over the long-term, the savings
    of investing in community resilience can be extraordinary.
        USAID's strategic approaches are helping shift the burden for
    making these investments and managing these risks from external donors,
    including USAID, to the Governments and communities themselves. If
    confirmed, I will continue to ensure that we balance the need to
    respond to immediate life-saving, humanitarian needs, while partnering
    with governments who are helping themselves, to make the strategic
    investments in resilience that are needed to reduce this liability in
    the future.

        Question 27. If confirmed, how would you plan to support the
    integration and expand proven, successful initiatives such as the
    Community-Based Management of Acute Malnutrition (CMAM) and Infant
    Young Child Feeding (IYCF) programs to combat wasting in order to save
    the lives of children suffering from acute malnutrition?

        Answer. USAID's Infant and Young Child Feeding and Community
    Management of Acute Malnutrition are cornerstones of its successful
    maternal and child health and nutrition programs. If confirmed, I will
    continue to support these programs, but I will also seek ways to use
    data to improve them, and to build the capacity of host-country
    partners to take these initiatives on themselves.

        Question 28. Should global food security remain a priority focus of
    United States Government development assistance funding? Will you
    commit to continuing to implement the Global Food Security Strategy,
    including support for the complementary strategies and investments
    listed in appendix 3 of the strategy?

        Answer. Yes, global food security should remain a priority focus.
    Thanks to Congressional leadership, the Global Food Security Act of
    2016 affirmed the United States' leadership and commitment to combating
    the root causes of hunger and poverty in an accountable and effective
    way. If I am confirmed, I will continue to implement the Global Food
    Security Strategy.

        Question 29. How do you envision the United States benefitting from
    promoting international education programs that invest in developing
    the minds of the world's most at-risk and vulnerable children? How do
    you prioritize USAID initiatives such as Let Girls Learn and Global
    Book Alliance? What will you do as the incoming USAID Administrator to
    ensure that USAID is resourced adequately to tackle the global
    education crisis?

        Answer. Education in the developing world is near and dear to my
    heart. My first steps in development were as a volunteer teacher in
    East Africa. My first overseas trip as a Member of Congress was to Mali
    and Ghana to review education programs for girls in those two
    countries. In other words, I agree that improving education
    opportunities for vulnerable populations and strengthening education
    systems accelerates economic growth, strengthens communities, and
    reduces instability that often fuels war, conflict, and extremism.
    Education is a foundational driver of development--the sustainability
    of investments across all sectors requires skilled populations that are
    capable of leading and managing their own future.
        When we invest in women and girls, including in their literacy and
    numeracy, we accelerate progress--toward a safer, more-secure and more-
    prosperous world. If I am confirmed, I will make sure we remember this
    principle.
        At the same time, we need to take a strategic, comprehensive
    approach to address the global education crisis. We will never have
    enough funding to solve every problem. This means we must extend our
    reach through partnerships, promote domestic resource-mobilization and
    encourage investment from a range of organizations, including the
    private sector. If confirmed, I will be looking into this issue
    further.

        Question 30. Please describe how you will advance the rights of
    women and girls around the world through USAID programming so as to
    further American leadership and further help empower women and girls
    globally.

        Answer. When we invest in women and girls, we accelerate progress
    toward a safer, more-secure and more-prosperous world. USAID has become
    a recognized global thought-leader, innovator, and convener in gender
    equality and women's empowerment, and is well-positioned to continue
    advancing women's and girls' equality in the countries where the Agency
    works. Since I returned from Tanzania in 2009, I have been committed to
    organizations that foster women's participation in civil society, and
    the defense of their civil and human rights. If confirmed, I will bring
    that focus and priority with me to USAID.

        Question 31. How will the goal of helping empower women and girls
    be reflected within the leadership, architecture, and institutional
    policies of USAID?

        Answer. When we invest in women and girls, we accelerate progress
    toward a safer, more-secure and more-prosperous world. If confirmed, I
    will look for ways USAID can increase women's empowerment by broadening
    access to human, financial, social and physical capital. I believe that
    USAID needs to continue to innovate to ensure the Agency remains on the
    cutting edge of programming to reduce gender disparities for women. I
    also believe that the U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace and
    Security and the United States Strategy to Prevent and Respond to
    Gender-Based Violence Globally should continue to inform USAID's
    programming. Finally, I will ask our program-design teams to seek out
    new ways to advance the goal of empowering women within the sectors and
    countries where USAID works, and to improve our measurement of the
    outcomes and impact of our investments.

        Question 32. How will USAID ensure local organizations continue to
    have a meaningful role in advancing our international assistance to
    promote gender equality and women's rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with all partners--donors, host-
    country governments, multilateral agencies, the private sector, and
    local organizations, including civil society and non-governmental--to
    promote gender equality and women's empowerment. Local organizations
    are critical to advancing USAID's work on gender equality and women's
    empowerment, just as understanding the local context, and engaging
    communities is vital to promoting sustainable change. I understand that
    in the design of the Agency's programs, policies and procedures call
    for plans to provide inclusive, meaningful and consistent engagement
    with local actors, including those focused on gender equality and
    women's empowerment. If confirmed, I will ensure this practice
    continues.

        Question 33. How should USAID address its internal barriers to
    implementing more effective programs to protect children and youth from
    violence and exploitation around the world? What measures will you take
    to collaborate with the State Department to prevent and respond to
    violence and exploitation against children?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID remains a global
    leader in protecting children and youth from violence. I support
    efforts to strengthen USAID's efforts to address violence against
    children and youth through the Global Partnership to End Violence
    Against Children.
        Success in these endeavors requires continued engagement with
    interagency partners, including the State Department, as well as the
    Departments of Health and Human Services and Labor. If confirmed, I
    will ensure USAID continues its close coordination with partners,
    including host-country governments, multilateral institutions and civil
    society, so that the U.S. Government's collective work aimed at
    preventing violence and exploitation against children and youth is
    complementary, collaborative, results-focused and sustainable.

        Question 34. How much of USAID's assistance is currently
    specifically targeted towards anti-corruption programs and activities?

        Answer. First, I would like to acknowledge the attention you have
    devoted to this issue. Corruption is not only a financial problem,
    but--as we heard during the hearing you held on this subject last
    year--creates an environment of resentment and hatred for authority
    that can foster violent extremism and terrorism. Corruption remains a
    tremendous obstacle to political, social, and economic development, and
    is a symptom of a broader pattern of poor governance, weak institutions
    and impunity. To fight corruption effectively, we need diplomacy,
    international law-enforcement efforts, and development assistance to
    work together as part of a global anti-corruption effort.
        I understand that USAID currently spends approximately $1 billion
    annually on its ``good governance'' programs, which include most USAID
    anti-corruption activities.
        I understand the Agency also funds other anti-corruption activities
    from different budget lines, and, if confirmed, I look forward to being
    briefed on these activities. I would welcome the opportunity to work
    with you to best focus USAID's resources and attention on anti-
    corruption activities.
        I believe that corruption, including the generalized subvention of
    government by elites that the democracy community terms
    ``kleptocracy,'' is a significant barrier to inclusive economic growth
    in many parts of the world. I am encouraged by some of the new
    corruption-assessment tools being developed, and, if confirmed, I would
    support the deployment of these new tools in appropriate settings.

        Question 35. What will you do to see to it that our aid programs
    help developing countries combat corruption and hold corrupt officials
    accountable, if confirmed?

        Answer. Corruption remains a tremendous obstacle to political,
    social, and economic development around the world. It usually is a
    symptom of a broader pattern of poor governance, weak institutions and
    impunity. To fight corruption effectively, we need diplomacy,
    international law-enforcement efforts, and development assistance to
    work together as part of a global anti-corruption effort. If confirmed,
    USAID's anti-corruption programs will remain a top priority for me, and
    I look forward to working with you on this important issue. I will
    ensure strong coordination of USAID's efforts with those of other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies, multilateral institutions, and
    private-sector actors to ensure the best, most-effective use of
    taxpayer dollars in our collective fight against corruption.

        Question 36. What role should USAID play in promoting grass roots
    reconciliation and funding activities that support healing the conflict
    in South Sudan?

        Answer. Conflict takes human lives, destroys communities and their
    livelihoods, erodes development gains, and leaves a legacy of fear,
    hostility, and trauma. Without effective, inclusive peace and
    reconciliation processes, countries are likely to revert back to
    violence.
        I understand that USAID is supporting reconciliation programs in
    South Sudan, at both the national and grassroots levels, to prevent the
    spread of violence and calm tensions. This work provides opportunities
    for antagonists to address issues, reconcile differences, and work on
    common goals with regard to potential, ongoing, or recent conflict.
        In addition, decades of conflict in South Sudan, exacerbated by the
    ongoing violence and atrocities against civilians, have resulted in
    severe trauma. I understand that USAID trauma-awareness programs work
    with communities to understand how trauma has perpetuated historical
    tensions, and to begin to bridge these divides, thereby paving the way
    for reconciliation.
        South Sudan is the world's most-fragile state, and is an ongoing
    tragedy of immense proportions. If confirmed, I hope that my first
    major trip as Administrator will be to South Sudan, so that I can see
    for myself some of the problems there, as well as meet with some of
    USAID's partners in the relief and reconciliation process.

        Question 37. Given the wealth of rigorous evidence available about
    what works in HIV programming, how can you assure the American people
    that these cuts will not reverse the gains we've seen globally in
    mitigating the impact of HIV nor increase HIV-related deaths worldwide?

        Answer. I understand Secretary Tillerson recently signed a
    memorandum that asked the Office of the Global AIDS Coordinator (OGAC)
    to devise a strategy to control the HIV/AIDS pandemic in 13 priority
    countries of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
    If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on the specifics of this
    strategy, as well as on how the administration is planning to
    prioritize efficiencies and preserve gains already made against HIV/
    AIDS in many countries. In the future, USAID should continue to support
    OGAC in its focus on the geographic regions and populations that are
    most at risk--which can provide for the greatest impact with every
    dollar invested, and interrupt the specific dynamics of transmission
    that are fueling the epidemic. Furthermore, if confirmed, I will seek
    ways to optimize the coordination of all of our global health programs
    with the Departments of State, Defense, Health and Human Services and
    multilateral institutions to make our limited resources go even
    further. Finally, I will work to support sharing financial
    responsibility with partner governments to better ensure the
    sustainability and impact of our HIV/AIDS efforts. As one of the
    original Congressional supporters of PEPFAR, I can assure you that our
    battle against HIV/AIDS is important to me personally, and I am looking
    forward to the day we can reverse the tide of the disease.

        Question 38. With a 15 percent reduction in resources as proposed
    in the FY18 budget, how would current HIV/AIDS patients stay on
    treatment, and not result in a reversal in trends where the number HIV/
    AIDS contractions and deaths start increasing?

        Answer. I refer you to the Department of State's Office of the
    Global AIDS Coordinator on the specifics of the Fiscal Year 2018 budget
    request for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). I
    understand the funding request would continue support for the current
    levels of patients on HIV/AIDS treatment. Again, as an original
    supporter of PEPFAR, and an ambassador who oversaw one of the world's
    larger PEPFAR programs, this is a cause that is important to me.

        Question 39. How does the budget's proposed cuts to malaria
    prevention advance U.S. economic security and prosperity?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on the
    specifics of the administration's Fiscal Year 2018 budget request, as
    well as how the administration is looking to prioritize efficiencies
    and preserve the gains the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) has
    achieved in many countries in Africa. As a survivor of malaria myself,
    and someone who lost students to malaria, if confirmed, I will work
    hard to build upon PMI's record of success.

        Question 40. Do you think it is important that USAID is working
    with the nations of West Africa to build systems to prevent, detect and
    respond to any future Ebola and other pandemic outbreaks?

        Answer. Yes. The Ebola epidemic demonstrated exactly why events in
    developing countries should matter to Americans. A viral outbreak in a
    remote corner of Guinea nearly brought three countries to the point of
    collapse, and sowed fear and panic in Dallas, Texas, and across the
    world.
        The Ebola crisis also demonstrated the need to build healthcare
    capacity in developing countries, as well as the need for early
    identification of outbreaks of infectious disease, the rapid
    declaration of Public Health Emergencies of International Concern, and
    rapid response to events that involve dangerous pathogens. Such efforts
    are instrumental to stopping an outbreak of a lethal, contagious
    disease at the source, which is critical to prevent or minimize the
    spread of, and subsequent deaths from, an epidemic. I understand that
    USAID, along with non-governmental implementing partners, continues to
    work with the nations of West Africa to strengthen their healthcare
    systems, services, and health-security measures.

        Question 41. How do you envision USAID's global health programs
    partnering with Gavi and other organizations to reduce child mortality
    and to reduce the dangers of infectious diseases from impacting the
    United States and other countries around the world?

        Answer. USAID's partnerships in global health, both within the U.S.
    Government, including under the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI)
    and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and with
    other organizations--such as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the Global
    Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and the Global Polio
    Eradication Initiative (GPEI)--have made, and will continue to make,
    critical contributions to reducing child mortality and the dangers of
    infectious disease. Partnerships such as Gavi help to leverage other
    donor resources to ensure that cost-effective, life-saving solutions
    can reach more children and reduce the impact of infectious disease
    worldwide.
        The experiences in recent years with outbreaks of novel infectious
    diseases, such as Ebola, Zika, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome,
    Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, and H1N1 influenza have also
    demonstrated that emerging infectious diseases that originate in other
    parts of the globe can quickly become homeland-security threats. USAID
    should continue to partner with the Departments of Agriculture, Health
    and Human Services and State, the World Health Organization, the United
    Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, and World Organization for
    Animal Health, and other key stakeholders, to further USAID's
    investments in strengthening the capacity of local and national
    institutions around the world, which will help prevent and detect
    outbreaks of dangerous infectious diseases.
        If confirmed, I will closely with the White House Global Health
    Security Agenda and interagency team to strengthen public health
    capacity in critical hot spots.

        Question 42. Will you commit to ensuring that ending preventable
    deaths of mothers and children remains a USAID priority?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 43. What correlation do you see between national security
    and improved maternal and child health?

        Answer. Any time that we are able to promote stability and social
    integration in a community, we are helping to immunize it against at
    least some of the potential drivers of despair, one the most
    significant being the preventable loss of mother or child. In a time
    when extremists are looking to exploit despair, alienation and
    marginalization, that effort is helpful in our broader struggle against
    extremism. Furthermore, humanitarian assistance and strategic
    investments in health, can help improve our national security by
    strengthening our relationships with people around the world,
    particularly in conflict-prone areas.

        Question 44. If confirmed, how will your pro-life voting record and
    views on family planning effect your decision making on related health
    issues that are a part of USAID's work?

        Answer. I have been a strong supporter of global health programs
    throughout my career, and I understand the importance of women's health
    issues, including voluntary family-planning programs that are
    implemented consistent with the law, available resources, and the
    Presidential Memorandum issued on January 23, 2017. I was part of the
    team that crafted key development health initiatives like the
    President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the President's
    Malaria Initiative (PMI), and, if confirmed, I will remain fully
    committed to advancing these programs that save women's lives.

        Question 45. How do you plan to structure USAID global health
    investments to help recipient countries move towards sustainable,
    domestically-financed health programs, increasing country ownership of
    such programs while maintaining U.S. leadership in global health?

        Answer. I understand that transitioning programs to the management
    and financing of partner countries is an explicit goal of all USAID
    global health investments. Because USAID works with countries in
    different stages of development, there is no one-size-fits-all model
    for health care and financing, and the Agency should tailor its global
    health investments to an individual country's needs, with a focus on
    sustainability, and a goal of self-sufficiency.

        Question 46. How will you build on USAID health successes and work
    with partners to address persistent systems barriers like the need for
    more trained and supported frontline health workers?

        Answer. As I indicated in my written statement, I believe ``the
    purpose of foreign assistance should be ending its need to exist.''
    That means that, if confirmed, I plan to assist governments and civil
    society in partner countries to strengthen their own ability to manage
    their health systems. I would look to incentivize partner governments
    to adopt key reforms, including task-shifting, and, as permitted by
    available resources, provide assistance for training and equipping
    frontline health workers to do more to support communities and save
    lives.

        Question 47. How will USAID prioritize the stability of funding for
    disaster risk reduction in countries facing significant natural hazards
    and the need for investment in preventative measures that save lives,
    build resilience, and are cost effective?

        Answer. USAID's work in disaster risk reduction over the past 30
    years has demonstrated clear results in increasing the capacity of
    countries to respond to their own calamities and to those that affect
    their neighbors. For example, I understand that following the
    earthquake in Ecuador in 2016, 73 percent of the search and rescue
    personnel who responded from neighboring countries such as Chile and
    Peru were trained by the United States. As a result of these regional
    interventions, the U.S. Government did not need to deploy its own
    search-and-rescue teams to respond.
        I understand that USAID recognizes that national and local entities
    can play a key role in responding to emergencies. The main goal of the
    Agency's programs should go beyond strengthening its own ability to
    respond to emergencies overseas, and extend to helping communities
    across the world become more resilient themselves to disasters and
    better able to deal with their impact. Relatively small investments in
    disaster risk-reduction can pay huge dividends in helping partner
    countries build capacity and resiliency. If confirmed, I will continue
    to support these efforts.

        Question 48. How will you ensure USAID upholds its commitments to
    developing and implementing a Global Water Strategy (as required by the
    2014 Water for the World Act) that addresses how the U.S. will increase
    access to safe drinking water and sanitation and hygiene services,
    improve the management of watersheds and water resources, and mitigate
    or resolve water-related conflicts?

        Answer. I agree that a comprehensive water strategy is critical to
    achieving results in this very important sector. If confirmed, and once
    fully briefed on the details of the Global Water Strategy, I look
    forward to working with Congress to address the intersection of water,
    sanitation and health.

        Question 49. What criteria will you use to prioritize the
    allocation of humanitarian assistance?

        Answer. Thanks to the generous support of Congress, the United
    States is the world's leading provider of humanitarian aid by sheer
    volume, and works in partnership with other donor governments,
    multilateral agencies, non-governmental organizations, local relief
    groups and others to respond to an average of 65 disasters in more than
    50 countries every year.
        I understand that USAID's two emergency-response offices, the
    Office of Food for Peace and the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster
    Assistance, continuously monitor humanitarian needs worldwide and make
    emergency funding decisions on a rolling basis, to provide life-saving
    assistance where it is most needed today, while also meeting and
    mitigating anticipated emergency needs several months in the future. I
    am told they rely on a variety of tools to determine need and
    vulnerability and guide the prioritization of resources, including
    information from field staff, partner reporting, and forecasting from
    the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET).
        Unfortunately, humanitarian needs always exceed available global
    resources, and USAID will never be able to provide as much assistance
    as we would all like. Difficult trade-offs, such as prioritizing
    immediate action at the expense of longer-term resilience and
    development activities, might need to be made.
        Recognizing that the U.S. Government cannot meet global
    humanitarian needs alone, and should not try to do so, USAID engages
    with fellow donors and actors in the international humanitarian
    architecture to seek their assistance and collaboration. Sustained U.S.
    humanitarian leadership, both diplomatic and financial, is critical for
    continued engagement from both traditional and emerging donors. The
    good news in this regard is that donors such as Japan and Germany have
    recently increased their support for humanitarian assistance. If
    confirmed, I intend to use my experience as both a diplomat and a
    Congressman to press donor counterparts for both more funding and a
    more-efficient coordination of effort. I also intend to turn to other
    potential funding sources, including traditional and emerging donors,
    as well as the private sector.

        Question 50. How will you ensure that humanitarian assistance goes
    to the most vulnerable, regardless of location?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work hard to coordinate with the
    Department of Defense and multilateral organizations to secure safe
    access to areas of humanitarian need. Beyond that, as Administrator of
    America's lead development and humanitarian-assistance agency, I would
    work relentlessly to highlight areas of greatest humanitarian need,
    wherever that might be at any moment.

        Question 51. How will you protect humanitarian assistance from
    political/security/economic priorities of other United States
    Government entities?

        Answer. The United States prioritizes humanitarian assistance based
    on need, whether that need arises from a man-made or natural disaster.
    While foreign assistance fulfills multiple objectives, some of which
    are strategic, political and/or economic, the U.S. Government has
    always targeted humanitarian assistance itself towards those most in
    need. Furthermore, humanitarian assistance should not be considered a
    substitute for political solutions in man-made crises. To do otherwise
    risks politicizing that assistance, which, among other things, puts aid
    workers at increased risk.
        If confirmed, I will ensure USAID continues to work with
    implementing partners committed to the humanitarian principles of
    neutrality, impartiality, and independence.

        Question 52. Do you intend to push back on OMB's intended
    withholding of humanitarian relief funds to meet the exceptional levels
    of humanitarian need globally?

        Answer. I have not been briefed on the situation to which you are
    referring. But, if I am confirmed, I commit to working to ensure we are
    providing humanitarian assistance as quickly and effectively as
    conditions permit.

        Question 53. How would you work at USAID--and with Congress--to
    ensure that the U.S. takes a forward looking, multi-year approach to
    its response to humanitarian crises where possible?

        Answer. Unfortunately, there is little chance that needs arising
    from current humanitarian emergencies will decline in the near future.
    The situations in Syria, Iraq, South Sudan, and Yemen represent what
    has become the norm--protracted, man-made, large-scale crises driven by
    conflict. In just over a decade, the number of people in need of
    humanitarian aid has more than doubled. I understand that the Famine
    Early Warning System Network indicates Somalia, Yemen, and Nigeria
    could fall into famine this year, and the United Nations has already
    declared famine in South Sudan.
        The U.S. Government funds partners in a reliable, timely manner,
    through arrangements that help to ensure continuity of assistance. If
    confirmed, I will continue to support USAID's mission to provide life-
    saving humanitarian assistance through, where feasible and appropriate,
    a multi-year approach in the American response, while adapting our
    responses to the crises of today and making the most of taxpayer
    dollars.

        Question 54. What are the greatest needs facing Iraqis and Syrians
    returning to areas liberated from ISIS?

        Answer. While, if confirmed, I will be in a much better position to
    respond to this question, I understand that more than 531,000 Iraqis
    have been displaced since the start of the campaign to retake Iraq's
    city of Mosul from ISIS. As the campaign in Syria to retake the city of
    Raqqah intensifies, potentially tens of thousands more will be forced
    to flee their homes. I understand that the U.S. Government and its
    partners continue to assist these populations as they escape from ISIS-
    held areas, through the provision of medical care, food, and emergency
    commodities. Assistance also continues in camps and emergency sites, as
    well as areas of return in eastern Mosul, despite continued insecurity.
        Many of those displaced would obviously like to return home.
    Security is the most-critical factor for returns--especially as ISIS
    leaves behind unexploded ordnance, improvised explosive devices (IEDs),
    and booby traps. The greatest stabilization needs are for immediate
    repairs to basic infrastructure, the creation of jobs, the extension of
    small-business loans, and the creation of medium-term programs that
    rehabilitate transport corridors among liberated cities and incentivize
    additional displaced persons to return. Working to ensure there are
    safe, habitable places for the displaced to return, with opportunities
    for the future, will help provide normalcy and stability, as well as
    further weaken ISIS's hold. Despite challenges, tens of thousands of
    people are returning to liberated areas, including an estimated 145,000
    people to liberated parts of Mosul so far. I understand that USAID is
    supporting those returnees with humanitarian assistance, and as
    programs transition from relief to early recovery, will make longer-
    term investments in infrastructure and livelihoods.

        Question 55. Should the U.S. Government assist in the stabilization
    of post-ISIS areas?

        Answer. I know that we will want to help as best as we can, but our
    overall policy is developed by more than just USAID, so I'll wait to
    consult more broadly within the U.S. Government before providing a more
    fulsome answer.

        Question 56. What more can and should the United States do to
    ensure that conflict parties refrain from causing harm to civilians and
    exacerbating already severe humanitarian catastrophes while conflicts
    are ongoing?

        Answer. I agree the U.S. Government should do whatever it can to
    ensure that combatants do not target civilians in and around conflict
    zones. I understand that the U.S. Government uses de-confliction
    processes with armed actors, where appropriate, to help avoid any
    unintentional targeting of humanitarian assistance or innocent
    civilians. The State Department and USAID continually urge all parties
    in conflict areas to respect international humanitarian norms, and to
    allow for unfettered access of aid to reach civilian populations. If
    confirmed, I will be a strong advocate on these issues.

        Question 57. What is the role of the United States to ensure
    compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 2286 to document and
    conduct investigations of attacks on health workers and facilities?

        Answer. I refer you to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations on
    the specific question of UN Security Resolution 2286. However, as the
    President of the International Republican Institute (IRI), the safety
    and security of my people on the ground is something I worry about
    every day. As you know, IRI carries out programs and activities in
    places where democracy advocates are often targeted for intimidation.
    Similarly, I know that USAID takes safety and security of its staff and
    implementing partners very seriously. If confirmed, I will continue to
    make this a priority for the Agency. More broadly, I am troubled by
    reports over the past several years of persistent attacks on health
    facilities, medical staff, and humanitarian personnel in conflict
    zones. Consequently, if confirmed, I will work with my colleagues at
    the Department of State and the rest of the interagency on this very
    important issue. Furthermore, if I am confirmed, I will take steps to
    make sure that USAID calls on all parties to prevent attacks, that it
    pushes for timely and appropriate channels for the investigation of
    reports of violence, and that it insists upon prosecution of any
    individuals responsible for intentional attacks.

        Question 58. What is your assessment of the last 15 years of the
    counterterrorism/countering violent extremism efforts and why they have
    largely failed?

        Answer. Not every question or challenge can be entirely addressed
    through a development lens, so this question can only be fully
    addressed in conjunction with other voices from the security sector and
    beyond. Furthermore, I agree with those who have opined that taking on
    violent extremism is a sweeping challenge for our time, one without
    simple answers or quick fixes. Violent extremism is not merely an idea
    to be challenged or countered, but something used by terribly dangerous
    individuals and groups who seek to end our way of life. We not only
    have to counter an ideology, but also defeat the evil practitioners of
    that ideology as well.
        What USAID can bring to these challenges are tools that can help us
    understand and address the drivers of extremism in many settings. With
    years of on-the-ground experience, the Agency is particularly suited to
    leading this analysis in many places, and then designing interventions
    and initiatives that can, in some cases, counter violent extremism. But
    more important, armed with good analysis, USAID can build resilience in
    communities to prevent or limit the expansion of extremist ideology, or
    help communities recover from the devastating effects of the battles
    extremists wage.

        Question 59. Under your leadership, how would U.S. counter violent
    extremism efforts seek to address citizens grievances, including
    security sector abuse, exclusion, and inequality?

        Answer. I understand that USAID's existing programs to counter
    violent extremism focus on addressing core grievances that extremist
    organizations seek to exploit, as well as contest their promotion of
    intolerance in the larger public.
        If confirmed, I will continue to encourage this focus. We will
    pursue prevention (advocating for these causes), accountability
    (investigating and holding perpetrators to account) and support for
    those aggrieved.

        Question 60. How can we bring real evidence and metrics to measure
    whether our counter violent extremism efforts are making an impact in
    reducing levels of support for violence?

        Answer. I understand that USAID is constantly gathering both
    quantitative and qualitative data to design, monitor, and evaluate its
    programming to counter violent extremism. If confirmed, I will seek to
    use those findings in both country- and context-specific analyses and
    surveys, among other tools, to measure the impact of these very
    important programs. We must be careful not to jump to conclusions on
    the drivers of extremism in any context. But, instead, undertake an
    informed, qualitative, analytical approach that enables us to tailor
    our approach to local and regional conditions.

        Question 61. What will USAID do, under your leadership, to ensure
    Burma's democratic transition and prospects for sustainable development
    are not undermined by the military's continued role in the economy and
    politics?

        Answer. I have had the honor of visiting Burma on a couple of
    occasions. While the elections two years ago were a historic victory
    for both the people of Burma and the cause of democracy, they were
    merely the beginning of a journey to a truly citizen-centered, citizen-
    responsive society. To sustain the gains of Burma's democratic
    transition, if confirmed, I will work to accelerate USAID's efforts to
    strengthen democratic institutions, including Parliament, the
    judiciary, and civil society; foster national reconciliation and peace;
    and improve the lives of the Burmese people by increasing access to
    better health services, economic opportunities, and, when needed,
    humanitarian assistance.

        Question 62. Given that USAID supports Burma's peace process
    through the Joint Peace Fund, will it endorse the recommendations of
    more than 135 civil society organizations calling for a new approach to
    natural resource management in the country as a way to address one of
    the root causes of the conflicts and build a better future for Burma's
    people?

        Answer. I agree that challenges with access to, and management of,
    natural resources are having a dangerous effect upon ethnic conflict
    and strife in Burma. Working with civil society is a key component of
    USAID's development strategy, and the U.S. Government currently
    supports non-governmental organizations in Burma on a wide array of
    development issues. If confirmed, I commit that USAID will engage with
    the 135 civil-society organizations that are calling for a new approach
    to natural resource-management in Burma, and identify areas where we
    can work effectively together on this very important issue.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to Mark Green by Senator Johnny Isakson

        Question 1. I have long been supportive of efforts to engage the
    private sector in a meaningful way in our development efforts. Public-
    private partnerships are a key tool we can use to achieve sustainable,
    long-term economic development. As you may know, Sens. Coons, Perdue,
    and I reintroduced the Economic Growth and Development Act that
    authorizes USAID to create a mechanism that would allow for the private
    sector to more easily engage and partner with USAID's development
    programs. Will you commit to me that you will work with us on this bill
    if you are confirmed?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. Last year, Congress passed into law the Global Food
    Security Act. I am thankful for all the work this committee did to get
    that bill across the finish line. It is up for reauthorization next
    year. Will you commit to me that you will work with me on continuing to
    improve the Global Food Security Strategy, the whole-of-government
    approach, and our agricultural development programs?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question . I am the chair of the subcommittee with direct oversight
    of the management of the State Department and USAID. If confirmed, will
    you commit to working with me to thoughtfully consider any reforms or
    reorganization of State and USAID and ensure that the proper
    authorities are in place to carry out any reforms or reorganization?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. On April 13, 2017, I joined a bipartisan group of
    Senators in sending a letter to USAID's acting leadership supporting
    the Volunteer for Economic Growth Alliance's skilled volunteer
    initiative. Additionally, a bipartisan group of eight Members of the
    House of Representatives also sent a letter expressing their support
    for this initiative. VEGA leverages pro-bono American private-sector
    expertise in cost-effective, flexible, efficient and strategic U.S.
    investments in emerging markets. However, after a short-term extension
    was granted to give the next Administrator time to review this
    initiative, it will soon expire. Given the bipartisan support for
    skilled volunteerism, do you intend to coordinate closely with Congress
    to ensure that our development efforts continue to draw on skilled
    volunteers and seek new, innovative ways to expand their involvement?

        Answer. Yes, I support drawing on volunteers, where practical and
    cost-effective, to better leverage our resources.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                 Submitted to Mark Green by Senator Todd Young

        Question 1. Ambassador Green, Secretary Tillerson has stated that
    he is seeking efficiencies through potential reorganization plans. How
    do you assess the relative performance of PEPFAR versus PMI, and do you
    see any opportunities for efficiencies at the intersection of these two
    programs that would sustain or improve the current level of
    performance?

        Answer. There is plenty of evidence to prove that the President's
    Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the President's Malaria
    Initiative (PMI) have both been successful global health initiatives,
    with an impact measurable both in terms of lives saved and, in some
    places, lower rates of transmission. There are several key factors to
    the success of PEPFAR and PMI, which include clearly articulated,
    quantitative goals and strategies focused on scaling up proven
    interventions; statutory Coordinators with clear authorities; high
    standards for transparency; the rigorous monitoring and evaluation of
    programs; and implementation structures that aim to maximize results
    through integration with other global health programs when
    programmatically relevant. If confirmed, I look forward to deepening
    the successes of these programs, to developing a close working
    relationship with the PEPFAR and PMI Coordinators, and to applying
    these lessons learned across the development landscape to further
    increase efficiency and effectiveness.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to Mark Green by Senator John Barrasso

        Question 1. I support making the Department of State and USAID
    leaner, more efficient, and more effective. The State Department and
    USAID need to advance our national security objectives while ensuring
    the best use of American taxpayer dollars.

       What opportunities exist for streamlining, efficiencies and savings
            at USAID?

        Answer. As stated in my written testimony, making sure that USAID
    programs respect American taxpayers will be an overarching priority, if
    I should be confirmed. It is our responsibility to use precious foreign
    assistance funds as efficiently and effectively as possible. If
    confirmed as Administrator, I will scrutinize every program and
    expenditure to ensure the Agency is maximizing value, minimizing waste,
    and always advancing America's interest. This will mean focusing the
    agency's limited resources on what is working, and ending programs that
    are not. I am committed to consulting with the Congress as we move
    forward in this effort.

        Question 2. Are you committed to eliminating duplication and
    redundancies?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. How would you recommend more deeply integrating USAID's
    policy and budget process into those of the Department of State?

        Answer. I am committed to improving efficiency and appropriate
    reforms to advance development. I am more interested in ensuring that
    we have the right functions and capabilities to meet the complex
    challenges before us rather than on agency structure, and I have an
    open mind on the best way to accomplish this. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with my interagency colleagues at the Departments of
    State, Defense, Health and Human Services, Agriculture and elsewhere,
    to ensure we are all working together to further U.S. national
    interests and strategic foreign-policy priorities.

        Question 4. The Obama administration focused on food security,
    global health and climate change as its top development priorities.

       What would be your top three development priorities?

        Answer. Should I be confirmed, my overarching development priority
    would be helping target countries take on their own development needs
    by incentivizing and supporting both the policy reforms and capacity-
    building necessary to do so. Each nation has particular strengths and
    needs, and I believe we should try to address them in a strategic and
    tailored way. Having said that, I would also emphasize development
    sectors that can also create economic opportunities for America. Feed
    the Future and Power Africa, for example, can help American businesses
    with new markets and new partnerships.

        Question 5. With the national debt rapidly approaching $20
    trillion, the federal government must be good stewards of taxpayer
    funds. Given the increasing need for humanitarian assistance, food
    insecurity, democracy promotion and global health crisis, I do not
    support U.S. taxpayer dollars going to the Global Climate Change
    Initiative and other international climate change programs. President
    Obama's administration requested about $1.3 billion in FY 2017 for
    these types of program. President Trump's administration requested $0
    for the UN Green Climate Fund and the Global Climate Change Initiative.

       If confirmed, will you ensure that funding is being properly
            prioritized and eliminate funding for international climate
            change programs?

        Answer. I certainly agree that we are facing serious budget
    challenges, and that we need to be good stewards of taxpayer resources.
    I also agree that humanitarian-assistance challenges and existing
    commitments, such as global health, are important priorities for USAID.
        As the question notes, the administration's budget does not provide
    funding for the Green Climate Fund or Global Climate Change Initiative.
    Instead, I would favor modest initiatives to prevent and deal with
    weather-related disasters, such as the assistance we have provided to
    the Philippines to assist in developing that country's typhoon early-
    warning system. This is the kind of intervention that has clear
    humanitarian and development applications.

        Question 6. What are your views of Power Africa?

        Answer. I share your support of Power Africa, which is a valuable
    and successful program, with great potential to transform the
    continent, while also creating new and expanded opportunities for U.S.
    companies.
        Power Africa's efforts and American leadership have resulted in
    significant international momentum towards tackling Africa's energy
    crisis. Power Africa is now among the largest public-private
    partnerships for development in history, having mobilized more than $54
    billion in commitments towards achieving its goals.
        If confirmed, I am interested in understanding how we can use Power
    Africa's model and other initiatives to incentivize good policies,
    capacity-building, and investments in our partner countries by
    leveraging the financing and expertise of the private sector.

        Question 7. As administrator of USAID, would you ensure that USAID
    is promoting all forms of energy projects across the globe, including
    oil, gas, and coal?

        Answer. Yes. Of the more than 7,000 megawatts of new power projects
    that Power Africa has helped reach financial close to date, more than
    three-fourths involve natural gas. I understand the Power Africa team
    has been engaging with Congressional staff, including your own, as well
    as with industry, on these very important issues. These discussions are
    exploring the ways we might deploy U.S. technologies and expertise to
    help African Governments and companies both to take advantage of their
    own domestic resources, as well as to examine the potential for gas
    imports from the United States and world markets. If confirmed, I would
    like to explore what more Power Africa could do to support the
    production of electricity from diverse sources of energy.

        Question 8. There has been a great deal of concern regarding
    reports of upcoming famines in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan and Yemen.
    The Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance at USAID and the Office of
    Food for Peace at USAID provide humanitarian assistance during
    international crises and disasters.

       Please discuss the main obstacles and best approaches to resolving
            the humanitarian crisis facing Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan,
            and Yemen.

        Answer. I am deeply concerned about the food-security situation in
    these countries, in which a combined total of 41.5 million people are
    in need of humanitarian assistance. I understand that U.S. assistance
    to the people of these countries includes emergency food and nutrition,
    support for livelihoods, critical health care, shelter, safe drinking
    water, sanitation and hygiene services, and protection for civilians.
        Access to populations in need is a considerable challenge,
    particularly in conflict situations. The numbers of people whom donors
    can reach in several of the ongoing conflicts is limited, and requires
    persistence, creativity, and talented and dedicated staff. For example,
    in South Sudan,ongoing conflict, deliberate bureaucratic impediments,
    and high levels of insecurity continue to stymie the ability to provide
    direct assistance to those most in need. In Yemen, as much as 90
    percent of humanitarian assistance flows through a single port, which
    requires constant negotiation to obtain the necessary clearances to
    ship, offload, and distribute assistance to people on the verge of
    starvation. There are signs that famine likely occurred in Northeastern
    Nigeria in 2016, and might even be ongoing, but continued violence and
    insecurity limits access to many areas, which has triggered large-scale
    displacement, and leads to greater emergency needs. In Somalia,
    humanitarian access has improved in some areas compared with the
    previous 2011-2012 drought and famine, but the situation remains
    tenuous, as much of this improved access is in cities and towns, and
    al-Shabaab's presence continues to limit the ability to access many
    hard-hit rural areas. Despite constraints, humanitarian assistance
    continues to reach many of those in need in Nigeria, Somalia, South
    Sudan and Yemen.
        While humanitarian assistance can save lives and alleviate
    suffering, it cannot resolve man-made crises, which require political
    solutions. In settings like Northeastern Nigeria, the end of violence
    and restoration of public infrastructure and security are the only
    lasting ways to end a humanitarian crisis born from insecurity.
    Similarly, the U.S. Government's continued support of Somali efforts to
    strengthen the federal government's structures and improve security are
    critical to ensuring sustained and reliable access to populations in
    need. If confirmed, I will commit to working with my colleagues across
    the whole of the U.S. Government, and with multilateral institutions
    and others in the international community, to develop enduring,
    political solutions in these countries.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JULY 11, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Todd Young,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Young [presiding], Gardner, Isakson,
    Shaheen, Coons, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, and Merkley.

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

        Senator Young. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee will come to order.
        Today we meet to consider the nominations of the following
    individuals: the Honorable David Steele Bohigian to be
    Executive Vice President of the Overseas Private Investment
    Corporation; Mr. Ray Washburne to be President of OPIC; Ms.
    Kelley Eckels Currie, to be U.S. Representative to the Economic
    and Social Council of the United Nations and Alternative
    Representative to the Sessions of the U.N. General Assembly;
    and Mr. Jay Patrick Murray to be Alternate Representative for
    Special Political Affairs at the United Nations and Alternate
    Representative to the Sessions of the U.N. General Assembly.
        I welcome each of our nominees, as well as your families.
        I would also like to welcome our distinguished guests to
    introduce one of the nominees, the senior Senator from Texas,
    Senator Cornyn.
        Before I do that, I would also like to acknowledge your
    fellow Texan, my former colleague, a great American, Pete
    Sessions, a Congressman who kind of showed me the ropes as I
    was getting started in Congress.
        So thank you, Senator Cornyn, for being here today, and I
    would like to recognize you for your remarks, sir.

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

        Senator Cornyn. Chairman Young and members of the
    committee, thank you for letting me be here today to introduce
    my friend and fellow Texan, Ray Washburne.
        Today's hearing and the issues at the core of the Overseas
    Private Investment Corporation come at an opportune time. On
    the heels of the President's trip overseas and as our country
    reasserts its economic role on the global stage, it is
    important for us to be realistic about how we support our
    allies. U.S. direct aid is only a small portion of the capital
    flow that drives the world's economy. Our best tools are
    frequently found in the private sector, and that is where Ray
    comes in and his experience.
        When you look at his background and dedication, you will
    see that he is a strong fit for this role. His drive for
    success started at an early age. His first business venture, I
    am told, was mowing lawns at age 9 with 20 employees. That is
    pretty impressive.
        And his vision for what can be accomplished with hard work
    and perseverance started even before that. I am told he keeps a
    ruler hanging on his office wall from when the Park City Bank
    and Trust Bank building in Dallas opened when he was 8 years
    old. He now owns that building and views the ruler as a symbol
    of one's ability to set goals and find creative potential.
        But many across Texas know him for the role he has played
    in the Dallas economy specifically. After paying his own way
    through Southern Methodist University, he went on to become one
    of Texas' most successful real estate investors and
    entrepreneurs. As the co-founder of MCrowd Restaurant Group,
    his footprint now spans 40 restaurants, including the perennial
    Texas favorite, Mi Cocina. He understands the importance of
    investing not simply for the sake of ownership and profit but
    for reinvigorating the local economy. One look at Highland Park
    Village in Dallas, a refurbished shopping center near his alma
    mater, will show you what I mean by that.
        Ray also serves as an adjunct professor at the SMU Cox
    School of Business where his wisdom and expertise are shared
    with future generations. And he also lends a hand as a
    volunteer and board member for organizations around Texas,
    including the Urban Land Institute, Baylor Health Care System
    Foundation, the Real Estate Council, and the World Presidents
    Association.
        Alongside his family Ray volunteers for the S.M. Wright
    Foundation, which serves the most impoverished in Dallas, and
    Family Legacy in Africa, which encourages education for the
    region's orphans.
        And somehow he manages to balance all of this with his
    three children at home, who are here today, and with this life
    partner Heather, who is a formidable business woman in her own
    right.
        I know Ray shares my belief that OPIC is an important tool
    in the United States' toolkit. It allows us to encourage
    natural economic growth and stability in areas of the world
    that need it the most. And while there are certainly changes
    that can be made, especially when we consider the long-term
    future of OPIC and the sometimes unbalanced investments made by
    the United States, Ray, I believe, will be an experienced and
    dedicated person at the table advocating on behalf of the
    United States of America.
        Once he is confirmed, we can be sure that he will marry the
    United States' interests and the developing world's potential
    into an economically sufficient and innovative future.
        So thank you, Chairman Young and members of the committee,
    for giving me the privilege of introducing my friend, Ray
    Washburne, and I hope the committee will support his
    nomination.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Cornyn. And since the
    good Senator introduced Mr. Washburne, I will take liberties
    here and provide a little additional background on the other
    three nominees.
        Mr. Bohigian is the Managing Director of Pluribus Ventures,
    an advisor to financial services firms in growth companies.
    Earlier he served on the core management team of Bridgewater
    Associates, the world's largest hedge fund. Prior to
    Bridgewater, Mr. Bohigian served as an Assistant Secretary of
    Commerce. Welcome.
        Ms. Currie is currently a senior fellow with the Project
    2049 Institute where she specializes in political reform,
    development, and humanitarian assistance, human rights and
    other nontraditional security issues in the Asia-Pacific
    region. She previously held senior policy positions with the
    Department of State and several international and
    nongovernmental human rights and humanitarian organizations.
    Good to have you here.
        And Colonel Murray is a retired U.S. Army colonel with
    distinction in Iraq, the Balkans, the U.S. Embassy Moscow as an
    advisor in the Bureau of Political Military Affairs at the
    Department of State and as the U.S. military representative at
    the United Nations. Good to have you here, Colonel.
        Before I go further, I would like to invite Senator Cornyn
    to depart at your leisure. I know how busy we get around here.
        And thank you Chairman Sessions again for your attendance.
        Before I turn to Senator Merkley for his statement, in
    light of the positions today's nominees seek to fill, I would
    like to make a few brief comments about the U.N. and OPIC.
        As you point out in your prepared remarks, Mr. Murray, the
    United Nations is an entity with much promise. It is also an
    entity that too often falls short of that promise. I admire
    Ambassador Haley's efforts to do what she can to seek reform
    and accountability at the U.N. There is no doubt that having
    additional high-level appointees at the U.N. will allow for
    increased U.S. engagement with the United Nations on a reform
    agenda.
        The Ambassador for the Special Political Affairs position
    will play an important role in peacekeeping reform in
    particular. This is an area in dire need of reform for missions
    that fail to fulfill their mandates to missions that outlive
    their purpose or, worse yet, missions rife with sexual
    exploitation that victimize those that are supposed to be
    protected. There is no doubt U.N. peacekeeping reform is long
    overdue. As you suggest in your prepared remarks, Mr. Murray,
    both whistleblower protections and training must be
    strengthened.
        The Ambassador to the Economic and Social Council of the
    U.N. will also play an important role, including potentially in
    efforts to reform the U.N. Human Rights Council. I would note
    that our sub committee held a hearing on the U.N. Human Rights
    Council on May 25th. As that hearing highlighted, some of the
    countries with the worst possible human rights records sit on
    the Human Rights Council using their membership to deflect
    attention from their egregious human rights abuses, instead
    attempting to pass judgment on Israel. Addressing this
    unacceptable status quo should be a top priority.
        Those are a few of the reasons I am hopeful that this
    committee and the larger Senate will process these two U.N.
    nominations expeditiously so that they can be in a position and
    get to work before the U.N. General Assembly in September.
        As I said, we also have two individuals who have been
    nominated to lead OPIC. I look forward to discussing OPIC's
    mission and the increasing importance of the private sector in
    international development.
        With that, I would like to recognize the distinguished
    ranking member for his comments. Senator Merkley?

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

        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am
    delighted we are holding this hearing as we exercise our advise
    and consent responsibility. And thank you to each of you for
    putting yourselves forward to take and consider serving in
    these important public roles.
        In the aftermath of the most destructive conflict in
    history, the United States worked in concert with its allies
    and partners to found the United Nations, a body chartered to,
    quote, save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and
    to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights and to promote
    social progress and better standards of life and larger
    freedom. Those are powerful aspirational missions.
        And the United Nations has pursued these lofty standards
    better when guided by American leadership. Confirming nominees
    to critical roles will help the United Nations fulfill the
    aspirations that were so well laid out in the beginning.
        I have been concerned about the pace of the process for
    nominating candidates to key positions and am pleased that we
    are moving forward today with this hearing at the United
    Nations for the United Nations Economic and Social Council and
    the United Nations Security Council. I look forward to hearing
    from all of you in terms of what you see as key changes or
    objectives that you might bring to your roles.
        I am delighted that we now have nominees for the Overseas
    Private Investment Corporation, or OPIC. OPIC is a self-
    sustaining U.S. agency that does important work facilitating
    American investment in emerging markets. I have been long
    impressed with their work, which is why I was so troubled to
    see the administration's budget call for OPIC's elimination.
    Zeroing OPIC is especially problematic as OPIC operates at no
    net cost to taxpayers and in fact reduces our deficits. Its
    revenues back to the U.S. Treasury have helped reduce the
    deficit for 39 consecutive years, including more than $3.7
    billion in deficit reduction over just the past 10 years. So I
    am excited that these nominations may well signal a reversal in
    the administration's plans to eliminate the agency, and I
    certainly look forward to hearing the nominees' views on the
    administration's plans.
        Thank you again for your willingness to serve. I look
    forward to your comments.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Merkley.
        We will now turn to our nominees. I appreciate your
    willingness to serve in these important capacities. I would
    remind you your full statements will be included in the record,
    without objection.
        For your opening statements, let us go in the order that I
    used earlier. I encourage each of you to start by recognizing
    any family or friends who may be attending today. Mr. Bohigian?

      STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID STEELE BOHIGIAN, OF MISSOURI, TO BE
      EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT
                              CORPORATION

        Mr. Bohigian. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of
    the committee, thank you for offering me the opportunity to
    appear here today. I am honored to be nominated to be the
    Executive Vice President of OPIC.
        I would like to thank the members of the committee and
    their staff for time they spent with me prior to the hearing.
        Thank you too for the invitation to have my family join me
    here today. My son Steele and younger daughter Caroline are
    away at camp. I am joined here by my fantastic wife Catherine,
    who I love more than words can express, and I would note, in
    particular, my daughter Kate served as Delegate for the United
    States in model United Nations where she achieved outstanding
    delegate earlier this year. Thank you for being here.
        I also want to thank my parents for supporting me. Every
    day I am trying to live up to their example of serving their
    community and their family.
        I would also like to recognize my fellow nominees and in
    particular Mr. Washburne who has been nominated to be the CEO
    and President of OPIC. As noted earlier, Mr. Washburne is a
    successful businessman who has a long history of analyzing
    companies and investments for their potential. He combines a
    keen business sense with a deep consideration of the impact
    that businesses will have on the broader community. His superb
    character has been shaped by a family not only here today but
    that has served this Nation as Senators, governors,
    Congressmen, and also includes a Secretary of State and an
    ambassador. I expect these qualities will serve him well as
    President and CEO of OPIC.
        If confirmed, I hope my government experience and business
    track record will complement his values and abilities and
    skills as OPIC seeks to help American businesses succeed in
    international markets.
        Earlier in my career, I had the distinct privilege to serve
    as Assistant Secretary of Commerce for market access and
    compliance in the International Trade Administration. My job
    was to ensure that American companies could compete fairly in
    international markets. I worked with American businesses and
    foreign governments to develop an international business
    climate that created opportunities for American workers and
    spread American values. In that role, I am proud to have
    launched the Entrepreneurship Initiative where small businesses
    could advocate to reduce barriers to trade and open new markets
    for American goods and services. I am also proud to have led
    the U.S. Government's first clean energy trade mission where
    U.S. businesses developed lasting and profitable relationships
    in China and India. Prior to that role, I was the Director of
    the Department of Commerce's Office of Policy and Strategic
    Planning where I advised two Secretaries on economics and
    energy.
        In business, I have helped companies grow and prosper,
    working across every corporate function from operations to
    strategy in a variety of roles including founder, CEO, and
    managing director. I have founded businesses such as an energy
    efficiency project finance firm and a startup incubator, as
    well as assisting countless companies enter new markets. I have
    helped manage some of the world's most innovative financial
    services firms in a career that has spanned venture capital,
    private equity, investment banking, and hedge funds. Across
    these disciplines, I have learned to turn concepts into
    companies, analyze business prospects, structure projects,
    develop global supply chains, and evaluate microeconomic and
    macroeconomic developments. I believe these experiences have
    helped prepare me to guide the important work ahead.
        American businesses operating in international markets
    deliver opportunities to workers in the U.S. and develop
    tangible benefits to partner companies, laying the foundation
    for global peace and prosperity. When the American private
    sector builds power plants, water treatment facilities, or
    airports, the benefits are not simply economic. These
    partnerships lift environmental, social, and governance
    standards around the world. International connections developed
    through business lead to deeper cross-cultural understanding
    and create the conditions for global opportunity and
    compassion. Throughout Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa,
    and the western hemisphere, American private sector investment
    has promoted American jobs, American values, and lifted living
    standards to heights unimaginable in earlier generations.
        Almost 250 years ago, the Declaration of Independence
    boldly asserted that life, liberty, and the pursuit of
    happiness were inalienable rights. I believe these rights are
    immutable and eternal and underpin values that have spread
    prosperity and freedom at home and abroad. If I am confirmed, I
    would be honored to continue that tradition and help advocate
    for American opportunities in the years ahead.
        Mr. Chairman and the committee, thank you for that
    opportunity.
        [Mr. Bohigian's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of David Bohigian

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the committee,
    thank you for offering me the opportunity to appear here today. I am
    honored to be nominated by President Trump to serve as the Executive
    Vice President of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
        I would like to thank the members of the committee and their staff
    for the time they have spent with me prior to the hearing. Thank you
    too for the invitation to have my family join me here today. While my
    son Steele and younger daughter Caroline are away at summer camp, I am
    joined here by my wife Catherine and daughter Kate. Thank you for being
    here. I also want to thank my parents for supporting me--every day, I'm
    trying to live up to their example of serving their community and
    family.
        I would also like to recognize my fellow nominees here on the
    panel. If confirmed, I particularly look forward to working with Ray
    Washburne, who has been nominated by the President to serve as OPIC's
    President and Chief Executive Officer.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Washburne is a successful businessman who has a
    long history of analyzing companies and investments for their
    potential. Mr. Washburne combines a keen business with a deep
    consideration of the impact that business will have on the broader
    community. His superb character has been shaped by a family that has
    served this Nation as Senators, Governors and congressmen, and also
    includes a Secretary of State and Ambassador. I expect these qualities
    will serve him well as President and Chief Executive Officer of OPIC.
        If confirmed, I hope my government experience and business track
    record will complement his values, abilities and skills as OPIC seeks
    to help American businesses succeed in international markets.
        Earlier in my career, I had the distinct privilege to serve as
    Assistant Secretary for market access and compliance in the
    International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce. My
    job was to ensure that American companies could compete fairly in
    international markets. I worked with American businesses and foreign
    governments to develop an international business climate that created
    opportunities for American workers and spread American values. In that
    role, I am proud to have launched the Entrepreneurship Initiative,
    where small businesses could advocate to reduce tariff and non-tariff
    barriers to trade to open new markets for American goods and services.
    I also am proud to have led the federal government's first clean energy
    trade missions, where U.S. businesses developed lasting and profitable
    relationships in China and India. Prior to the International Trade
    Administration, I was the Director of the Department's Office of Policy
    and Strategic Planning, where I advised two Secretaries on economics
    and energy.
        In business, I have helped companies grow and prosper, working
    across every corporate function from operations to strategy in a
    variety of roles including founder, Chief Executive Officer and
    Managing Director. I have founded businesses such as an energy
    efficiency project finance firm and a startup incubator as well as
    assisting countless companies enter new markets. I have helped manage
    some of the world's most innovative financial services firms in a
    career that has spanned venture capital, private equity, hedge funds,
    and investment banking. Across these disciplines, I have learned to
    turn concepts into companies, analyze business prospects, structure
    projects, develop global supply chains, and evaluate microeconomic and
    macroeconomic developments. I believe these experiences have prepared
    me well to help guide the important work ahead.
        American businesses operating in international markets deliver
    opportunities to workers in the United States and develop tangible
    benefits to partner countries, laying the foundation for global peace
    and prosperity. When the American private sector builds power plants,
    water treatment facilities, or airports, the benefits aren't simply
    economic--the partnerships lift environmental, social and governance
    standards around the world. International connections developed through
    business lead to deeper cross-cultural understanding and create the
    conditions for global opporunity and compassion. Throughout Eastern
    Europe, Asia, the Middle-East, Africa and the Western Hemisphere,
    American private sector investment has promoted American jobs here,
    American values overseas, and lifted living standards to heights
    unimaginable to earlier generations.
        Almost 250 years ago, the Declaration of Independence boldly
    asserted that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were
    unalienable rights. I believe that these rights are immutable and
    eternal and underpin values that have spread prosperity and freedom at
    home and abroad. If I am confirmed, I would be honored to continue that
    tradition and help advocate for American opportunities in the years
    ahead.
        Mr. Chairman, I welcome the chance to serve our country as the
    Executive Vice President of OPIC. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you, the other members of the committee, the committee
    staff, and OPIC's talented and committed professionals to advance our
    common goals.

        Senator Young. Thank you.
        Mr. Washburne?

     STATEMENT OF RAY WASHBURNE, OF TEXAS, TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE
                OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION

        Mr. Washburne. Thank you, Chairman Young, Ranking Member
    Merkley, and members of the committee. Thank you for the
    opportunity to appear here today. Thank you also to the members
    and staff for graciously giving their time to meet with me
    prior to today's hearing. I also would like to thank my Senator
    Cornyn for his kind words in support of my nomination and to my
    local Congressman, Pete Sessions, for his support.
        It is a great privilege to address the committee as
    President Trump's nominee for President and Chief Executive
    Officer of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
        I am joined this morning by my wife Heather sitting
    directly behind me. I would also like to introduce my three
    children, Hill, Andrew, and Margo. They are students of
    history, and today is an opportunity for them to see how our
    great democracy works.
        My family has been involved politically and in public
    service with our republic since the 1850s. My forbearers served
    as mayors, Congressmen, Senators, governors, ambassadors, and
    Secretary of State that by example have given me a great desire
    to serve the American people. I have personally served on city
    and State boards and commissions. I have been fortunate to have
    traveled the world extensively and recently have spent a great
    deal of time in Africa. In particular, my wife, children, and I
    support an orphanage in Zambia and we have worked there the
    last two summers and have recently funded the construction of a
    new K through 12 school for 300 children in the middle of the
    most distressed areas of the Zambian capital, Lusaka. We
    continue to support many of the orphans there, and the
    experience has given me a deep insight into developmental
    issues in Africa.
        I have been an entrepreneur for 37 years. I have paid my
    way through college at SMU by selling carpet door to door to
    students, as well as working in construction. I know the value
    of a dollar both in the hard work it takes to earn it and to
    not unjustly take risks to lose it. Since graduating from
    college, I have been involved in financial services,
    hospitality, manufacturing, and real estate development. In
    financial services, my experience has included being on the
    board and loan committee of several banks involving hundreds of
    millions of dollars of loans and credit facilities. In private
    equity, I have invested and served on boards of infrastructure,
    construction, and businesses involved in various equipment and
    transportation manufacturing. Businesses I have grown have
    allowed workers to provide for their families, develop their
    skills, and are cornerstones of the economic fabric of their
    communities. I believe entrepreneurship promotes values that
    are integral to the American dream.
        In real estate, I have acquired and developed everything
    from office buildings, warehouses, shopping centers, and land
    developments. In hospitality, 26 years ago I was a co-founder
    of a small 10-table restaurant that has grown to over 2,000
    employees. Last year we served over 6 million customers.
        All these experiences have prepared me well to lead OPIC.
        As a businessman, I have dealt with the challenges of
    running a company, meeting a payroll, and ensuring prudent
    financial management and risk mitigation. If confirmed, I will
    use my experience to make OPIC more efficient while being a
    good steward of the American taxpayers' dollar.
        I have seen firsthand how American innovation and American
    capital can impact developing companies. America's
    entrepreneurial spirit can improve the well-being of people
    living in some of the world's most vulnerable countries. When
    an American business is willing to risk capital, it sends a
    signal to the rest of the world. It signals to the business
    community that markets are viable. It signals that American
    businesses have faith in a country's rule of law and that a
    country is capable of upholding labor and environmental
    standards.
        I am confident, if confirmed, I can guide OPIC to the path
    forward as determined by the Congress and the President.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with
    you, the members of the committee, the committee staff, and my
    colleagues in the administration to ensure OPIC continues to
    prudently manage its portfolio while upholding American
    principles abroad. I will provide steady but adaptable
    leadership.
        In the meantime, I welcome the chance to serve our country
    as President and CEO of OPIC and look forward to any questions
    you have today. Thank you.
        [Mr. Washburne's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Ray Washburne

        Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, and members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. Thank
    you also to the Members and staff for graciously giving their time to
    meet with me prior to today's hearing. I want to thank Senator Cornyn
    for his kind words in support for my nomination.
        It is a great privilege to address this committee as President
    Trump's nominee for President and Chief Executive Officer of the
    Overseas Private Investment Corporation. I am joined this morning by my
    wife, Heather. I would also like to introduce to you my three children,
    Hill, Andrew, and Margo. They are students of history, and today is an
    opportunity for them to see how our great democracy works.
        My family has been involved politically and in public service with
    our Republic since the 1850's. My forbearers have served as Mayors,
    Congressmen, Senators, Governors, Ambassadors, and a Secretary of
    State. I have personally served on city and state boards and
    commissions. I been fortunate to have traveled the world extensively
    and recently spent a great deal of time in Africa. In particular, my
    wife, children, and I support an orphanage in Zambia and we have
    recently funded the construction of a new K-12 school for 300 children
    in the middle of the most distressed areas of the Zambian capital,
    Lusaka. We continue to support many of the orphans there, and the
    experience has given me deep insight into developmental issues in
    Africa.
        I have been an entrepreneur for 37 years. I paid my way through
    college at Southern Methodist University (SMU) by selling carpet door-
    to-door and working in construction. I know the value of a dollar both
    in the work that it takes to earn it and not to unjustly take risks to
    lose it. Since graduating from college, I have been involved in
    financial services, hospitality, manufacturing, and real estate
    development. In financial services, my experience has included being on
    the board and loan committees of several banks involving hundreds of
    millions of dollars of loans and credit facilities. In private equity,
    I have invested and served on company boards of infrastructure,
    construction, and businesses involving various equipment and
    transportation manufacturing. Businesses I have grown have allowed
    workers to provide for their families, develop their skills and are
    cornerstones of the economic fabric of their communities. I believe
    entrepreneurship promotes values that are integral to the American
    Dream.
        In real estate, I have acquired and developed everything from
    office buildings, warehouses, shopping centers, and land developments.
    In hospitality, I was the co-founder of a small 10-table restaurant
    that has grown to 2,000 employees and served over 6 million customers
    last year.
        All of these experiences have prepared me to lead OPIC.
        As a businessman, I've dealt with the challenges of running a
    company, meeting a payroll, and ensuring prudent financial management
    and risk mitigation. If confirmed, I will use my experience to make
    OPIC more efficient while being a good steward of the American
    taxpayer's dollar.
        I've seen firsthand how American innovation and American capital
    can impact developing countries. America's entrepreneurial spirit can
    improve the well-being of people living in some of the world's most
    vulnerable countries. When an American business is willing to risk
    capital, it sends a signal to the rest of the world. It signals to the
    business community that markets are viable. It signals that American
    businesses have faith in a country's rule of law and that a country is
    capable of upholding labor and environmental standards.
        I am confident, if confirmed, that I can guide OPIC through the
    path forward as determined by the Congress and the President.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you, the
    other members of the committee, the committee staff, and my colleagues
    in the administration to ensure OPIC continues to prudently manage its
    portfolio, while upholding American principles abroad. I will provide
    steady, but adaptable, leadership.
        In the meantime, I welcome the chance to serve our country as
    President and CEO of OPIC and look forward to any questions.

        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Washburne. It is broadly
    understood that public administration can be quite challenging,
    but I cannot imagine it would be any more challenging than
    selling carpet to college students door to door. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Washburne. Primarily in the girls' dorms. [Laughter.]
        Senator Young. We will move on. Ms. Currie?

         STATEMENT OF KELLEY ECKELS CURRIE, OF GEORGIA, TO BE
    REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON THE ECONOMIC
      AND SOCIAL COUNCIL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, WITH THE RANK OF
    AMBASSADOR, AND TO BE AN ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED
     STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SESSIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF
                           THE UNITED NATIONS

        Ms. Currie. I am not sure I can follow that.
        Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, distinguished
    members of the committee, thank you so much for the opportunity
    to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to be
    the United States Representative to the Economic and Social
    Council of the United Nations. I am honored to have this
    opportunity to serve my country and appreciate the confidence
    President Trump, Secretary Tillerson, and Ambassador Haley have
    shown in me.
        I also want to thank my wonderful family, who is here
    today, particularly my husband Peter and my children, Mack and
    Sarah, for all of their support and encouragement; my mother
    Beth and my step-father, Gene Price, who have come today from
    Thomasville, Georgia; and my mother-in-law, Dottie Currie, who
    is very much looking forward to seeing more of her
    grandchildren in New York, if I am confirmed.
        I also have to thank everyone at USUN and the other offices
    at the State Department and the White House and, of course, the
    great committee staff here at the Foreign Relations Committee
    who have helped to guide me through this process.
        I also am glad to be here today with my fellow nominee
    Patrick and hope that we can move through this process together
    the rest of the way.
        Finally, I have to give a shout out to my colleagues from
    Project 2049 who are here today in the audience.
        When I was growing up in small-town south Georgia,
    enthusiastically participating in model U.N. programs in high
    school, I never dreamed that I would be asked to represent our
    great Nation at the U.N. Whether serving as the majority staff
    director of the congressional Human Rights Caucus or supporting
    democratic activists in closed societies during my time with
    the International Republican Institute, I have spent my career
    working to promote international human rights, human freedom,
    and human dignity. Today, the universality of human rights is
    under attack from resurgent authoritarian regimes that are
    threatened by the very ideas of freedom of expression, freedom
    of association, and freedom of religion. Regimes that rule
    through fear, coercion, and cooptation rather than the consent
    of the governed will always seek to limit basic freedoms both
    of their own citizens and of others when possible.
    Unfortunately, repressive regimes have too often found a safe
    harbor in the very international bodies that are meant to
    protect the most vulnerable. This must change if these bodies
    are to continue to enjoy the support of the American people. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with Ambassador Haley and
    our colleagues at the State Department to advance the
    protection of human rights worldwide by refocusing the U.N. on
    the core missions that Senator Merkley spoke so eloquently of
    earlier.
        Among the most critical aspects of America's efforts to
    elevate and defend human rights and human freedom is our
    longstanding focus on empowering women and girls. As a mother
    of a young girl, this issue is of deep personal importance to
    me. It is vital that girls have equal access to education,
    women are given equal opportunity in the workforce, and women
    and girls are protected from sexual violence and exploitation.
    If these efforts are to succeed, men must be partners in these
    initiatives. Many of the lead U.N. agencies that address these
    challenges fall under the ECOSOC umbrella. Unfortunately,
    overlapping mandates, bureaucratic competition, and other
    factors have made these U.N. mechanisms less effective than
    they could and should be. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with our global partners to support the full economic
    and political participation of women and girls.
        Another major focus of ECOSOC's work is the global effort
    to achieve the sustainable development goals. While recognizing
    the value of the framework established by the SDGs, it is
    important to realize that achieving a more stable, prosperous,
    and secure global community also requires tackling political
    issues implicated in systemic human rights abuses and conflict-
    related crises. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    our partners to see how we can work within this framework while
    also addressing some of its gaps.
        While there are certainly areas for improvement, ECOSOC is
    a critical forum for the United States to advocate America's
    human rights, development, and humanitarian values and
    interests. If confirmed, I will be honored to represent the
    United States at this important body and will work closely with
    our partners, as well as with Congress, to demonstrate American
    leadership in these areas.
        Thank you so much for the opportunity to appear before the
    committee today, and I look forward to taking your questions.
        [Ms. Currie's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Kelley Currie

        Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, distinguished members of
    the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you as
    President Trump's nominee to be the United States Representative to the
    Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. I am honored have
    this opportunity to serve my country, and appreciate the confidence
    President Trump, Secretary Tillerson, and Ambassador Haley have shown
    in me. I also want to thank my family, particularly my husband Peter
    and my children Mack and Sarah, for their support and encouragement; my
    mother Beth and my step-father Gene Price who have come today from
    Georgia; and my mother-in-law Dottie Currie who is looking forward to
    seeing more of her grandchildren in New York. I also have to express my
    appreciation to everyone at USUN and the other offices at the State
    Department and the White House who helped guide me through the process.
        When I was growing up in small-town South Georgia, enthusiastically
    participating in model United Nations programs in high school, I never
    dreamed I would be asked to represent our great nation at the United
    Nations. Whether serving as the majority staff director of the
    Congressional Human Rights Caucus or supporting democratic activists in
    closed societies during my time with the International Republican
    Institute, I have spent my career working to promote international
    human rights, human freedom and human dignity.. Today, the universality
    of human rights is under attack from resurgent authoritarian regimes
    that are threatened by the ideas of freedom of expression, freedom of
    association and freedom of religion. Regimes that rule through fear,
    coercion and cooptation rather than the consent of the governed will
    always seek to limit basic freedoms--both of their own citizens and of
    others, when possible. Unfortunately, repressive regimes have too often
    found a safe harbor in the very international bodies that are meant to
    protect the most vulnerable. This must change if these bodies are to
    continue to enjoy the support of the American people. If confirmed, I
    look forward to working with Ambassador Haley and our colleagues at the
    Department of State to advance the protection of human rights worldwide
    by refocusing the U.N. on its core mission of promoting genuine
    international peace and security.
        Among the most critical aspects of America's efforts to elevate and
    defend human rights and human freedom is our long-standing focus on
    international efforts to empower women and girls. It is vital that
    girls have equal access to education, women are given equal opportunity
    in the workforce, and women and girls are protected from sexual
    violence and exploitation. If these efforts are to succeed, men must be
    partners in these initiatives. Many of the lead U.N. agencies that
    address these challenges fall under the ECOSOC umbrella. Unfortunately,
    overlapping mandates, bureaucratic competition and other factors have
    made these U.N. mechanisms less effective than they could and should
    be. If confirmed, I look forward to working with our global partners
    and the U.N. management to improve the functioning of those agencies
    that are intended to support the full economic and political
    participation of women and girls.
        Another major focus of ECOSOC's work is the global effort to
    achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Providing improved access to
    food, water, and health care are laudable and important goals, but
    without broad-based domestically-driven economic growth--not to mention
    peace, security and responsive, accountable governance--any short-term
    gains in these areas are likely to be illusory. While recognizing the
    value of the framework established by the Sustainable Development
    Goals, it is important to realize that achieving a more stable,
    prosperous and secure global community also requires tackling political
    issues implicated in systemic human rights abuses and conflict-related
    crises. If confirmed, I look forward to working with our partners to
    see how we can work within this framework while also addressing some of
    the gaps on political reform.
        While there are certainly areas for improvement, the Economic and
    Social Council of the United Nations is a critical forum for the United
    States to advocate America's human rights, development, and
    humanitarian values and interests. If confirmed, I will be honored to
    represent the U.S. at this important body, and work closely with our
    partners, as well as with Congress, to demonstrate American leadership
    and to further American values and interests.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee today.
    I look forward to taking your questions.

        Senator Young. Thank you, Ms. Currie.
        Colonel Murray?

     STATEMENT OF JAY PATRICK MURRAY, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE ALTERNATE
      REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR SPECIAL
       POLITICAL AFFAIRS IN THE UNITED NATIONS, WITH THE RANK OF
    AMBASSADOR AND TO BE AN ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED
     STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SESSIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF
                           THE UNITED NATIONS

        Mr. Murray. Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley,
    distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to appear
    before you today as the President's nominee to serve as the
    Alternate Representative for Special Political Affairs at the
    United Nations. I am grateful to President Trump, Secretary
    Tillerson, and Ambassador Haley for this opportunity.
        I am also grateful to have some friends and family in the
    audience I would just like to introduce: my nephew Clay, his
    wife Heidi, and my sharp-as-a-tack great niece Rebecca sitting
    right here; also some good friends that are here today, Jackie
    Wolcott, Jim Gilmore, Sherry Simmons, David Norcross, and
    Laurie Michael. And, Kelley, I also appreciate the opportunity
    that we have had to go through this together and, if we are
    confirmed, to work side by side at the United Nations.
        It was the honor of my life to serve my country in uniform
    for almost 25 years. And while I have retired from the Army,
    that solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution has no
    expiration date. If confirmed, I pledge I will take those same
    values to the United Nations where I will work tirelessly to
    defend American national interests and protect our sovereignty.
        Upon its creation after World War II, the United Nations
    was seen as a mechanism for peace and stability around the
    world, and since that time, we have seen the United Nations
    provide lifesaving food and medicine globally, help the weak
    and the most vulnerable, and send peacekeepers into some of the
    most dangerous and volatile corners of the world.
        However, the U.N. also retains a culture of mismanagement,
    inefficiency, and too often a lack of accountability. An
    organization that ignores the activities of grave human rights
    abusers while repeatedly and unfairly assailing one of our
    greatest allies Israel. As we look around the world, it is
    clear that the United Nations Security Council leaves a great
    deal to be desired in fulfilling its mandate to maintain
    international peace and security. So there is certainly much
    work to be done, and American leadership and American values at
    the United Nations will be essential as we move forward.
        I am grateful for Ambassador Haley's leadership at the
    United Nations pressing for vital reforms, insisting on the
    fair treatment of Israel, and defending global freedoms. We
    face a myriad of global challenges, including a devastating
    famine across Africa and Yemen, the growing threat of North
    Korea, and the ongoing conflict in Syria. Currently there are
    some 100,000 peacekeepers deployed around the world, including
    in some very volatile places such as Mali, South Sudan, and the
    Central African Republic. The American taxpayer foots 29
    percent of that bill, making our contribution far and away the
    largest of any United Nations member state. And while we
    appreciate the vital role of those peacekeepers, the scourge of
    sexual exploitation and abuse threatens to undermine that role
    and permanently damage the reputation of the U.N.'s blue
    helmets. Indeed, when peacekeepers prey upon the very people
    they are ostensibly there to protect, it is not only vile and
    wrong, but the viability of the peacekeeping operation itself
    is greatly diminished. If confirmed, I will fight to ensure
    that the U.N. finally holds those responsible, both the
    individuals and the troop-contributing countries, publicly to
    account and work to improve training efforts at home and
    whistleblower protections in the field.
        Additionally, based upon my previous experience, I believe
    the Security Council must take a goal-oriented approach to
    peacekeeping. Instead of allowing peacekeeping operations to
    perpetuate for decades, I think we should establish mandates
    with clear objectives and hold both the leadership and the host
    parties responsible for accomplishing those objectives so that
    we can declare victory and go home. We owe that not only to the
    troops in the field and the citizens that they are there to
    protect but also to the American taxpayer.
        I have a strong background of military, political, and
    diplomatic experience. Army Foreign Area Officers have long
    been described as America's soldier statesmen. I proudly served
    as a Foreign Area Officer at numerous embassies around the
    world and at the Department of State in the Bureau of Political
    Military Affairs and later at the U.S. mission to the United
    Nations. I participated in frequent Security Council
    deliberations pertaining to international peace and security,
    peacekeeping operations, and other issues. If confirmed, I will
    be involved with these and other similar issues at the United
    Nations.
        I am grateful for Ambassador Haley's leadership to the
    U.N., and once again, I am honored to be considered for this
    post, for the opportunity to work under her leadership. I
    believe we are at a tipping point where the injection of strong
    American leadership and values can make a powerful, positive
    difference. A secure, stable world is decidedly in America's
    national interest.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this
    committee today, and I look forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Murray's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Jay Patrick Murray

        Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, distinguished members of
    the committee, I am honored to appear before you today as the
    President's nominee to serve as the Alternate Representative for
    Special Political Affairs at the United Nations. I am grateful to
    President Trump, Secretary Tillerson, and Ambassador Haley for this
    opportunity.
        It was the honor of my life to serve my country in uniform for
    almost twenty-five years. While I've retired from the Army, that solemn
    oath to support and defend the Constitution has no expiration date. If
    confirmed, I pledge to take those same values to the United Nations,
    where I will work diligently to defend American national interests and
    protect our sovereignty.
        Upon its creation after World War II, the United Nations was seen
    as a mechanism for peace and stability around the world. Since that
    time, we've seen the United Nations provide lifesaving food and
    medicine globally, help the weak and most vulnerable, and send
    peacekeeping troops into some of the most dangerous corners of the
    world. However, the U.N. also retains a culture of mismanagement,
    inefficiency, and a lack of accountability. An organization that
    ignores the activities of grave human rights abusers while repeatedly
    and unfairly assailing one of our greatest allies, Israel. And as we
    look around the world, it is clear that the United Nations Security
    Council leaves much to be desired in fulfilling its mandate to maintain
    international peace and security. So there is certainly much work to be
    done, and American leadership and values at the United Nations will be
    essential moving forward.
        I am grateful for Ambassador Haley's leadership at the United
    Nations, pressing for vital reforms, insisting on fair treatment of
    Israel, and defending global freedoms. We face myriad global
    challenges, including a devastating famine across Africa and Yemen, the
    growing threat of North Korea, and the ongoing conflict in Syria.
    Currently there are some 100,000 U.N. peacekeepers deployed around the
    world, including in volatile places like Mali, South Sudan, and the
    Central African Republic. The American taxpayer foots 29 percent of
    that bill, making ours far and away the largest contributing nation.
    And while we appreciate the vital role of peacekeepers, the scourge of
    sexual exploitation and abuse threatens to undermine that role and
    permanently damage the reputation of the U.N.'s blue helmets. Indeed,
    when peacekeepers prey upon the very people they are ostensibly there
    to protect, it is not only vile and wrong, but the viability of the
    peacekeeping operation is greatly diminished. If confirmed, I will
    fight to ensure that the U.N. finally holds those responsible, both the
    individuals and the troop contributing countries, publicly to account,
    and work to improve training efforts at home and whistleblower
    protections in the field. This must be stopped.
        Additionally, based on my previous experience I believe the
    Security Council must take a goal-oriented approach to peacekeeping.
    Instead of allowing peacekeeping operations to perpetuate for decades,
    we should establish mandates with clear objectives, and hold both the
    leadership and the host parties responsible for accomplishing those
    objectives so that we candeclare victory and go home. We owe that not
    only to the troops in the field and the citizens they are there to
    protect, but also to the American taxpayer.
        I have a strong background of military, political and diplomatic
    experience. Army Foreign Area Officers have long been described as
    America's ``Soldier-Statesmen.'' I proudly served as a Foreign Area
    Officer at numerous embassies around the world, at the Department of
    State in the Bureau of Political Military Affairs, and later at the
    U.S. Mission to the United Nations as the American Military
    Representative to the United Nations Military Staff Committee. I
    participated in frequent U.N. Security Council deliberations pertaining
    to international peace and security, Peacekeeping Operations, and other
    issues. If confirmed, I will be involved with these, and other similar
    issues at USUN.I am grateful for Ambassador Haley's leadership at the
    United Nations, and once again, I am honored to be considered for this
    post, and for the opportunity to work under her leadership. I believe
    we are at a tipping point, where the injection of strong American
    leadership and values can make a powerful, positive difference, not
    only in an institution with so many shortfalls yet so much promise, but
    also for those most vulnerable around the world. A secure, stable world
    is decidedly in America's national interest.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee
    today. I look forward to taking your questions.

        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Murray.
        Before I proceed, I would just like to acknowledge the
    presence of Governor Jim Gilmore in the audience. I did not see
    you earlier, sir. Thank you for your service.
        We are going to proceed with questions, 7-minute rounds,
    and I will begin with Ms. Currie.
        Ms. Currie, in your prepared statement, you note that a
    major role of the United Nations Economic and Social Council is
    the global effort to achieve the sustainable development goals.
    Some of these 17 goals include zero hunger and clean water and
    sanitation. When I consider these worthy goals, I cannot help
    but think of the urgent crisis in Yemen. What is your
    assessment of the situation in Yemen, Ms. Currie?
        Ms. Currie. Thank you for asking about the famine and the
    humanitarian crisis in Yemen and for your excellent work with
    Senator Cardin introducing your resolution on the four famines
    and all the attention that you have brought to the issue of the
    four famines. These complex humanitarian disasters, all of
    which are manmade, have been almost invisible despite their
    huge proportions. It is quite amazing that millions of people
    are at risk of starvation, imminent risk of starvation, and the
    world has barely paid attention to it.
        The United States, through the generosity of the Congress,
    has supported a $1 billion contribution to the UNOCHA appeal of
    $5.6 billion, but we have been, I think, disappointed by the
    lack of participation by other partners and hope to see that
    stepped up.
        In Yemen, this is one of the most complex of the four
    because of the presence of different groups that are fighting
    and the involvement of external actors, including the United
    States and the Saudis. So there is a huge conflict element
    obviously here. If confirmed, this is going to be a top
    priority, working on not only Yemen but the other three famine
    or near-famine states and working very closely with my
    colleague, if he is confirmed with me, to coordinate both the
    kinetic aspects of responding to these disasters, as well as
    the humanitarian.
        Senator Young. So continuing with Yemen, let us consider
    the sustainable development goal of zero hunger. According to
    the U.N., there are 6.8 million people in Yemen on the brink of
    starvation. These people are not worried about sustainable
    development goals a decade from now. Of course, they are
    worried about where their next meal is going to come from,
    where their family's next meal is going to come from, their
    friends', and so forth.
        Consider the sustainable development goal of clean water
    and sanitation. Due in part to the lack of both of these, it is
    estimated that about 300,000 people in Yemen have now been
    infected with cholera, with more than 1,700 deaths. The scale
    of this crisis demands action not fatalism, and it sounds as
    though you have an action orientation. So that is fantastic.
        You spoke to the lack of participation of partners vis--vis
    this crisis. According to the U.N. Office for the Coordination
    of Humanitarian Affairs, the Yemen 2017 humanitarian response
    plan is only 33 percent funded. We still need $1.4 billion.
        Now, there are a number of countries, a number of partners
    that have nominally participated. They have committed to give
    more funds to Yemen to help address this crisis. They have
    committed to take action with great fanfare, and yet the money
    is still slow in arriving.
        If confirmed, Ms. Currie, will you look at the situation in
    Yemen and consider what countries that you can press to fulfill
    their financial and moral obligations in Yemen?
        Ms. Currie. Absolutely, Senator Young. If confirmed, this
    will, as I said, be one of the top priorities for the ECOSOC
    office. It already is a major priority of the ECOSOC team in
    New York.
        The unwillingness or inability of various actors to
    constrain their own forces that are harassing and making it
    impossible to deliver humanitarian assistance is one of the key
    factors. So, again, working with my colleague in Special
    Political Affairs, we have to tackle all of this. As you note,
    this a manmade famine. This is a famine that results from a
    conflict and not a natural disaster or weather event. And,
    therefore, most of the routes to resolving this famine lie in
    the political sector and dealing with the political crisis in
    Yemen.
        Senator Young. So I do not want to linger on Yemen because
    I want to have enough time to pivot to OPIC briefly. But there
    is another concrete action you can take. It is something I have
    been working on and it pertains to U.S.-funded cranes. These
    are cranes that are needed in the major port of Hodeidah in
    Yemen to offload food and medical supplies and help mitigate,
    help stanch this ever-growing humanitarian disaster. And there
    are things, as I see it, that can be done.
        If confirmed, will you look at this situation regarding the
    cranes working with our office and others and consider pressing
    the Saudi Government at the U.N. to permit delivery of these
    cranes?
        Ms. Currie. Absolutely, I pledge to do that, if confirmed.
        Senator Young. Thank you.
        Mr. Washburne and Mr. Bohigian, thanks for meeting with me
    in the office yesterday. Let me ask the question that may be on
    the minds of multiple members.
        In its fiscal year 2018 budget request, the Trump
    administration has proposed the elimination of OPIC. At the
    same time, you both have been nominated to lead OPIC. Can you
    concisely, in light of this uncertainty, indicate how you view
    your nomination and the role you would play at OPIC? Mr.
    Washburne?
        Mr. Washburne. Thank you, Chairman. That is the elephant in
    the room question. I am a builder and creator of jobs, and the
    President and his team know that I am a builder. I am not
    someone to sit there and look at an organization and wind down.
        But in light of that, the mission of OPIC is something that
    I believe in. I feel like I have got the right experience to
    grow it and continue to take its mission forward. But given the
    light that the President has proposed, I am willing to work
    with the committee and the administration in any way that you
    dictate us to go. OPIC currently has $22 billion in projects in
    162 countries. So to shut it down and flip a switch just would
    not be practical to do. And so, if confirmed, I look forward to
    growing it and proving to the committee, Congress, and the
    administration that OPIC is a valuable entity to go forward
    with.
        Senator Young. Well, I for one am encouraged by that
    response. And you rightly point out that someone would still be
    needed to manage the existing portfolio.
        Mr. Bohigian, anything to add to that, sir?
        Mr. Bohigian. Thank you for that excellent question and the
    excellent answer.
        I would just say that President's budget, obviously, is the
    start of the process, and if confirmed, Mr. Washburne and I
    look forward to being part of the conversation that Congress
    and the administration will have in the months ahead.
        Senator Young. Thank you.
        Mr. Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Murray, as you know, the Alternate Representative for
    Special Political Affairs plays an important role in
    negotiating U.N. Security Council resolutions. Few tasks in
    diplomacy are more difficult than negotiating resolutions on
    critical peace and security issues with 14 other council
    members. It is made all the more difficult by the veto power
    enjoyed by four other members, including two, China and Russia,
    that are often at odds with our values. If confirmed, how do
    you intend to rally support at the council for U.S. interests?
        Mr. Murray. Thank you for that question, Senator Merkley.
        That is one of the huge challenges with the Security
    Council, and we have seen it play out in places like Syria
    where Russia has become so isolated within the Security Council
    and the world when it comes to resolution after resolution
    after resolution that they have vetoed. And that is part of the
    way the Security Council is set up. It requires us to have
    extensive conversations and deliberations before we put forward
    a resolution, and also, I think this is somewhere where we can
    get help from the United States Senate, as well as the
    administration, in dealing directly with Russia, in this case,
    or when it comes to North Korea, with China.
        Senator Merkley. So it is a very complex and difficult
    task, and if you are in this position, I wish you well in
    representing the United States.
        Let me turn to a different question. When we met before,
    you expressed doubt on whether human activities are causing
    climate disruption. Let us set that aside. Let us just
    acknowledge that 2016 was warmer than 2015 was warmer than
    2014, whether or not it was caused by human activities. Many
    national security experts believe that this climate disruption
    is a threat multiplier leading to increased instability around
    the world as societies clash over resources. Do you share that
    view of many national security experts? And your thoughts on
    how to address that issue in the context of the United Nations.
        Mr. Murray. I appreciate your leadership on this issue and
    the discussion that we had in your office.
        As Ambassador Haley has said, climate change needs to have
    a role, a position at the table, and when we are discussing
    these important issues, that we should make sure that is a
    metric that we include, and I agree with that.
        Senator Merkley. Let me turn to the challenge of our
    peacekeeping missions, which you have mentioned would be an
    important responsibility. The U.N. peacekeeping operations are
    tasked with increasingly complex mandates, and some, like
    MINUSMA in Mali, operate in places where there is no peace to
    keep. Are U.N. peacekeeping forces the right tool to address
    complex security situations like those present in Mali?
        Mr. Murray. Mali is the most dangerous peacekeeping
    operation. We have had, I believe, 77 peacekeepers killed to
    date. And you are right. The peace is not so much there to
    keep.
        This is where I believe the Security Council has to play an
    important role when they start to look at a peacekeeping
    operation. Obviously, you want to get somebody in there for
    humanitarian reasons and to protect the most vulnerable, and at
    the same time, if you design a mandate that oversteps its
    bounds, then you are setting a peacekeeping operation up to
    fail. And I believe that is incumbent upon the Security Council
    to plan that carefully and then to resource it properly.
        One of the foundations that goes back to the founding of
    the U.N., when you put in a peacekeeping operation, the host
    parties or the host country needs to be in agreement with that.
    It is one of the problems we are having in southern Sudan, or
    South Sudan now, is we have a government that is actually
    hindering this process. I traveled to southern Sudan with the
    Security Council a few years back, also to Darfur where we see
    the same issues with the host country government actually being
    a hindrance. And so those are some things that the Security
    Council needs to take very seriously and balance across from
    the need to protect the most vulnerable and to deliver
    humanitarian assistance.
        Senator Merkley. So often after a peacekeeping mission
    begins, facts on the ground can change. Are there any
    peacekeeping missions that you would put forward as examples of
    ones that should be shut down?
        Mr. Murray. Currently we are up to 15 peacekeeping
    operations. Now we recently shut down successfully the Ivory
    Coast and Liberia, which if it continues to plane as it is, I
    think will be another successful mission when that closes down
    in March of 2018.
        So I think the Security Council has the responsibility to
    look at the mandates that come up either biannually or
    annually. That is when we should have a lot more flexibility to
    tweak these peacekeeping operations, to tweak the mandates, and
    also to hold the leadership, as well as the troop-contributing
    countries, responsible to fulfill their mandate. As I mentioned
    in my testimony, it would be great to have a political solution
    so that we can accomplish that, as appears to be the case in
    Liberia, for example, and then we can shut that peacekeeping
    operation down, maybe transition it into a political operation
    to continue with some institution building and then that frees
    up troop-contributing countries and troops to go elsewhere such
    as Mali where right now--the size of Texas--we have only about
    10,000 or 11,000 peacekeepers. So those are the balances and
    the criteria I think that the Security Council needs to look at
    when it comes to peacekeeping operations.
        Senator Merkley. You mentioned the mission in South Sudan,
    UNMISS. And one of the things that developed there is that
    people were fleeing violence and tens of thousands descended on
    the compounds in Juba seeking shelter and as fighting spread
    outside the capital, several other UNMISS bases became de facto
    displacement camps referred to as protection of civilians
    sites. And currently UNMISS is providing physical protection to
    more than 200,000 civilians at six sites around the country.
        It raises a whole host of questions about how the mission
    has been transformed. But do you support this role of the U.N.
    in providing this protection to these civilians, and is this a
    strategy or this tool, the protection of civilians, that should
    perhaps be used elsewhere?
        Mr. Murray. That is a very good and a very difficult
    question, Senator Merkley.
        You look at all of those POCs, as you pointed out, where
    there are some almost a quarter of a million citizens being
    protected by peacekeepers. I do not want to pull them out
    because that makes those citizens vulnerable. That makes the
    most vulnerable at risk. At the same time, I think it is
    important to look at what we do at the outset with a mandate,
    and I think a lot more pressure is needed on the leadership and
    the disparate parties down in South Sudan in order to mitigate
    these threats to the individuals, to carve out a political
    solution, and then move toward implementing that solution.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Murray.
        Senator Isakson?
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like for the record to reflect that while I was a
    little bit late to the committee, I was right on time to hear
    Ms. Currie speak. She is from Thomasville, Georgia. I think I
    met her in 1990 in the Thomasville Rose Parade in Thomas
    County, Georgia when I was running for Governor of Georgia, and
    she was a senior at the University of Georgia. Is that not
    right?
        Ms. Currie. Actually we met in Professor Charles Bullock's
    class in 1990 when you were running for Governor, and you came
    and spoke. I was not in the Rose Parade. I was busy at school,
    but yes, we did meet in 1990.
        Senator Isakson. Well, I do not forget a pretty face, and I
    knew we had met somewhere. And when you run for Governor of
    Georgia, you always start in Thomasville at the Rose Parade and
    work your way up to Atlanta by the end of the race.
        But we are very proud to have you nominated and we are glad
    to have you here. We are glad to have all of you here. And I am
    going to have a question for you in just a minute.
        Mr. Murray, I really appreciate your answer in response on
    the question about should we be involved in peacekeeping
    missions and your reflection on the issues of those 15 that we
    currently have in the world. Is that right?
        Mr. Murray. Yes, Senator, 15.
        Senator Isakson. I was the second Member of Congress to
    ever go to Darfur, and if any of you have ever been to Darfur,
    you thank God there is a peacekeeping mission of the United
    Nations because if they were not there with mostly South Korean
    troops and a couple other smaller countries like that,
    countries like the United States would be implored because of
    our social conscience to do it or take on that effort in one
    way or another. So while the U.N. is problematic in a number of
    ways in things that it does, it can be central to solve
    problems that seem insolvable. And I appreciate your attitude
    towards the peacekeeping missions. I hope you will work to make
    them as accountable as possible. But we cannot turn our back on
    the least fortunate in this world, those that are as oppressed
    as the people in Darfur because somebody somehow has got to
    come to their aid. And I would like any comments you might have
    on that.
        Mr. Murray. Well, thank you very much for that, Senator. I
    spent some time in Darfur as well, and I completely concur with
    your assessment. When you have a group called Janjaweed there,
    which translates into ``devils on horseback,'' preying on the
    local populace, this is why we have a United Nations. And I
    think they have been pretty effective.
        Also, one of the reasons I like Darfur, as well as what is
    going on in Somalia, is our evolving ability to work with
    regional groups. The Darfur peacekeeping operation, Senator, as
    you know, is a hybrid with the African Union, and we have
    actually drawn down some of the U.N. troops because we built up
    those African Union troops. The same with what is going on in
    Somalia with the fight against terrorist groups there like Al
    Shabaab.
        So these are the kind of things that are exciting to me, if
    I am confirmed, that we can work with regional groups, as well
    as evolve peacekeeping and how we look at it in the Security
    Council with the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the
    Department of Field Support in order to make it more efficient,
    more nimble and maybe save a few taxpayer dollars at the same
    time.
        Senator Isakson. Well, the U.N. is not a very popular
    institution in Georgia, and a lot of people think we waste a
    lot of money sending it to the U.N. But if you have ever seen
    the role they play in these peacekeeping missions, as you
    mentioned in South Sudan, with the conference peace agreement
    where we tried to make a difference there, which obviously fell
    apart in large measure, but you would appreciate the work that
    they do for the world. And one of these days, this effort is
    going to materialize into friends of the United States, friends
    of peace and liberty, not the type of evil things that are
    going on in Africa right now.
        Ms. Currie, you are an honor graduate of the University of
    Georgia, magna cum laude or cum laude, one of the two.
        Ms. Currie. Just cum laude.
        Senator Isakson. Neither one of which I achieved.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Laude.
        Ms. Currie. Just cum laude, sir. Thank you.
        Senator Isakson. After leaving the University of Georgia, I
    note she had a quick stint on Hilton Head Island, which
    everybody ought to go through once in their life, to earn a
    living waiting on tables. But from there you went straight to
    Washington and went straight where?
        Ms. Currie. I came to work on the Hill, sir, and I worked
    for my home State Congressman from Georgia, Sanford Bishop, for
    a year and then went to work for a great Member of Congress,
    who I had interned with, John Porter in the House.
        Senator Isakson. Yes. Sanford is a great Representative
    from our State, and John Porter is one of the finest people you
    would ever want to meet and did so much good in the arena that
    you are going to be working in so much in terms of the United
    Nations.
        Ms. Currie. I could not agree with you more, sir.
        Senator Isakson. With regard to the United Nations, my plea
    to all of you is to help elevate the influence and the role of
    the United States in the operation of the United Nations. Every
    time they do good things, they turn around and appoint somebody
    like Iran the head of the Human Relations Council or Committee
    and do something that is just unfathomable consideration-wise.
    But it is a valuable tool for us.
        I know in OPIC and the number of investments that the
    United States makes around the world where we can use the
    economic power of the United States and invest in things that
    create jobs and opportunity for people in oppressed countries
    and depressed communities, then we are going to help create
    more and more friends around the world.
        Lastly, from time to time, there is a critical vote that
    makes a large difference in which way the body politic goes in
    the world today. One of those big issues in the next few years
    ahead is going to be the Palestinian issue, which raises its
    head oftentimes in the United Nations. As you interact with the
    countries you will be interacting with particularly, Mr.
    Murray, some of the things you have talked about in terms of
    those countries, their votes are going to be critical to us to
    help us influence the direction of the U.N. in terms of which
    way we go in terms of Palestinian recognition or no recognition
    thereof or something in between. So I urge you to keep in mind
    the perspective of not just your job for what it is at ECOSOC,
    but also the job to win more friends and influence more of our
    enemies on the U.N. stage so that when they go to vote, they
    will vote with a positive image of the United States of America
    and what we are trying to accomplish through the U.N. rather
    than be an obstacle for us on the issues we stand for like
    Israel and other things like that.
        So I wish you the best. I am proud of your nomination. We
    are glad to have another Georgian come in. If I can ever help
    you, let me know.
        Ms. Currie. Thank you so much, Senator Isakson. It is a
    great honor to have your support, and I really appreciate your
    kind words especially about Thomasville, my wonderful hometown.
    I think that actually may have been my sister Emily who was in
    the Rose Parade that year. I will have to ask my mom. She is
    back here. So maybe she can clarify all that.
        But, yes, the issues that you raise are critically
    important for the work that we will be doing. And I take your
    message very much to heart and, if confirmed, look forward to
    working with you and the rest of the committee members to
    implement these things.
        Senator Isakson. Congratulations to all of you and best
    wishes.
        Senator Young. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you all very much for your willingness to serve this
    country.
        Mr. Washburne, I was encouraged by your comments about
    taking over at OPIC with the idea of growing the agency and
    being more productive because I was very distressed when I saw
    the budget proposal from this administration that would phase
    out OPIC, an organization that I believe has been very
    important to businesses throughout the country. In New
    Hampshire, we have about $115 million in projects that have
    helped small businesses in our State, and it has been very
    important.
        So can you share with us whether you have any understanding
    with the administration about what your role will be as the
    head of OPIC? Was there a request from the administration when
    they nominated you for this position that you would phase out
    the agency as President?
        Mr. Washburne. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        No, there was never any specific discussion at all about
    phasing the agency out. Again, I run a private business in
    Dallas. I got a great life. I do not need to come up here and
    shut something down. I am a builder and a grower. And if I
    thought I was coming up here just to melt something away, I
    would melt in Dallas in the heat today. [Laughter.]
        Senator Shaheen. Well, again, I am encouraged to hear that.
        You know, one of my favorite statistics is about the
    number. We have only about 1 percent of small and medium-sized
    businesses who do business overseas, and yet large businesses
    have that opportunity every day. And one of the challenges I
    believe we have is to help those small businesses, in
    particular, through organizations like OPIC, through the EXIM
    Bank. They have been so important to success for smaller and
    medium-sized businesses in successfully trading overseas. And
    so I hope that you will continue that role as the head of OPIC
    and with Mr. Bohigian that the two of you will preside over an
    expansion of OPIC in a way that helps small businesses in this
    country create jobs because that is our goal.
        I wanted to ask you, Ms. Currie. I was very pleased to see
    your statement about the importance of empowering women,
    something that I think is absolutely critical, and as we look
    at how do we raise the economic prosperity of countries around
    the world, we know that empowering women is a very important
    piece of that, that women tend to give back more not just to
    their families but to their communities and that that is
    important in developing economic opportunities.
        One of the areas where I think it is very important to help
    empower women is--where the U.N. has been very important is
    through UNFPA because they have provided women access to the
    ability to determine their--to plan their families and that
    affects everything from domestic violence to what kind of job
    opportunities they get in the future to their education.
        So can you tell me whether you think we should continue to
    support UNFPA in funding?
        Ms. Currie. Thank you for that question, Senator Shaheen.
        As you know, according to the Kemp-Kasten determination
    that the Department made, they are rescinding $32 million in
    funding to UNFPA. And those funds will be redistributed through
    global health programs by USAID so that there will not be
    breaks in service and that women will continue to have access
    to important family planning and other care that they need to
    manage their lives, birth spacing, and all of the key issues
    that you raise that make it possible for women to engage
    economically, politically, and to fully participate in the
    lives of their countries.
        If confirmed, I look forward to participating in the
    discussion in the next fiscal year and looking at the Kemp-
    Kasten determination and whether UNFPA has made the kinds of
    reforms that will allows us to participate in their work again.
    And that is all I can offer to do at this point.
        Senator Shaheen. The experts that I have talked to have
    suggested that Kemp-Kasten is not an issue with UNFPA, that
    that is a red herring and that in fact the ability to
    distribute those dollars through other organizations to be as
    effective is really not going to achieve the same outcomes. Do
    you think we are going to be able to be as effective by
    distributing dollars through those other organizations?
        Ms. Currie. Well, as you know, I was not part of the
    discussion or the decision. So I would have to refer you back
    to the State Department and the people who did make that
    determination, what the basis for their determination that
    UNFPA was in violation of the Kemp-Kasten provisions.
        And I think that USAID has excellent partners in women's
    health and global health that they can utilize, and they are
    working very hard. And I would refer you to them about how they
    plan to continue to provide these services.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I look forward to seeing
    your ongoing efforts to continue to work to empower women
    because I think that is a critical piece of what we need to do
    and what we need to do if we are going to provide economic
    opportunities around the world.
        Mr. Murray, I am very pleased to hear your comments about
    the importance of peacekeeping missions. This committee had a
    chance to meet with Secretary-General Gutierrez not too long
    ago where he talked about the importance of reforming the
    peacekeeping operations. And I know he is working very closely
    with Ambassador Haley to try and do that.
        But one of the concerns I have is that one proposal to try
    and reform peacekeeping would be to decrease the resources that
    are available. Is that something that you believe is important
    as we look at all of the challenges we have around the world,
    that cutting off their money is a way to reform them?
        Mr. Murray. I appreciate that question, Senator.
        In terms of the budget with peacekeeping operations, what
    we have seen since Ambassador Haley has arrived at the United
    Nations as our Permanent Representative, they have negotiated a
    new budget, and it is $500 million less than it was last year.
    And part of that comes from some cost savings, a couple of
    things that we have already mentioned such as the hybrid
    operation in Darfur where the African Union is taking a larger
    role, enabling us to pull some U.N. troops out, saving money
    there, closing down the operation in Ivory Coast, transitioning
    the operation in Haiti from a peacekeeping operation into
    something that is more institution building, especially with
    regard to rule of law and having more police forces there than
    troops. And finally Liberia, which I alluded to earlier, is on
    a glide path to close in March of next year after they
    hopefully go through some elections which, by the way, if they
    have successful elections, this is the first time since 1944
    that Liberia will have had a peaceful transition of power. So
    those are the kinds of cost savings, Senator, that I think that
    we should look for, and that is all under the rubric, as I was
    mentioning earlier, about goal-oriented peacekeeping with a
    defined political objective that we can achieve and then
    declare victory and go home.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Murray.
        Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Senator Young, Senator
    Merkley, for convening this hearing and to our four nominees
    before us today for your willingness to serve or continue
    serving our Nation. I was grateful for the opportunity to meet
    with several of you before today's hearing.
        I support the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. I
    had the same question that Senator Shaheen did about the
    tension between the administration's budget proposal and the
    intentions of Mr. Washburne and Mr. Bohigian. And I was pleased
    to hear your answer, and I was encouraged by our private
    conversation before this and by your opening statement and by
    the impressive dedication that you and your family have shown
    to engaging personally in the work of building in the
    developing world.
        More and more of the money that is making a difference in
    the developing world comes from private sector sources. And so
    I think having at the helm folks in OPIC who understand the
    importance of development finance and the disciplines of the
    private sector could be a real contribution.
        There is also a huge demand for more development financing,
    and our competitors in Asia and in Europe recognize that. And
    so the developing nations of Africa, Latin America, and Asia
    have increasingly looked to Chinese and European sources rather
    than American because ours are so limited. I am hopeful that we
    will work together in a bipartisan way on this committee not to
    reduce the scope and capability of OPIC but to actually expand
    it and to strengthen it. I hope to see us take up legislation
    to reform and improve the way that the United States Government
    pursues development finance, and I am pleased we had an
    opportunity to discuss those ideas. So let me jump into that,
    if I might.
        Mr. Washburne, can you just explain to me and to critics
    not here I think today the value of OPIC and why it returns
    value, not just money to the Treasury, but value to the
    American people and whether you believe that it crowds out
    activity in the private sector as some critics of OPIC have
    suggested?
        Mr. Washburne. Thank you, Senator Coons, and thank you for
    your time and our discussions last week.
        As we discussed in the meeting, OPIC has a very unique--it
    is not crowding out people in other countries. We are actually
    crowing in. And what I mean by that is we are going to
    countries where banks will not go, companies will not go.
    Companies do have to put a substantial amount of risk capital
    in place which sitting on loan committees of banks, I always
    like to see. I never like to see someone to get 100 percent
    loans. They have got risk capital in place. But before someone
    can acquire a loan guarantee, political risk insurance, they
    have to prove--it is a very, very stringent underwriting
    process that you have to go through at OPIC to show that you
    cannot get money from any other source or insurance product
    from anywhere else.
        We currently have $22 billion out. Only $4 billion of that
    is in insurance. And so a lot of the criticisms come in the
    political risk insurance. But there are some countries you just
    cannot get insurance in at all, and without OPIC there to do it
    to protect American interests, there would be no way we could
    go in there and do business.
        Senator Coons. I think as you demonstrated, you know by
    time spent in Lusaka and elsewhere in the developing world,
    that in countries like that, if we want there to be an American
    private sector footprint, without OPIC it is not going to
    happen. I agree with you.
        I would be interested in hearing from both of you, if I
    might, what reforms to OPIC you would pursue, if confirmed, to
    make it more effective, how you plan to convince other
    administration officials of OPIC's positive and constructive
    role in mobilizing private sector development, and what work
    you might want to do with this committee to help advance those
    reforms or improvements.
        Mr. Bohigian. Thank you, Senator, for that opportunity.
        I believe OPIC represents the best in American values, and
    the administration has opened a process whereby we can
    reexamine across the Government how to reform agencies such as
    OPIC. So I know Mr. Washburne and I look forward to being part
    of that discussion.
        Additional authorities for OPIC could include what
    counterparts in development finance institutions overseas have
    such as direct equity investments, which is something that the
    development community in the United States has long looked for
    to be able to promote American jobs here, as well as American
    values abroad. When you look at, as you mentioned earlier, our
    European and Chinese counterparts who are truly investing
    trillions of dollars in these sort of efforts, America is ready
    for a 21st century OPIC.
        Beyond that, critics have called OPIC market-distorting,
    and we believe that over the last 15 years, many of those
    objections have been answered, whereas Mr. Mosbacher, who is
    here in attendance today as a former President of OPIC, Mr.
    Watson, as well as Elizabeth Littlefield, have worked with this
    committee and Congress to ensure that at a transactional level,
    as Mr. Washburne stated, each and every transaction is looked
    at for any sort of market distortion, including a certification
    on the insurance side, that this business will not distort the
    market. That is true through the Office of Investment Policy,
    through the President's office, through the board, and through
    oversight through committees such as this.
        In addition, critics have also said that we need to look at
    the ability for having additional tools throughout reorganizing
    the U.S. Government. That could include working with the
    Millennium Challenge Corporation more closely, USAID more
    closely, and certainly through coordination with the board of
    OPIC in the interagency process.
        So I think this conversation that this committee has led in
    conjunction with the President's budget proposal truly allows
    OPIC the chance to begin a conversation about what development
    finance should look like in the 21st century. And if confirmed,
    I welcome that conversation.
        Senator Coons. Well, I am optimistic that both of you will
    find in your engagement with OPIC that there is a thorough and
    rigorous review process, a motivated and capable staff, and
    that this is a role that we should be working together to
    strengthen so that we can be a more effective partner in
    development around the world, and I look forward to doing that
    with both of you.
        I have additional questions for the other two witnesses,
    but my time is up and I will either submit them for the record
    or wait for a second round. Thank you.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And thanks to all. Congratulations to all for your
    appointments--or your nominations. We would not presume for
    your nominations but each of you have a significant public
    service record.
        I am going to pretty much focus on the OPIC question too.
    There is an old line that everything that needs to be said has
    been said, but everybody who needs to say it has not said it
    yet. And I want to emphasize the importance of OPIC in
    Virginia.
        Before I do, I want to acknowledge one of my predecessors
    as Governor of Virginia. Governor Gilmore is here. And I think,
    Mr. Chair, you acknowledged him too, a fine public servant. I
    just want to recognize him.
        OPIC really helps a lot of Virginia businesses. I do not
    get lobbied from Virginia businesses saying this is a bad
    thing. It should be reduced. It should be shut down. I know
    there are some criticisms in the ether about OPIC, but this is
    not what I am hearing from Virginia businesses. What I am
    hearing about OPIC and similar agencies like the EXIM Bank is,
    frankly, we need more support, and this is really critical to
    enabling private sector businesses in America to succeed. So I
    am confused with the budgetary proposal.
        First, let me just make sure I am right about this. The
    quote from the President's budget on this is that they want to
    engage in activities to, quote, initiate orderly wind-down
    activities. And there is money allocated in the 2018 budget
    proposal, $60.8 million to, quote, initiate orderly wind-down
    activities.
        My understanding is that OPIC is not a drain on the general
    fund budget, but OPIC actually returns money to the general
    fund budget. Am I correct about that?
        Mr. Washburne. Yes, sir, approximately $300 million a year.
        Senator Kaine. $300 million. $2.3 billion has generated for
    the federal budget in the last 6 years. I mean, this is
    returning dollars.
        The pronunciation of your name, sir.
        Mr. Bohigian. Bohigian. It took me 5 years to learn.
        Senator Kaine. You were talking about sort of critics'
    arguments about OPIC. Have either of you had discussions with
    the administration? What did they say about the reason that
    they want to wind down OPIC?
        Mr. Bohigian. I think within the administration there is a
    range of opinions that you would expect from any executive
    branch. Certainly, if confirmed, we look forward to continuing
    those conversations with executive branch officials. But I
    think if you look at the OPIC budget page in particular, they
    have left open the opportunity to reform OPIC. They say that
    over almost 10 years OPIC has not had the chance of
    reauthorization, which has left it open to critics who are
    looking for reform. So I think it is a first step in putting
    OPIC on a 21st century footing.
        Senator Kaine. Mr. Washburne?
        Mr. Washburne. As you mentioned, with this committee and
    also with Congress, in our meetings with several members around
    this table, we hear the same thing back. You know, 75 percent
    of OPIC's loans are to small businesses. Less than 8 percent is
    to Fortune 500 companies. It has less than a 1 percent loan
    loss. I mean, when you look at that----
        Senator Kaine. Which any private lender would just kill for
    that. Would they not? I mean, it is fantastic.
        Mr. Washburne [continuing]. It has staff of around 250
    people. It is an amazing group they put together. They have
    been in business since 1971. It is really a shining example for
    what government could be. And that is why I am excited about
    going in. I do not have to reform it from the standpoint of
    something that has issues.
        The reform we want to bring in is more of bringing it into
    the 21st century on financing mechanisms because when it was
    set up originally, it was a leftover after the Marshall Plan
    and USAID and it was formed on its own. Really more than
    anything else it was a political risk insurance facility to
    have for people to go into developing countries where no one
    would go into.
        Well, the way businesses evolve today, people look at the
    expertise of OPIC to go into some third world countries like,
    as I mentioned earlier, Zambia which we know well. American
    businesses are not going to go in there. And this is a way to
    have a soft diplomacy. It is a great foreign policy tool for
    the U.S. Government, and we think it is something that we are
    excited to get in and try to find some other financing vehicles
    we can put with the toolbox we have and expand its scope.
        Senator Kaine. I think everybody on this committee is very
    familiar with arguments about this sector is crowding out my
    sector. We all are in tug of wars between banks and credit
    unions, for example. They are crowding me out. No, they are
    crowding me out. We just do not hear this about OPIC. We are
    not hearing from private sector financial institutions or
    others that OPIC is blocking other private sector entities from
    being involved. So I am puzzled about this one, but I am
    heartened by your discussion that comments with the
    administration suggest an openness to reform.
        This is part of a bigger pattern. We are grappling, for
    example, with an overall State Department, USAID budget that is
    dramatically reduced. And when we have talked to the Secretary
    of State about it, I would have felt really good if he had said
    we need to reform how we spend. We can spend more effectively.
    Instead, what we are being told is we cannot spend that money
    anyway. I know what other nations are doing around the world in
    terms of trying to build relationships, invest, find allies,
    find trade. I know what they are spending. And so when there is
    an attitude that, well, we do not need these agencies, it
    causes me great concern.
        So I am heartened by your discussion that maybe, you know,
    10 years after the last reauthorization, it is time to think
    about reforms that can make the dollars that we do spend on
    OPIC, the effort that we pay to OPIC even more productive.
        And with that, I am going to cede the rest of my time. My
    colleagues and I--we would love to work together with you on
    reform to make OPIC even more effective. But I know this.
    Virginia businesses will consider it a real loss to them. Just
    to extend beyond, we are in a global economy now. Your ability
    to find deals and customers around the world is a sine qua non
    of being economically powerful. And if you remove organizations
    and institutions that help you do that, we are really just--it
    is like eating our seed corn. We are going to hurt ourselves.
    So let us help our businesses, not hurt them, and if reform is
    part of it, you will find a lot of willing partners. If a wind-
    down is part of it, I think there is going to be some
    significant opposition to that.
        Mr. Washburne. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kaine. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Young. Well, I thank my colleagues for their
    thoughtful comments and questions. I understand Senator Merkley
    would like an additional 5 minutes. So we will give him a
    second round, and I believe everyone else is fine. So Senator
    Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Murray, I think it is probably good to give you a
    chance here to address one of your comments that may come up
    among members, and that is when you wrote that government is a
    massive parasite putting us on a path to civil unrest--I am
    summarizing and shortening it--a failed government of career
    politicians of both parties have the problem. And then you go
    on to call for an Article V convention.
        In this case, as you talk about government being this
    problem, how will you in your position at the U.N. make sure
    that our U.N.-governmental team does not become part of the
    problem?
        Mr. Murray. Thanks for the opportunity to address some
    comments from my book. The intent of those comments had to do
    with my concern as a private citizen at that time with our
    excessive federal debt. I have heard a former Chairman of the
    Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as Senator Hillary Clinton,
    mention that our federal debt is one of the biggest, if not the
    biggest, threats to our national security. And as an individual
    who spent his adult life in the military, that was of great
    concern to me. And that was the nature of those comments. I am
    looking for a way to mitigate that.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Ms. Currie, I want to go back to the question that Senator
    Shaheen was asking about, the UNFPA, Family Planning
    Association. It has a record in the Zaatari refugee camp in
    Jordan of facilitating care for 7,400 women who gave birth to
    7,400 babies without a single baby or mother dying, which is
    rather extraordinary in a refugee zone. And they work in areas
    of conflict and refugee camps around the world in pursuit of
    enabling children to get a good start in life with the type of
    health care that they have been providing. Would it not make
    sense to keep empowering the UNFPA?
        Ms. Currie. Thank you for the question, Senator Merkley.
        Again, as I said with Senator Shaheen, I was not part of
    those discussions. I would have to refer you back to the people
    at the State Department who made the determination under Kemp-
    Kasten that UNFPA was not the appropriate vehicle for U.S.
    funding for family planning internationally. And my
    understanding is that USAID is working hard to try to make sure
    that there are not gaps in service and that the organizations--
    as you know, UNFPA also contracts out much of its work to other
    organizations, and it is possible for the United States through
    USAID and other mechanisms to fund those same organizations
    bilaterally rather than through the multilateral vector of
    UNFPA.
        And I would add further that I think that the United States
    is always open, and it has been my understanding over the years
    that this issue has come up in various contexts where I have
    worked on it, whether it was on the Hill as an appropriations
    staffer when a lot of this legislation was coming up, that we
    are always trying to work with UNFPA to try to deal with the
    problematic issues, which in this case is, my understanding is,
    a finding related to China and the coercive elements of their
    family planning program.
        Senator Merkley. So I would just like to note that UNFPA,
    for the record, does not provide any financing for abortions,
    does not conduct any abortions, and has had an extraordinary
    record of supporting successful pregnancies and births in very
    difficult settings.
        And I think there will be children and women hurt by this
    decision. And I know you referred me back to others, but I was
    looking for your opinion on it. But I will not put you under
    further pressure on it since you have had a couple chances to
    respond to it.
        But let me ask about something different. We have 20
    million people facing starvation, a high threat of starvation
    over the next 6 months due to the four famines. And ECOSOC's
    humanitarian affairs segment is a unique platform that brings
    together the member states, U.N. organizations, humanitarian
    and development partners, the private sector, and affected
    communities. Has the U.N. responded quickly enough and, if you
    will, effectively enough, or what more should be done? And
    should we commit more resources, more United States resources?
        Ms. Currie. The four famines, as we have all discussed, is
    an epic tragedy and failure of multiple political actors to
    conduct themselves in a humane fashion. The conflicts that are
    driving these famines are not going to be solved by
    humanitarian assistance. We can only attempt to alleviate the
    human suffering in the short term, but the long-term answer to
    these problems is political in nature.
        UNOCHA very quickly worked together with other humanitarian
    actors, including the ICRC, to come up with a coordinated
    appeal. Unfortunately, as Senator Young said, the response has
    not been what one would hope, especially considering the
    involvement of certain countries in some of these conflicts and
    their ability to marshal substantial resources to improve the
    situation. Not just financial resources but also use their own
    influence to make access easier and more safe and get the
    resources to the people who need them the most.
        The fact that in Yemen 60 percent of the population is food
    insecure is beyond belief. This is not something that is going
    to be solved quickly. The political solutions need to be
    addressed in the Security Council and through the political
    mechanisms, bilateral, multilateral, whatever we can throw at
    this problem. We need to be working them.
        But on the humanitarian side, I think that the effort that
    UNOCHA is trying to put together with its partners is
    sufficient to meet the short-term needs. It is just a question
    of the member states coming up with the resources, and if
    confirmed, I really hope I can work with you to help marshal
    other countries, other partners to bring those resources to
    bear so that we can all tackle this together because we cannot
    solve it ourselves. The United States cannot resolve these
    problems. We need a lot of teamwork from a lot of other actors
    who are more involved in them directly.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Merkley, to you and your
    team for your continued partnership on this sub committee.
        I want to thank our nominees again for your thoughtful
    responses and for your testimonies.
        For the information of members, the record will remain open
    until the close of business on Thursday, including for members
    to submit questions for the record. We ask the nominees to
    respond as promptly as possible. Your responses will also be
    made a part of the record.
        I want to note the presence of Senator Gardner for the
    record.
        And with the thanks of the committee, this hearing is now
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to David Bohigian by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As Assistant Secretary of Commerce, one of my proudest
    efforts was an initiative that I launched to provide forums for small
    businesses around the world to exercise freedom of speech and to
    petition their government. The Entrepreneurship Initiative convened
    small businesses from the United States and host countries (including
    Brazil, Mexico, China and India) to speak directly to foreign
    government officials to press for pro-growth economic policies. I have
    always considered freedom of speech and the right to petition one's
    government among the most fundamental human rights. The very nature of
    entrepreneurship and job creation helps develop more democratic and
    engaged citizens. I am deeply gratified to see the impact of this
    project. Launched as a joint venture between the Department of Commerce
    and the Kauffman Foundation, the initiative attained global reach.
    According to the website, over 120 heads of state and ministers from
    more than 60 countries supported Global Entrepreneurship week in 2013.

    Emoluments:
        Question 2. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the executive branch?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to follow the law and all
    appropriate procedures. Should questions about legal or ethical issues
    arise, I will consult with the lawyers and ethics officials at OPIC.

    Diversity
        Question 3. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What is your plan to ensure that the
    workforce in your agency, at all levels, is diverse, and how do you
    plan to ensure supervisors and managers are equipped to manage their
    teams effectively?

        Answer. My fellow nominee and I are united in our commitment to
    diversity at OPIC. Creating a more diverse workforce isn't just the
    right thing to do it is the smart thing to do. Diversity can bring
    innovation to the marketplace of ideas, which is particularly important
    at a development institution, like OPIC, that works in every region of
    the world. We believe OPIC should lead by example if it is going to
    represent American values abroad.
        If confirmed, we will continue OPIC's current practices that
    include : (1) use of special hiring flexibilities to improve its
    competitiveness with the public and private sectors; (2) outreach
    initiatives to reach a highly qualified and diverse workforce with the
    skills needed for OPIC's mission-critical occupations; (3)
    communicating its EEO/diversity policy, program and OPIC's employment
    needs to all sources of job applicants; (4) increasing recruitment of
    veterans and persons with targeted disabilities as a means of achieving
    the 2 percent Federal goal for disability employment; and (5)
    increasing the representation of minorities and women in OPIC's
    officials and managers categories. Our focus on these commitments will
    support OPIC's continuing efforts to diversify its workforce, improve
    the overall representation of employees in the various EEO groups, and
    to remain a model employer.

        Question 4. The federal workforce has made progress in hiring
    diverse professions in most agencies. There is, however, work to be
    done to cultivate work environments where all employees feel valued and
    included. What plans do you have to ensure your agency leverages the
    diversity of its employees and develops an inclusive work environment?

        Answer. Prior experiences and challenges enrich a person's ability
    to think creatively and problem solve, which are qualities essential to
    OPIC's continued success. We believe diversity also fosters a sense of
    community which can strengthen communication within the workplace and
    ultimately enhance efficiency and effectiveness by encouraging people
    to work together to maximize resources and minimize time. It is
    important for leadership to imbue these ideals by consistently
    respecting and cultivating differences at the highest levels, and we,
    if confirmed, will work to ensure that OPIC upholds these ideals.
        Our goal is for OPIC to remain a model employer and have an
    inclusive workforce. We will ensure OPIC supports workplace diversity.
    OPIC will continue to focus on recruiting, retaining, and promoting a
    highly qualified and diverse workforce, based on merit and equal
    employment opportunity. Training managers and administrative support
    staff will be key to this effort. OPIC will comply with relevant EEO
    statutes and regulations, including the No FEAR Act (Notification and
    Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002). OPIC
    will continue to train its workforce on the various Federal anti-
    discrimination statutes, which also will help to promote workforce
    inclusiveness.

                                   __________

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                 to Ray Washburne by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The most important actions I have taken in my career to
    promote human rights involve my family's volunteer work in Zambia. When
    my family and I first stepped foot in Lusaka in 2014, we were
    immediately struck by the lack of basic fundamental human rights. On
    our very first day, we visited the compound of Chaisa and observed the
    rampant poverty, pollution, and devastating hunger that stretched
    across this shantytown of approximately 100,000 Zambians.
        My family's humanitarian work thus has focused primarily on the
    children of Zambia. We volunteer for an organization which houses over
    700 orphans on the outskirts of Lusaka, and also provides medical care
    and other support to approximately 7,000 Zambians each summer. The
    funding that our family has committed to the organization provides for
    the care of over fifty orphans, including expenses to cover the child's
    school, food and housing. Most recently, our family has funded the
    construction of a school for three hundred students in the heart of
    Chaisa that is being built on the property of a former brothel.
        My work in Zambia has opened my eyes to the positive impact that
    America can achieve by devoting time and resources to projects in the
    developing world. If confirmed, I am confident that the perspective I
    have gained in Zambia will serve me well as the Chairman and CEO to
    ensure that OPIC's projects continue to promote human rights and
    democracy around the world.

    Emoluments
        Question 2. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the executive branch?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to follow the law and all
    appropriate procedures. Should questions about legal or ethical issues
    arise, I will consult with the lawyers and ethics officials at OPIC.
    Diversity:
        Question 3. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What is your plan to ensure that the
    workforce in your agency, at all levels, is diverse, and how do you
    plan to ensure supervisors and managers are equipped to manage their
    teams effectively?

        Answer. My fellow nominee and I are united in our commitment to
    diversity at OPIC. Creating a more diverse workforce isn't just the
    right thing to do it is the smart thing to do. Diversity can bring
    innovation to the marketplace of ideas, which is particularly important
    at a development institution, like OPIC, that works in every region of
    the world. We believe OPIC should lead by example if it is going to
    represent American values abroad.
        If confirmed, we will continue OPIC's current practices that
    include: (1) use of special hiring flexibilities to improve its
    competitiveness with the public and private sectors; (2) outreach
    initiatives to reach a highly qualified and diverse workforce with the
    skills needed for OPIC's mission-critical occupations; (3)
    communicating its EEO/diversity policy, program and OPIC's employment
    needs to all sources of job applicants; (4) increasing recruitment of
    veterans and persons with targeted disabilities as a means of achieving
    the 2 percent Federal goal for disability employment; and (5)
    increasing the representation of minorities and women in OPIC's
    officials and managers categories.
        Our focus on these commitments will support OPIC's continuing
    efforts to diversify its workforce, improve the overall representation
    of employees in the various EEO groups, and to remain a model employer.

        Question 4. The federal workforce has made progress in hiring
    diverse professions in most agencies. There is, however, work to be
    done to cultivate work environments where all employees feel valued and
    included. What plans do you have to ensure your agency leverages the
    diversity of its employees and develops an inclusive work environment?

        Answer. Prior experiences and challenges enrich a person's ability
    to think creatively and problem solve, which are qualities essential to
    OPIC's continued success. We believe diversity also fosters a sense of
    community which can strengthen communication within the workplace and
    ultimately enhance efficiency and effectiveness by encouraging people
    to work together to maximize resources and minimize time. It is
    important for leadership to imbue these ideals by consistently
    respecting and cultivating differences at the highest levels, and we,
    if confirmed, will work to ensure that OPIC upholds these ideals.
        Our goal is for OPIC to remain a model employer and have an
    inclusive workforce. We will ensure OPIC supports workplace diversity.
    OPIC will continue to focus on recruiting, retaining, and promoting a
    highly qualified and diverse workforce, based on merit and equal
    employment opportunity. Training managers and administrative support
    staff will be key to this effort. OPIC will comply with relevant EEO
    statutes and regulations, including the No FEAR Act (Notification and
    Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002). OPIC
    will continue to train its workforce on the various Federal anti-
    discrimination statutes, which also will help to promote workforce
    inclusiveness.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Kelley Currie by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I spent nearly five years working for Congressman John
    Porter as his staff director for the Congressional Human Rights Caucus
    and as his foreign operations appropriations associate. One of my
    greatest accomplishments during that time was the integration of our
    human rights advocacy into the foreign operations bills on a range of
    issues, including: limiting military assistance to countries over human
    rights abuses by their security forces; tightening restrictions on
    Burma; and expanding financial support to democracy and human rights
    promotion efforts, especially regarding Tibet, Burma and East Timor. I
    also helped to develop an "adopt a political prisoner" program that
    paired Members of Congress with Chinese and Tibetan political
    prisoners, and encouraged the Members to advocate for improved
    treatment and release of their 'adopted' prisoner. I vividly remember
    the day that I met Jigme Sangpo, the long-serving Tibetan political
    prisoner our office had adopted, after he was released and exiled to
    Switzerland on medical parole. It was one of the highlights of my life
    to see him free.
        After leaving Capitol Hill to work for the International Republican
    Institute (IRI), I was fortunate to work on implementing several of the
    initiatives we had legislated. As the program officer managing several
    of IRI's programs in Southeast Asia, I worked to help set up IRI's
    operations in Indonesia and Timor Leste, providing key electoral and
    governance assistance to those countries at the time of their
    democratic transitions. I also managed IRI's support to the Burmese
    democracy movement at a critical juncture, when the military junta was
    engaged in one of its most severe crackdowns. When Aung San Suu Kyi was
    released from house arrest in 2001, we arranged for video equipment to
    be provided to the National League for Democracy. They used this
    equipment to document Daw Suu's travels around the country, showing
    that she and the NLD retained their strength at the grassroots. This
    equipment also documented the attack on the NLD at Depayin, in which
    Aung San Suu Kyi was nearly killed.
        It also was during this period that I helped some former Burmese
    political prisoners to launch an organization to provide humanitarian
    support to, and conduct documentation and advocacy on behalf of,
    Burma's thousands of political prisoners. Today, the Assistance
    Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) is one of the most important
    civil society organizations in the country and a key player in
    promoting legal reform as part of Burma's transition, but before 2012
    it was literally a lifeline for hundreds of political prisoners and
    their families. Over the past four years, Project 2049 has coordinated
    US support for AAPP through a grant from the Department of State's
    Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.
        In addition to AAPP, I have worked with a number of other important
    Burmese organizations and individuals who are helping to push forward
    human rights and democracy in that country.
        My work with them has been among the most consequential and
    personally fulfilling I have done, even as the outcome remains unclear.
    By supporting the work of catalytic Burmese organizations and
    individuals through funding and demand-driven technical assistance, the
    small grants project we have been running at Project 2049 is helping to
    lay a strong foundation for a genuine democratic transition in Burma.
        My work on human rights in China and Tibet since leaving the
    Congress has been rather less rewarding in terms of broader outcomes
    but no less so in terms of the amazing advocates and human rights
    defenders I have had the privilege to work with. While focused on
    empowering Chinese and Tibetan voices, I have tried to find ways to
    keep pushing these issues even as the space for international advocacy
    on them has diminished over the past two decades. In the Office of the
    Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues under Ambassador Paula
    Dobriansky, we worked to institutionalize the Tibetan Policy Act in
    U.S. policy and get important funding to efforts to preserve Tibetan
    culture inside Tibet. After leaving the State Department, I led the
    research, writing and editing of a report on cultural genocide in Tibet
    published by the International Campaign for Tibet. I have also
    continued to work with my human rights colleagues to keep human rights
    on the U.S. policy agenda with China, including by linking up my
    security-focused colleagues at Project 2049 with Chinese human rights
    defenders on research projects.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    ECOSOC today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy at ECOSOC and with its
    member countries? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The U.N. Economic and Social Council does not formally deal
    with human rights questions on its agenda. However, the Economic and
    Social Affairs section of the United States Mission (informally known
    as the ECOSOC Section) covers human rights issues that come up in the
    Third Committee of the General Assembly.
        The most pressing human rights concerns in the General Assembly's
    Third Committee today include Iran, the Russian occupation of Crimea,
    the egregious abuses in the Syrian conflict, and the continuing human
    rights violations and abuses in the Democratic People's Republic of
    Korea. Of course, the protection of human rights is deeply intertwined
    with international peace and security, and situations in many
    countries, including for example the Democratic Republic of the Congo,
    are also addressed in other U.N. committees as well.
        In order to advance human rights and democracy at ECOSOC, I believe
    the U.S. resolution, advanced at the 2015 United Nations General
    Assembly, on strengthening the role of the United Nations in enhancing
    periodic and genuine elections and the promotion of democratization
    must remain a key priority. Other important resolutions facing the
    United Nations include those on the protection of journalists,
    protection of human rights defenders, the report of the United Nations
    Human Rights Council, including reporting on reform progress, and the
    resolution on freedom of religion and belief. If confirmed, I will
    continue to vigorously advocate for resolutions that advance these
    priorities.
        As always we will lobby like-minded states to improve the vote
    count on country-specific resolutions and to pursue the same priorities
    as ours; a large number of votes in favor sends a strong message about
    the global community's commitment to these issues. It is essential that
    the international community address human rights violations and abuses
    in these priority countries and regions, as they have a direct impact
    on U.S. security and prosperity.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face by ECOSOC member
    countries in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. There are several potential obstacles to addressing human
    rights concerns in the aforementioned crises. Russia is unlikely to
    cooperate on resolutions regarding Crimea and Syria, and we must
    continue to urge China to play a constructive role with regard to the
    human rights and humanitarian issues in the DPRK. A critical step in
    addressing these issues, as well as those mentioned in my previous
    response, is to enlist member states to play constructive roles,
    including by voting affirmatively for country-specific resolutions that
    hold human rights offending countries accountable for their actions, as
    well as resolutions that call for the protection of human rights
    defenders and participation by civil society. At the same time, we must
    continue to maintain cross-regional support for resolutions on the
    human rights situation in those countries despite opposition from
    Russia and others, something we have historically been quite successful
    in achieving.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from ECOSOC member countries?

        Answer. The United States has long been a leader in championing the
    participation of NGOs, human rights defenders, journalists and others
    from civil society at the UN, and I intend to prioritize these issues
    during my tenure. If I am confirmed, I absolutely plan to engage
    closely with human rights, civil society, and other non-governmental
    organizations. Leadership on respect for human rights and fundamental
    freedoms is not possible without continued, close, and sustained
    contact with such organizations, whether they be based in the United
    States or in other ECOSOC member nations. If confirmed, I will
    regularly consult with such groups, pay attention to the challenges
    they face in their operations as well as the issues they address, and
    work closely with them to advance human rights at the United Nations
    Economic and Social Council.
        I am very concerned about the efforts undertaken by a number of
    governments to suppress the legitimate activities of civil society,
    including by human rights defenders, NGOs and journalists within the
    U.N. If I am confirmed, I will work hard to address reprisals against
    civil society representatives for their engagement with U.N. or other
    international human rights mechanisms. I will also address the lack of
    NGO accreditation by the U.N. ECOSOC NGO Committee.

        Question 5. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the Executive Branch?

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

        Question 6. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups?

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have benefitted personally and
    professionally from working with colleagues with diverse backgrounds
    and experiences. My personal approach to staffing is to find the best
    person for the job regardless of race, gender, religious or other
    background, but I have always gone out of my way to seek and promote
    candidates from underrepresented groups and diverse backgrounds. I have
    also found it deeply rewarding to mentor young women in the field of
    foreign and security policy. As staffing positions become available, if
    confirmed, I will work with the human resources officials of the
    Department to ensure that we are drawing from the broadest and most
    diverse candidate pool possible to ensure that USUN's ECOSOC team
    continues to lead the way as a rewarding and exciting office that
    showcases the best of America's federal workforce.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Jay Murray by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Thank you for this question. Most of my professional life
    has been serving in the U.S. Army. One important lesson I've learned in
    my service is that human rights are a core component of international
    peace and stability. Indeed the abuse of human rights is often the
    underlying cause of strife and violence. Additionally, facilitating
    democracy and representative government also serves to minimize human
    rights abuses.
        While serving in the Balkans I worked with the Organization of
    Security and Cooperation in Europe as an on-the-ground election
    observer in order to facilitate free and fair elections. In Kosovo, I
    also worked directly with the Kosovo Liberation Army in order to
    transform it into the peacetime Kosovo Protection Corps, as well as to
    help with institution building that would ultimately lead to Kosovo's
    independence. On my personal time, I frequently visited the local
    orphanage in Pristina, delivering food, blankets, bedding and toys.
        While serving at the United Nations, one of my roles was to work
    with the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and Troop Contributing
    Countries in order to deploy and maintain peacekeeping operations
    around the world. At that time we were focused on Darfur and Sudan. I
    deployed to both locations in order to get an on-the-ground perspective
    and to talk with government officials, the local population, and visit
    the refugee camps there. I also traveled to the African Union
    Headquarters in Ethiopia where we helped to negotiate what is now the
    hybrid U.N.-AU peacekeeping operation in Darfur. I understand the
    linkages between military/peacekeeping operations and the focus on
    human rights. If confirmed, I pledge to maintain that focus in the
    Security Council, and I look forward to working with you and this
    committee.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in U.N.
    peacekeeping operations and security cooperation activities? What are
    the most important steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to promote
    human rights and good governance in U.N. peacekeeping operations and
    security cooperation activities? What do you hope to accomplish through
    these actions?

        Answer. One of the most pressing issues in U.N. peacekeeping is the
    issue of sexual exploitation and abuse. Over the last several years,
    the U.N. has taken important steps to uphold the zero tolerance policy
    for sexual exploitation and abuse, especially in peacekeeping missions.
    The U.N. has instituted stronger vetting procedures and improved
    training for peacekeepers, enhanced transparency through regular public
    reporting on allegations, and strengthened accountability measures,
    including those outlined in Security Council resolution 2272. These
    measures should be continuously strengthened, expanded, and rigorously
    implemented.
        During his first six months, the Secretary-General has already
    demonstrated his strong commitment to addressing sexual exploitation
    and abuse. I support his attention to and prioritization of this issue,
    especially the renewed focus on putting victims first. I commend the
    work of the Special Coordinator, Jane Holl Lute, and her efforts to
    ensure that the U.N.'s approach to sexual exploitation and abuse is
    truly a system-wide strategy.
        If confirmed, I would continue to support the U.N.'s recent work in
    developing minimum standards for investigations and prosecutions of
    sexual exploitation and abuse. Member states must be more accountable,
    and more transparent, in their pursuit of justice for their nationals
    responsible for sexual exploitation and abuse. They must hold
    themselves, as well as the U.N., to the highest standards of
    accountability. By promoting a policy of zero tolerance, I hope we can
    preserve and promote the credibility and the legitimacy of U.N.
    peacekeeping and ensure the protection of civilians on the ground.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in peacekeeping
    operations and security cooperation activities in advancing human
    rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. One of the biggest challenges in U.N. peacekeeping today is
    holding troop- and police- contributing countries (TCC/PCCs)
    accountable for poor performance, including but not limited to cases of
    sexual exploitation and abuse. Certain TCCs have been reticent to
    properly investigate and punish incidents of sexual exploitation and
    abuse, even when they have been informed of these incidents by the U.N.
    In a letter to the Secretary-General on June 14, Ambassador Haley noted
    the importance of sending a strong message to all troop- and police-
    contributing countries that performance will be monitored, and when it
    is found lacking, there will be accountability. Subsequently, the U.N.
    broke new ground by calling for the repatriation of troops from the
    Republic of Congo on the basis of the U.N.'s zero-tolerance policy for
    sexual exploitation and abuse. Ultimately, ROC responded by withdrawing
    the troops from the mission. I strongly support the highest standards
    of accountability and a performance-based approach in deciding which
    TCC/PCCs will participate in U.N. peacekeeping.
        More broadly, the United States continues to face challenges
    negotiating the human rights, civil society, and democracy components
    of U.N. peacekeeping missions in the Security Council given that not
    all Council members, host countries, or regional neighbors share this
    priority. The United States continually faces difficult negotiations
    with China and Russia over the inclusion of human rights advisors in
    missions, and host countries such as Sudan often fail to provide visas
    and access to human rights personnel. If confirmed, I will work to
    resolve these obstacles so that the U.N. can meet its ideals and
    advance our interests.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in countries with peacekeeping operations and
    security operations?

        Answer. Absolutely. The perspective of non-governmental
    organizations both in the United States and in countries with
    peacekeeping and security operations is invaluable in helping to
    understand the context in which we are operating. Non-governmental
    organizations that cover human rights, humanitarian issues, democracy,
    and peacebuilding are frequently on the forefront of providing in-depth
    reporting and analysis on important conflict dynamics and often have
    access to remote locations where others do not. If confirmed, I would
    adopt and widely encourage the practice of meeting with them.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support continued implementation of
    the Leahy Law. I am aware that under the Leahy Law, the United States
    Government is prohibited from providing assistance to any unit of
    another country's security forces if the Secretary of State has
    credible information that the unit committed a gross violation of human
    rights. This law is well known around the world, and is an important
    component of our foreign policy, It provides the opportunity for open
    dialogue on human rights as well as an incentive for positive behavior.
    It is important to note that the law permits the Secretary of State to
    resume assistance to foreign security force units previously deemed
    ineligible if he determines that the foreign government is taking
    effective steps to bring the responsible members of the security forces
    unit to justice. This mechanism encourages foreign security partners to
    investigate credible allegations and hold accountable those
    responsible.

        Question 6. Will you commit to providing information to this
    committee if you become aware of emoluments from foreign governments or
    government-owned companies being directed to the President, his
    immediate family, or anyone else in the Executive Branch?

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

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. I agree completely with your
    supposition regarding the value of diversity. I've experienced it
    firsthand throughout my military career. I've served alongside of
    soldiers from diverse ethnicities and faiths. What we discovered is
    that regardless of background, we all wore the same uniform and we were
    all Americans.
        Over a decade of my service was deployed overseas, where I worked
    with military and political counterparts from multiple nations and
    faiths. I also served for almost five years at the United Nations where
    diversity is the norm. So I've seen the power and value of diversity
    firsthand. And that is precisely why, if confirmed, that I commit to
    promote, mentor and support individuals on my staff who come from
    diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups. I believe it is the
    right thing to do, it is the American thing to do, and it will also
    enable us to be more successful within the U.N. Community.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Jay Murray by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. Colonel Murray, on July 11, 2016 you published a piece
    focused on domestic and national security in Newsmax. You concluded it
    by saying: ``Come November it's your choice sheep. Vote with the
    sheepdogs, or vote with the wolves,'' implying that a vote for your
    candidate's opponent was a vote for those who would attack the American
    people.

       Why did you choose such extremely divisive rhetoric to characterize
            the national security choice before the American electorate in
            last year's election?
       Do you stand by your characterization of the American electorate as
            ``sheep''?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. I wrote this
    article while I was a private citizen. It was not the intent of the
    article to be derogatory towards Americans. I have the utmost respect
    for the American electorate, indeed all Americans, so much so that for
    some twenty-five years I put my life on the line to protect and defend
    them.

        Question 2. Colonel Murray, in your book Government is the Problem
    you portrayed those serving in Congress as being adverse to the
    interests of the American people, describing those in serving in public
    office as being ``like cunning bacteria.'' By contrast, Ambassador
    Haley has consistently expressed an attitude of personal collegiality
    and mutual respect, and an understanding of the role and oversight
    responsibilities of Congress.

       Do you still stand by the views expressed in your book about those
            serving in Congress?
       Do you believe members of Congress are ``like cunning bacteria?''
       Do you agree to work with members of this committee and our staffs
            as we exercise our constitutional responsibility for oversight
            of the Executive Branch's conduct of foreign relations?
       Will you respond promptly and completely to our questions and
            requests for information?
       Do you recognize why many people see a propensity toward the kind
            of extreme, divisive, and inflammatory rhetoric that you've
            used in your publications as disqualifying for the position of
            third-ranking U.S. diplomat at the United Nations?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. I hold both members of
    Congress and the institution in the highest regard. I wrote the book
    while I was a private citizen.
        One important lesson I learned while serving in the Army is that
    there are no political parties in the military--only Americans. I
    believe that is the case with the practice of diplomacy as well.
    Writing articles as a private citizen in the midst of a heated
    political campaign is one thing. Service to country is very different,
    and I understand that difference.
        Over a decade of my military service was overseas, including in my
    capacity as a military attache working daily with host country military
    and political counterparts. I also served at the United Nations for
    several years as the American representative to the U.N. Military Staff
    Committee. I learned that my words and actions as an American are
    watched very closely. That is a responsibility that is larger than
    self; I've felt it before and I take it very seriously. If confirmed, I
    pledge to serve in a capacity that is worthy of my post and of my
    country. I also commit to work with you and this committee to the
    utmost of my ability.

        Question 3. Colonel Murray, the President has nominated you for a
    critically important position representing the United States at the
    United Nations, including in the Security Council. Yet you seem to take
    a pretty dim view of that organization and of multilateral diplomatic
    initiatives generally.
        In your book Government is the Problem you blasted the ``Obama
    regime'' for pursuing a range of multilateral initiatives that are
    ``arguably designed to constrain American power and wealth by chipping
    away at our sovereignty.''

       Do you still believe that multilateral diplomacy and agreements
            undermine U.S. sovereignty?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. In the course of
    my military service at the State Department and at the United Nations,
    I was constantly involved in multilateral initiatives, including in the
    Security Council, the General Assembly and inside the Secretariat. I
    know the strengths and weaknesses of those bodies very well, having
    been directly involved for several years.
        Moreover, as a soldier I served for over six years in NATO. I also
    worked directly with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
    Europe on multiple occasions as an election observer in the Balkans. In
    Iraq, I was part of the Multi-National Force--Iraq. I am a graduate of
    the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, an
    Institute that brings together military and political leaders from more
    than 152 countries. In short, I have a great deal of experience serving
    in multilateral organizations and initiatives.
        I wrote the book while I was a private citizen. While I may have
    been critical of multilateral institutions, it was because I know the
    potential they have, but they sometimes fall short when it comes to
    human rights and the maintenance of international peace and security.
    Those principles are not only the right thing to do, but they directly
    serve U.S. interests. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to further
    those ideals, and I look forward to working with you and this committee
    to do so.

        Question 4. In May 2016 you wrote in Newsmax that ``David
    Petraeus's recent opinion piece in The Washington Post entitled `Anti-
    Muslim bigotry aids Islamic terrorists' targeted Donald Trump's
    recommendation about curbing Muslim immigration. The retired general's
    accusations are typical of the rash of strawman arguments now common
    from the Obama/Clinton camps.''
        And in March 2016 you wrote in Newsmax that ``Muslims now comprise
    almost 25 percent of the Brussels population. Most have not assimilated
    and have no intention of doing so. At worst they're planning to kill
    their infidel neighbors, at best they protect and harbor those who are
    doing the killing.''

       Why have you made these kinds of generalized accusations against
            Muslim people?
       How do you plan to work with your Muslim counterparts at the United
            Nations?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. Any inference of
    generalized disparagement of a single group, including Muslims, is both
    hurtful and inaccurate. I've served proudly and successfully alongside
    my Muslim counterparts on multiple occasions and locations throughout
    my adult life. In Kosovo, I worked extensively with Kosovar Albanian
    Muslims in support of their transition to a sovereign nation. In
    ethnically and religiously diverse Bosnia, I worked with Muslims,
    Orthodox Christians and Catholics to build a united military inclusive
    of all groups. In Iraq, I worked with a confidence-building committee
    comprised of Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish military officers. At the U.N., I
    worked with numerous Muslim military and political counterparts,
    including from Troop Contributing Countries, in order to successfully
    deploy Peacekeeping Operations. When I was a candidate for public
    office, I met with numerous Muslim groups, listened to their concerns
    and appreciated their support. I wish to make it clear that I have
    respect and tolerance for the Muslim faith.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with my Muslim
    counterparts, as well as my counterparts of all faiths at the United
    Nations in support of international peace and security.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to Jay Murray by Senator Jeff Merkley

        Question 1. Colonel Murray, in our meeting before your confirmation
    hearing you expressed doubts about the human impact on climate
    disruption and on the need to ``act fast'' to address the issue. You
    indicated we should wait for the results from scientists, however 97
    percent of scientists have affirmed that climate change is occurring.
    We are already seeing the impacts of climate disruption around the
    world. 2016 was the hottest year on record and some countries have
    already relocated citizens due to climate change, creating the world's
    first climate refugees. Additionally, national security experts,
    including military leadership at the Pentagon, have warned that climate
    change poses a range of threats from the impact on U.S. installations
    around the world, to global health trends, to international dynamics in
    the Arctic, and as a ``threat multiplier,'' leading to increased
    instability around the world as societies clash over resources that
    become scarcer and scarcer.

       Do you believe climate change poses a national security threat?
       If so, do you believe the United States should be a leader in
            helping find global solutions?
       What role should the United Nations play in helping combat climate
            disruption?
       Will you commit to discussing climate disruption with your foreign
            counterparts and to look for areas of international
            cooperation?

        Answer. Thank you for this question, I respect your leadership on
    this issue. As Ambassador Haley has remarked and as I also stated in
    response to your question during my confirmation hearing on 11 July
    2017, climate change should always be on the table as one of the
    factors we consider. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you
    regarding the appropriate roles that the U.N. should play regarding
    climate change.

        Question 2. In various articles you make derogatory remarks about
    members of Congress, including members of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee. Do you stand by these statements? Do you feel attacks on
    Senators are appropriate for diplomats? How will your statements
    attacking both individual Senators and Senators of a group impact your
    ability to work constructively with members on both sides of the aisle?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. I hold Members of Congress in
    the highest regard, and I deeply appreciate Members' of Congress
    service to our Nation. I wrote that in my capacity as a private
    citizen.
        I am grateful to Ambassador Haley for having the confidence in me
    to fulfill this role. If confirmed, I pledge to serve in a capacity
    that is worthy of my post and of my country. I also commit to work with
    you and all members of this committee, regardless of party, to the
    utmost of my ability.

        Question 3. You have also referred to government and Senators as
    ``massive parasites,'' ``cunning bacteria,'' and a ``problem.'' Do you
    believe members of the House and Senate are bacteria or parasites?

        Answer. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to clarify. I
    hold Members of Congress, regardless of party, in the highest regard.
    If confirmed, I commit to working with you and this committee to the
    utmost of my ability.

        Question 4. Do you recognize this rhetoric could be unhelpful for a
    diplomat at the United Nations?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. Writing as a
    private citizen is very different from serving the country. I
    understand that my words and actions while representing the United
    States are watched very closely. That is a responsibility that I have
    proudly and successfully borne in the past while serving at the U.N.
    and abroad. I take it very seriously. It is an honor to be considered
    for this post, and I am grateful to Ambassador Haley for having the
    confidence in me to serve in this role. If confirmed, I pledge to serve
    in a capacity that is worthy of my post and of my country.

        Question 5. I have appreciated Ambassador Haley's personal
    collegiality and mutual respect. She has made a concerted effort to
    consult regularly with Congress, calling the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee her ``board of directors.'' Do you share her sentiment and
    approach?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. I agree completely with
    Ambassador Haley's approach and appreciate the professional, respectful
    relationship that has developed. If confirmed, I pledge to pursue the
    same approach and look forward to working with you and the entire
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

        Question 6. There are reports that the Trump administration has
    directed agencies to ignore oversight requests from Democrats and only
    respond to requests for information from the Chair of committees of
    jurisdiction. Will you commit to consulting regularly with this
    committee? Will you respond promptly and completely to questions and
    requests for information from both parties?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to furthering the same respectful
    approach that Ambassador Haley and Secretary Tillerson have pursued
    with you and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, regardless of
    party. One important lesson I learned while serving in the Army is that
    there are no political parties in the military--only Americans. I
    believe that should also be the case with diplomacy.

        Question 7. The administration is working to better match
    peacekeeping missions and mandates while simultaneously cutting costs
    for the U.N.'s peacekeeping activities. Cost efficiency is important,
    but so is ensuring that U.N. peacekeeping missions have sufficient
    troops and resources to carry out their mandates. How is the
    administration balancing cost savings with mission effectiveness? Are
    there any existing missions that you would recommend strengthening?

        Answer. To ensure each mission is appropriate to the situation in
    each country and advancing the Security Council's objectives, the
    United States has invited U.N. Security Council members to join in
    evaluating every U.N. peacekeeping mission as its mandate comes up for
    renewal through the lens of the five peacekeeping principles Ambassador
    Haley articulated in April: 1) missions must support political
    solutions, 2) host country strategic consent is critical, 3) mandates
    must be realistic and achievable, 4) clear sequencing and exit
    strategies are required at all stages, and 5) missions and mandates
    must be adjusted where Security Council objectives are not achieved.
        Throughout this process, the United States seeks to strengthen all
    missions by ensuring they are appropriately resourced and designed to
    respond to the unique circumstances of the environments in which they
    are operating, and to implement Security Council mandates efficiently
    and effectively.

        Question 8. The Obama administration successfully launched an
    effort to generate new troop contributors and new force capabilities
    for U.N. peacekeeping operations, highlighted during a high-level event
    at the 70th Session of the U.N. General Assembly in 2015. Do you plan
    to continue the Obama administration's efforts? How important do you
    believe it is to improve the quality and capability of U.N.
    peacekeeping forces?

        Answer. It is crucial to continue to improve the quality and
    capability of U.N. peacekeeping forces. U.N. peacekeeping helps share
    the cost of collective security in some of the most dangerous and
    difficult environment around the world.
        The 2015 U.S.-led peacekeeping summit generated the pledges needed
    to ensure strategic force generation in U.N. peacekeeping. It was
    followed by the 2016 UK-hosted Defense Ministerial and a French
    Ministerial on Peacekeeping in French-Speaking Environments. These
    events helped maintain momentum for continued reform, identifying ways
    to improve the planning and performance of U.N. peacekeeping
    operations, including by generating new pledges and reviewing previous
    pledges to fill personnel and capability gaps, increasing women's
    participation, tackling sexual exploitation and abuse, improving rapid
    deployment and training, and developing performance-based management
    systems.
        In November, Secretary Mattis will co-host with Canada the 2017
    U.N. Peacekeeping Defense Ministerial in Vancouver. This ministerial is
    another important step in U.S. efforts to make U.N. peacekeeping more
    effective, particularly at the operational level. The ministerial is an
    important opportunity to generate additional pledges to fill shortfalls
    in ongoing U.N. peacekeeping missions, as well as provide the
    Secretary-General with an opportunity to report on progress made in
    implementing peacekeeping reforms and chart a course for reforms to be
    implemented throughout 2018. If confirmed, I would strongly support
    this effort and continue to exercise U.S. leadership to ensure much-
    needed reform of U.N. peacekeeping.

        Question 9. The Obama administration, in conjunction with South
    Korea and other partners, successfully added the human rights situation
    in North Korea to the U.N. Security Council's agenda, meeting on the
    topic most recently in December 2016. Ambassador Haley has also made
    the nexus between human rights and peace and security a focus of her
    work at the Council. Do you support this approach? What would you do to
    make human rights a focus at the Council?

        Answer. As Ambassador Haley emphasized in the U.N. Security Council
    in April, the protection of human rights is deeply intertwined with
    international peace and security and should be addressed by the Council
    accordingly. Human rights violations and abuses are not merely the
    byproduct of conflict, but are often the trigger. Violations of human
    rights by states exacerbate violence and instability that can spill
    across borders. The Security Council should continue to address human
    rights, as it has through reporting on peacekeeping and special
    political missions, sanctions, and dedicated sessions on the worst
    human rights abusers, as well as consider the connection between human
    rights and security more broadly.
        If confirmed, I will redouble efforts to ensure that U.N.
    peacekeeping and political missions are working to fulfill their
    mandates related to protection of civilians, and monitoring and
    reporting on human rights violations and abuses. I will also work
    within the U.S. Mission to the United Nations to amplify the Council's
    voice on human rights abuses and violations in countries on the
    Council's agenda such as North Korea, Venezuela, and the Democratic
    Republic of Congo, and will use the platform of the Security Council to
    reinforce the work of the U.N. Human Rights Council.

        Question 10. The Obama administration and members of Congress from
    both parties have continuously prioritized U.S. national security
    interests including by fighting terrorists like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. In a
    July 18, 2016, article you state that the ``left'' believes ``wolves
    like ISIS are just misunderstood victims.'' Do you think Democratic
    members of the House and Senate are sympathetic to ISIS?

        Answer. I hold Members of Congress, regardless of political party,
    in the highest regard. I do not believe that any Member of Congress is
    supportive of ISIS. If confirmed, I pledge to work with all members of
    the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in a timely and respectful
    manner.

        Question 11. We are seven months into the Trump administration and
    we have yet to see any new comprehensive strategy for Syria,
    Afghanistan or the broader fight against ISIS. Do you think broad
    strategy on these issues includes the United States leading partner
    nations in these efforts?

        Answer. On January 28 the President directed Secretary of Defense
    Mattis to work with interagency partners to conduct a 30-day review of
    the U.S. Government's strategy to defeat ISIS, and identify ways to
    accelerate it. The Department of State was DOD's primary partner in
    drafting a strategic framework and, as the White House has announced,
    it was delivered to the White House on February 27 for consideration
    and broader discussion.

        Question 12. As you may be aware from 2009-2017 the unemployment
    rate dropped from 10 percent to 4.6 percent, there were 75 continuous
    months of job growth with 11.3 million new jobs created, and the
    federal budget deficit as share of gross domestic product went down
    from 9.8 percent to 3.2 percent. Yet, in a November 2, 2016, article
    you state that Obama's ``presidency has been a shambles by every
    conceivable metric both at home and abroad.'' Given these metrics, do
    you still support that statement, or do you think these were an
    improvement?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. President Obama inherited a
    very difficult economic situation upon taking office in 2009. My
    function while writing as a private citizen was to debate issues such
    as this. If confirmed, my role at the United Nations will be markedly
    different, and I am very clear about that. If confirmed, I pledge to
    serve in a capacity that is worthy of my post and of my country.

        Question 13. Under the Affordable Care Act, 20 million people
    nationwide gained health insurance, Medicaid was expanded, and the
    exchanges were established. The result was access to lifesaving
    affordable care for low income individuals and families, those
    suffering from chronic illness, and people with preexisting conditions.
    That being said, you have referred to the Affordable Care Act as
    ``devastating to the middle class.'' Do you still believe these results
    to be ``devastating''?

        Answer. Thank you for this question. My function while writing as a
    private citizen was to debate issues such as the Affordable Care Act.
    If confirmed, my role at the United Nations will be markedly different,
    and I am very clear about that. If confirmed, I pledge to serve in a
    capacity that is worthy of my post and of my country.

        Question 14. In a July 18 article you make an endorsement of Mr.
    Trump for President by saying we need ``A president who will focus on
    bringing Americans together instead of fomenting division for political
    gain.'' At the time of writing, Mr. Trump and his campaign used
    divisive rhetoric against women, Muslims, Hispanics and other minority
    groups. Do you think that type of rhetoric is helpful for bringing
    people together?

        Answer. I believe that we should strive to bring our nation
    together. Our diversity can be an asset. Throughout my career I've
    served alongside service members and Foreign Service Officers from
    diverse ethnicities, genders, and faiths. I've experienced the value of
    diversity firsthand. I am honored that Ambassador Haley has the
    confidence in me to serve in this role at the United Nations. If
    confirmed, I pledge to serve in a capacity that is worthy of my post
    and of my country.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson [presiding], Risch, Gardner,
    Young, Isakson, Murphy, Menendez, Shaheen, Udall, Kaine, and
    Merkley.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Johnson. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. I want to
    welcome everybody. We gather today to consider the nominations
    of two ambassadorships and two senior positions at the State
    Department.
        Mrs. Callista L. Gingrich is the President's nominee to be
    the U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See.
        Mr. Nathan Alexander Sales is the President's nominee to be
    coordinator for counterterrorism with the rank and status of
    Ambassador-at-Large.
        Mr. George Edward Glass is the nominee to be the U.S.
    Ambassador to Portugal.
        Mr. Carl C. Risch is the President's nominee to be the
    Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs.
        I want to welcome the nominees and their families to this
    committee and congratulate them on their selection by the
    President. Thank you for your willingness to serve.
        I also want to note that we have Congressman Rooney here
    supporting Mrs. Gingrich. Congressman Rooney was the
    Congressman from Florida and also the Ambassador to the Holy
    See during President Bush's term.
        This committee is also honored to welcome our distinguished
    colleagues who will introduce two of our witnesses, the senior
    Senator from Oregon, Senator Ron Wyden, and an esteemed member
    of this committee, Senator Portman from Ohio. Thank you both
    for being here today.
        With that, I will recognize Senator Wyden to introduce Mr.
    Glass.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON

        Senator Wyden. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your courtesy.
    As Senator Portman knows, we are right in the middle of
    debating tax reform, I know a topic of great interest to many
    Senators here, and I am trying to help out Chairman Hatch, so I
    will make this a filibuster-free opportunity, Mr. Chairman.
        And it is a great privilege to be able to introduce a
    longtime friend, George Edward Glass. Mr. Glass has been
    nominated to serve as our next Ambassador to Portugal.
        And as we begin this discussion, I am glad that the
    President has begun submitting more nominees to the Senate for
    consideration, because we all understand that having a Senate-
    confirmed Ambassador makes a world of difference when
    challenges emerge, as this committee knows better than just
    about anybody.
        Knowing Mr. Glass as I do, I am confident that, as all of
    you get to know him better, you are going to report him
    favorably to the Senate floor.
        As he is going to tell you, George Glass is an Oregonian
    through and through. He was born in Eugene. He attended college
    there, graduating from the University of Oregon. Like me, he is
    a Duck, and he has continued to be involved with the
    university, with the community, as he has been recognized as a
    pillar of Portland's financial, real estate, and tech
    communities.
        He has been involved in a number of projects to help our
    community. I am particularly pleased that he has had a long
    interest in the Oregon Health and Science University. They are
    a lifeline in terms of reaching out to our community and to
    those who have really found it hard to access health care. He
    has been a trustee for the Oregon Health and Science
    University, a former president of the University of Oregon
    Alumni Association, and also a member of the Catholic Business
    Leaders Association.
        I just feel very strongly that as you look to Portugal and
    to that part of the world, we are going to need people who have
    demonstrated a track record of stepping up, being involved in
    their community, someone with expertise in a variety of areas,
    not just his chosen profession of finance, but health care,
    with his background at Oregon Health and Science.
        And I believe that as you get to know him and confirm him,
    after you have had a chance to hear from him, you will come to
    the conclusion I have, which is George Glass has values shared
    by Americans and by those in the country he seeks to serve,
    Portugal.
        And I very much appreciate my colleagues going out of order
    to extend this courtesy to me. And my guess is Chairman Hatch
    is probably grateful to you all as well, as we try to keep
    matters proceeding in the Finance Committee.
        So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I very much look
    forward to members of the committee getting to know George
    Glass, as I have. I think you will come to the same judgment I
    have, that he will serve and reflect great credit on the United
    States in this position.
        Thank you very much.
        Senator Johnson. Thanks, Senator Wyden, for the great
    introduction and your strong support for the nominee.
        As long as you are taking a look at my corporate tax
    reform, I really do encourage you to get out of here and get
    back to the task at hand.
        Senator Portman?

                    STATEMENT OF HON. ROB PORTMAN,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Chairman Johnson.
        I will be joining my colleague in a minute back on the tax
    reform front, but I wanted to be here to welcome this
    distinguished group of nominees.
        Thank you for your willingness to serve. And to Mr. Risch
    and Mr. Glass, you have just gotten a nice accolade from
    someone who will help you not just in this committee but in the
    vote on the floor.
        To Callista Gingrich, again, thank you for serving. You
    could have no better person behind you than former Ambassador
    to the Holy See, Francis Rooney. That means a lot to all of us,
    and we are looking forward to supporting you.
        Finally, Nathan Sales, Mr. Chairman, he is from Ohio.
        Senator Johnson. I wouldn't have guessed.
        Senator Portman. Yes, you wouldn't have guessed. Did I tell
    you that he was from Ohio?
        But we are very proud of him. He is before this committee
    to be the next coordinator for counterterrorism at the State
    Department, so, obviously, an incredibly vital national
    security position that needs to be filled as quickly as
    possible.
        And by the way, in these national security positions, we
    need to have honorable, capable individuals who understand the
    importance of that mission, protecting the homeland but also
    working with our allies to combat the threat of global
    terrorism. So we are pleased to have you here.
        Did I mention he is from Ohio?
        Senator Johnson. You did. It never hurts to mention it
    again.
        Senator Portman. Okay. Canton, Ohio, to be specific. He
    also intended Ohio's Miami University. He then, for some
    reason, headed south and went to Duke Law School. Following law
    school, he did clerk for the Honorable David B. Sentelle of the
    United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, a very
    prestigious position.
        And he is no stranger to public service. He served in the
    Office of Legal Policy at the Department of Justice, and then
    as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Department of
    Homeland Security during the George W. Bush administration,
    where I also served. There, he focused on intelligence,
    information-sharing, terrorist travel.
        At DHS, he drafted critical legislation to improve the
    security of our visa waiver program, something that the
    chairman and I have had deep interest in, in his other role as
    chairman of the Government Affairs and Homeland Security
    Committee.
        In the past 2 years, Nathan returned to the private sector
    and academia. He has been counsel at Kirkland & Ellis here in
    Washington, but also an associate professor of law at Syracuse
    University College of Law. By the way, he teaches and writes in
    the fields of national security law and counterterrorism law,
    among other areas. So he is perfectly qualified for this
    position.
        So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to supporting Nathan Sales
    as our next coordinator for counterterrorism, not only because
    of his ties to the Buckeye State, which are important. But much
    more importantly, because of his relevant experience, because
    of his strong record, and because of his lifelong commitment to
    our Constitution, our laws, and the security of our country.
        I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join
    me in this effort to quickly fill this critically important
    national security role with an experienced and capable public
    servant.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Portman, for that great
    introduction. Again, by all means, go back to the Finance
    Committee and start working on that Ron Johnson corporate tax
    proposal.
        Again, thank you for that.
        Now, as great as it is to have nominees from Oregon and
    Ohio, I certainly appreciate the fact that I have the privilege
    of introducing our nominee from the State of Wisconsin.
    Although I am chairing this hearing, in my capacity as the
    senior Senator from Wisconsin, I also have the honor of
    introducing my fellow Wisconsinite, Mrs. Callista Gingrich, our
    nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See.
        Callista was born and raised in Whitehall, Wisconsin, a
    particularly beautiful area of the State. Although, as I have
    driven through it, it is an area where you drop cell coverage
    frequently. It is hard to do radio interviews as you are
    driving through that region.
        She graduated from Whitehall Memorial High School as the
    valedictorian, and served as an organist at St. John's Catholic
    Church. Callista attended Luther College in Decorah, Iowa,
    where she was a Regent Scholar and honors graduate.
        Almost 3 decades ago, Callista came to Washington to intern
    for her hometown Congressman, Steve Gunderson. She became a
    member of Congressman Gunderson's personal staff and later
    served as the chief clerk of the House Committee on
    Agriculture.
        After 18 years of service, Callista left Capitol Hill to
    found Gingrich Productions, a multimedia production consulting
    company. She has been the president and CEO of Gingrich
    Productions for the last decade, producing documentary films,
    writing books, and advising clients. Callista also works to
    support many charitable causes through her role as the
    president of the Gingrich Foundation.
        Callista is a lifelong Catholic and has been active in her
    faith community for many years. She has sung for 21 years in
    the choir of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the
    Immaculate Conception here in Washington.
        As part of her work with Gingrich Productions, Callista
    collaborated with church leaders to produce and host `` Nine
    Days That Changed the World,'' a documentary about Pope John
    Paul II's historic 1979 pilgrimage to Poland. She also produced
    a documentary about Pope John Paul II's canonization.
        Callista's interests in Pope John Paul II is fitting, given
    her nomination. President Reagan's friendship with Pope John
    Paul II led to reestablished formal relations with the Holy See
    in 1984, and together, they helped orchestrate the fall of the
    Soviet Union.
        Since then, Popes and American Presidents have collaborated
    on a wide range of issues, including promoting human rights and
    respect for human dignity, interreligious understanding, and
    economic progress in the developing world.
        Callista's understanding of the Catholic Church, her
    considerable experience in government and business, and her
    talents as a communicator make her an ideal choice to represent
    U.S. interests at the Holy See. I support her nomination and
    urge my colleagues to support her as well.
        So thank you, Mrs. Gingrich, for your willingness to serve.
        I am also delighted to introduce Mr. Carl C. Risch of
    Pennsylvania, the President's nominee to be Assistant Secretary
    of State for Consular Affairs. Mr. Risch is a highly regarded
    Pennsylvania attorney and current acting Chief of Staff in the
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. He was previously
    the field office director of the U.S. Citizenship and
    Immigration Services at the American Embassy in Seoul, South
    Korea.
        A senior immigration official abroad and in Washington,
    D.C., for over a decade, and a former consular Foreign Service
    Officer with the Department of State, Mr. Risch is an expert on
    responsibilities and challenges of managing Consular Affairs
    worldwide.
        With that, I would like to recognize the distinguished
    ranking member for his comments, Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have, actually,
    a good full house of members here, so I am going to defer my
    opening remarks.
        I thank all of you for your service. Mr. Sales and I had a
    chance to sit down and have a very productive conversation
    yesterday. I am very glad for your testimony and for us to
    engage in a dialogue.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        The order of our nominees' opening remarks will be Mrs.
    Gingrich, Mr. Sales, Mr. Glass, and then Mr. Risch.
        Mrs. Gingrich?

    STATEMENT OF CALLISTA L. GINGRICH OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                        AMERICA TO THE HOLY SEE

        Ms. Gingrich. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and
    distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Foreign
    Relations, I am honored to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the
    Holy See.
        I am thankful to President Trump for the confidence and
    trust he has placed in me to be his representative at this
    important Embassy.
        In addition, I want to express my gratitude to Secretary of
    State Rex Tillerson for supporting my nomination.
        It is a special honor to be introduced by Chairman Johnson
    from my home State of Wisconsin. Thank you.
        I am also grateful to appear before this committee today
    with the full support of my husband, Newt. As veterans of
    Capitol Hill, we both have great respect for your role in
    assessing and confirming those who represent the American
    people abroad. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely
    with the members and staff of this committee.
        Like the United States, the Holy See is active on a global
    scale. It is engaged on every continent to advance religious
    freedom and human rights, to fight terrorism and violence, to
    combat human trafficking, to prevent the spread of diseases
    like Ebola and HIV/AIDS, and to seek peaceful solutions to
    crises around the world.
        Those who serve in the State Department are known the world
    over for their patriotism and dedication. The professional
    staff at the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See exemplify these
    traits. They work tirelessly to leverage the Vatican's global
    reach and to advance our strong bilateral relationship.
        Charge d'Affaires Louis Bono and the Embassy team did an
    extraordinary job preparing for and hosting the President on
    his visit to the Vatican in May. During that visit, President
    Trump and Pope Francis highlighted shared concerns, including
    the protection of Christian communities in the Middle East.
        Pope Francis has powerfully called on religious leaders and
    people of all faiths to unequivocally reject terrorism and
    violence in the name of religion. The Vatican and its
    organizations play an active role in troubled areas around the
    globe, from Venezuela to South Sudan to the Democratic Republic
    of the Congo, countries where the Holy See's support for
    peaceful solutions and democratic institutions directly
    benefits the interests of the United States.
        The Catholic Church is a unique global network, overseeing
    the world's second largest international aid organization,
    operating 25 percent of the world's health care facilities, and
    ministering to millions in every corner of the world.
        As global leaders, the United States and the Vatican must
    continue to work closely to advance our shared values of human
    dignity and freedom. This can only happen if we maintain and
    build upon a strong foundation of trust and mutual
    communication. If confirmed, I will continue this vital
    dialogue, which has been so important for the people of the
    United States and the world.
        I understand how the United States and the Holy See can act
    as a worldwide force for good when we work together. Several
    years ago, I had the honor of producing a documentary film
    entitled, ``Nine Days That Changed the World.'' It chronicles
    Pope John Paul II's historic pilgrimage to Poland in 1979, an
    event that inspired the Polish people to renew their hearts,
    reclaim their courage, and free themselves from the shackles of
    communism.
        Producing this film required substantial work with key
    church leaders and other experts in the United States, Poland,
    and the Vatican. This film has been well-received by the
    Catholic Church and is used in religious education programs
    throughout the United States. Most importantly, this film is a
    powerful example of the invaluable role the Vatican plays in
    international affairs.
        Recently, I produced another documentary film entitled,
    ``Divine Mercy: The Canonization of John Paul II.'' These
    projects, along with my decades-long membership in the choir of
    the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate
    Conception, have given me the opportunity to build
    relationships with many church leaders, clergy, and religious
    scholars. These experiences have instilled in me the highest
    respect for the Holy See, a deep appreciation for the
    responsibility of this post, and confidence that the United
    States-Vatican bilateral relationship is a force for good and
    one that cannot be ignored.
        As a lifelong Catholic, business owner, documentary film
    maker, author, and former public servant, I am profoundly
    humbled at the prospect of serving my country as the United
    States Ambassador to the Holy See. If confirmed, I will work
    diligently to develop even stronger ties between the United
    States and the Holy See.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the
    committee, I appreciate the opportunity to be before you today
    and would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
    Thank you.
        [Ms. Gingrich's prepared statement follows:]

                   Prepared Statement of Callista L. Gingrich

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and distinguished members
    of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, I am honored to appear
    before you today as President Trump's nominee to serve as the United
    States Ambassador to the Holy See. I am thankful to President Trump for
    the confidence and trust he has placed in me to be his representative
    at this important Embassy. In addition, I want to express my gratitude
    to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for supporting my nomination.
        It is a special honor to be introduced by Chairman Johnson from my
    home state of Wisconsin. I am also grateful to appear before this
    committee today with the full support of my husband, Newt. As veterans
    of Capitol Hill, we both have great respect for your role in assessing
    and confirming those who represent the American people abroad. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the members and staff
    of this committee.
        Like the United States, the Holy See is active on a global scale.
    It is engaged on every continent to advance religious freedom and human
    rights, to fight terrorism and violence, to combat human trafficking,
    to prevent the spread of diseases like Ebola and HIV/AIDS, and to seek
    peaceful solutions to crises around the world.
        Those who serve in the State Department are known the world over
    for their patriotism and dedication. The professional staff at the U.S.
    Embassy to the Holy See exemplifies these traits. They work tirelessly
    to leverage the Vatican's global reach and to advance our strong
    bilateral relationship. Charge d'Affaires Louis Bono and the Embassy
    team did an extraordinary job preparing for and hosting the President
    on his visit to the Vatican in May.
        During that visit, President Trump and Pope Francis highlighted
    shared concerns, including the protection of Christian communities in
    the Middle East. Pope Francis has powerfully called on religious
    leaders and people of all faiths to unequivocally reject terrorism and
    violence in the name of religion.
        The Vatican and its organizations play an active role in troubled
    areas around the globe, from Venezuela to South Sudan to the Democratic
    Republic of the Congo--countries where the Holy See's support for
    peaceful solutions and democratic institutions directly benefits the
    interests of the United States.
        The Catholic Church is a unique global network, overseeing the
    world's second-largest international aid organization, operating 25
    percent of the world's healthcare facilities, and ministering to
    millions in every corner of the world.
        As global leaders, the United States and the Vatican must continue
    to work closely to advance our shared values of human dignity and
    freedom. This can only happen if we maintain and build upon a strong
    foundation of trust and mutual communication. If confirmed, I will
    continue this vital dialogue--which has been so important for the
    people of the United States and the world.
        I understand how the United States and the Holy See can act as a
    world-wide force for good, when we work together. Several years ago, I
    had the honor of producing a documentary film entitled, Nine Days that
    Changed the World. It chronicles Pope John Paul II's historic
    pilgrimage to Poland in 1979--an event that inspired the Polish people
    to renew their hearts, reclaim their courage, and free themselves from
    the shackles of Communism.
        Producing this film required substantial work with key church
    leaders and other experts in the United States, Poland and the Vatican.
    This film has been well received by the Catholic Church and is used in
    religious education programs throughout the United States. Most
    importantly, the film is a powerful example of the invaluable role the
    Vatican plays in international affairs.
        Recently I produced another documentary film entitled, Divine
    Mercy: The Canonization of John Paul II. These projects, along with my
    decades-long membership in the Choir of the Basilica of the National
    Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, have given me the opportunity to
    build relationships with many Church leaders, clergy and religious
    scholars.
        These experiences have instilled in me the highest respect for the
    Holy See, a deep appreciation for the responsibility of this post, and
    confidence that the United States-Vatican bilateral relationship is a
    force for good, and one that cannot be ignored.
        As a lifelong Catholic, business owner, documentary film maker,
    author, and former public servant, I am profoundly humbled at the
    prospect of serving my country as the United States Ambassador to the
    Holy See.
        If confirmed, I will work diligently to develop even stronger ties
    between the United States and the Holy See.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee, I
    appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and would be
    pleased to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mrs. Gingrich.
        Our next nominee will be Mr. Sales.
        Mr. Sales?

    STATEMENT OF NATHAN ALEXANDER SALES OF OHIO, TO BE COORDINATOR
     FOR COUNTERTERRORISM, WITH THE RANK AND STATUS OF AMBASSADOR-
                                AT-LARGE

        Mr. Sales. Thank you, Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ranking
    Member Murphy. And thank you, members of the committee for
    holding this hearing today. It is an honor to be with you this
    morning.
        Let me start by introducing my family, my wife, Margaret,
    along with our daughters, Anna and Cate. They are the ones with
    the coloring books and the stickers. My parents, Alex and
    Marsha, are here. They came out from Ohio. And I would also
    like to acknowledge my father-in-law and mother-in-law, Charlie
    and Anna Tretter, who are home in Boston and couldn't be with
    us this morning.
        A special word of thanks to Senator Portman, a fellow
    Buckeye, for his kind words of introduction. You can take the
    boy out of Ohio, but you cannot take Ohio out of the boy.
        I also want to express my gratitude to President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for putting me forward for this important
    position. If I am confirmed, I will do everything in my power
    to earn and pay back the trust and confidence that they have
    shown in me, and that the Senate will have shown in me.
        I came to the field of counterterrorism almost by
    happenstance. In 2001, I was a young lawyer at the Justice
    Department. I had been hired to work on administrative law
    issues. It was the middle of August 2001.
        Three weeks later was 9/11. I still vividly recall the
    chilling rumors that flew that morning as we evacuated Main
    Justice. I am sure many of the people in this room recall those
    rumors as well. Car bomb at the State Department. Fires on the
    National Mall. Another hijacked plane heading for the capital.
        Some of those rumors turned out to be false alarms, but
    that was little consolation. The reality was bad enough.
        Suddenly, the Chevron doctrine no longer seemed so
    important. My job and the job of everybody at the Justice
    Department, everybody in the administration, everybody in
    Congress, now shifted to one fundamental and overriding
    priority: preventing another assault on our homeland. 9/11 was
    not just an attack on our citizens and our landmarks. It was an
    attack on our very way of life, our democracy, our commitment
    to the rule of law, our veneration of individual liberty.
        And so our top priority at the Justice Department was to
    equip our Nation's cops, and spies, and soldiers with the tools
    they needed to confront this new menace and, just as
    importantly, to do so in a way that maintained faith with our
    fundamental values as Americans, our basic national values. We
    couldn't allow our fundamental values to become a casualty of
    war.
        I took that commitment with me to Homeland Security a few
    years later. At DHS, I learned the importance of working with
    our allies around the world to confront the specter of
    terrorism. And I saw firsthand that our alliances are strong,
    not just because of our shared economic and military might, but
    because of our shared values.
        Let me also say a few words about the dedicated career
    professionals that I hope to join at the State Department.
    Before she became a lawyer, my wife earned a master's degree at
    Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, and many of her
    classmates went on to serve at State Department. There is a
    reason they call the West Point of the Foreign Service.
        Getting to know them, I have developed a deep appreciation
    for their extensive knowledge, their commitment to the mission,
    and the sacrifices they have made for our country. It will be a
    privilege to serve alongside them, if I am confirmed.
        I started with my family and I would like to end there,
    too. I come from a long line of patriots. My father, Alex, was
    an ROTC cadet and a Navy officer in the tumultuous Vietnam era.
    During World War II, my grandfather, Clarence, served in the
    Army Corps of Engineers. He was stationed in England, which is
    where he met my grandmother, Agnes, an Army nurse. She actually
    outranked him, which is a fact that she never let him, or
    anybody else, forget. My other grandfather, Chic, was an
    infantry captain. He saw action in Normandy, helped liberate
    France, and earned a Bronze Star for valor and a Purple Heart.
        It was a great honor for me to carry on their tradition of
    service at Justice and Homeland Security. And it will be a
    great honor, if I am confirmed, to continue their legacy at
    State.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, members
    of the committee. And I look forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Sales's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Nathan Alexander Sales

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and distinguished members
    of the committee, thank you for holding this hearing. It's an honor to
    appear before you as the President's nominee to be Coordinator for
    Counterterrorism.
        Let me introduce some family members who are here this morning: My
    wife, Margaret, along with our daughters, Anna and Cate. My parents,
    Alex and Marsha, came out from Ohio. And I'd like to acknowledge my
    father- and mother-in-law, who are home in Boston and couldn't join us
    today: Charlie and Anna Tretter.
        I'd like to thank Senator Portman, a fellow Buckeye, for his kind
    words of introduction.
        I also want to express my gratitude to President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for putting me forward for this important position.
    If I'm confirmed, I'll do everything in my power to justify the trust
    and confidence that they--and the Senate--have placed in me.
        I came to the field of counterterrorism and national security
    almost by happenstance. In 2001, I was a young lawyer, fresh off a
    judicial clerkship, when the Justice Department hired me to work on
    administrative law issues. I started in mid-August.
        Three weeks later was 9/11. I still vividly recall the chilling
    rumors that flew as we evacuated Main Justice that sunny morning. Car
    bomb at the State Department. Fires on the national mall. Another
    hijacked plane heading for the capital. Some of the reports turned out
    to be false alarms, but that was little consolation. The reality was
    bad enough.
        Suddenly, the Chevron doctrine no longer seemed so important. My
    job--indeed, the focus of the Justice Department and the administration
    as a whole--now shifted to one fundamental and overriding priority:
    Preventing another assault on our homeland.
        September the 11th wasn't just an attack on our landmarks and our
    citizens. It was an attack on our very way of life--our democracy, our
    devotion to the rule of law, our commitment to individual liberty. And
    so our top priority as policymakers was to equip our nation's cops,
    spies, and soldiers with the tools they needed to confront this new
    menace, and to do so in a way that affirmed our basic national values.
    We couldn't allow our fundamental rights as Americans to become a
    casualty of war.
        I carried that commitment with me when I joined the fledgling
    Department of Homeland Security a few years later. At DHS, I learned
    the importance of working with our allies around the world to confront
    terrorism. And I saw firsthand that our alliances are strong, not just
    because of our shared economic and military might, but because of our
    shared liberal values.
        I also learned the ins and outs of the interagency process, working
    with key counterterrorism players throughout the Government. Terrorism
    is a complex threat that requires all tools of national power--the
    armed forces and the intelligence community, to be sure, and also the
    diplomatic corps, economic officials, and law enforcement.
        Let me say a few words about the dedicated career professionals I
    hope to join at the State Department. Before she became a lawyer, my
    wife earned a master's degree at Georgetown's School of Foreign
    Service, and many of her friends and classmates have gone on to work at
    State. Getting to know them, I've developed a deep appreciation for
    their extensive knowledge, their commitment to the mission, and the
    sacrifices they've made to advance our country's interests and values.
    It will be a privilege to serve alongside them, if I'm confirmed.
        I started with my family and I'd like to end there too.
        I come from a long line of patriots. My father, Alex, was an ROTC
    cadet and a Navy officer in the tumultuous Vietnam era. During World
    War II, my grandfather, Clarence, served in the Army Corps of
    Engineers. He was stationed in England, where he met my grandmother,
    Agnes, an Army nurse. She actually outranked him, a fact that she never
    let him--or anyone else--forget. My other grandfather, Chic, was an
    infantry captain. He saw action in Normandy, helped liberate France,
    and earned a Bronze Star for valor and a Purple Heart.
        It was a great honor for me to carry on their tradition of service
    at Justice and Homeland Security. And it will be a great honor, if I'm
    confirmed, to continue their legacy at State.
        Thank you again and I look forward to your questions.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Sales. I appreciate you
    introducing your family. I was remiss in not encouraging
    everybody to do so.
        So, Mr. Glass, if you have members here, please introduce,
    and then we look forward to your testimony.

     STATEMENT OF GEORGE EDWARD GLASS OF OREGON, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                   AMERICA TO THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC

        Mr. Glass. I will, Senator. Thank you. Mr. Chairman,
    Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members of the
    committee, it is with great humility and honor I sit before you
    today.
        I am deeply grateful to President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for their trust and support in nominating me to be
    the Ambassador to the Republic of Portugal. If confirmed, I am
    committed to focusing all my energies to further the interests
    of the United States of America.
        I could take a moment, I would like to introduce my family,
    for without their support and love, I would not be here today.
    I would like to acknowledge my wife, Mary, who is sitting here
    with me who came out from Oregon. I would also like to
    acknowledge my three sons and their wives, who are supporting
    me from afar. My oldest, Gordon, and his wife, Giau, currently
    live in Japan. He teaches English over there. My middle son,
    George, and his wife, Emily, are not here for the best of all
    reasons. They are due with their first child here in August,
    and that is actually our first grandchild. And our youngest,
    Andrew, is in the throes of his very first job just after
    graduating from college.
        I would also like to acknowledge my mother and step-father,
    Mary and Jay O'Leary, and Mary's parents, Joe and Laurie
    Ferguson.
        Lastly, I want to thank my father, who is here in spirit.
    It is his courage and wisdom that brings me strength every day.
        I take seriously representing the United States of America
    to the Republic of Portugal, which includes the Azores and
    Madeira. Portugal is amongst our oldest and most reliable
    allies. The history of our two nations has always been one of
    mutual respect and support. Portugal was the second country to
    recognize America's independence, and our consulate in the
    Azores is the oldest continually operating consulate in the
    world.
        If confirmed, I also look forward to working with the
    outstanding personnel that currently serve our country at
    Mission Lisbon.
        Portugal's traditional and geographic orientation to the
    Atlantic, the presence of 1.5 million Portuguese Americans
    living in the United States, and a strong pro-American
    sentiment across the political spectrum make the relationship
    between our two countries one of the three focal points of
    Portugal's foreign policy. This unique relationship has allowed
    us to turn to Portugal for political and material support in
    almost every peacekeeping mission the United States, NATO, and
    the United Nations has led since the end of the Cold War.
        If confirmed, it will be my job to lead Mission Portugal to
    further expand enhance this political and economic
    relationship.
        More recently, the Republic of Portugal was hit especially
    hard by the 2008 global recession, to the point where a
    financial rescue package was adopted in 2011. Mary and I were
    in Portugal for an extended trip in 2014 and saw for ourselves
    what the wage and spending cuts and tax increases were doing to
    the business environment. At that time, unemployment rates were
    over 15 percent, and they were double that for young adults.
        What we witnessed on that trip endeared us to the people of
    Portugal for life. Even with that economic backdrop, they were
    focused on the same values that we hold dear in America, God,
    family, and the belief that hard work will ultimately help one
    to succeed. These observations were not unfounded. Merely 3
    years later, Portugal is in the midst of a remarkable economic
    recovery.
        The United States is now Portugal's No. 1 trading partner
    outside the EU single market and the fifth largest trading
    partner overall. The most recent example of this resurgence in
    bilateral trade occurred in 2016 when Portugal received the
    first-ever shipment of liquefied natural gas from the United
    States to Europe.
        It is this newfound momentum in Portuguese business that
    makes it such an exciting time to engage in commerce between
    our two countries. Lisbon is currently rated one of the hottest
    technology startup cities in the EU. Given my former position
    as president of Pacific Crest Securities, I am uniquely
    situated to help partner U.S. and Portuguese businesses to
    build upon the technology boom we are seeing today.
        The emergence of small startups, incubators, and boot camps
    looks a lot like the San Francisco Bay Area did in the late
    1980s and early 1990s. If confirmed, I cannot wait to join the
    200-strong at Mission Lisbon to help them in their endeavor to
    support and expand the business ties between the United States
    and Portugal.
        Lastly, if I may, I would like to express my deepest sorrow
    for the family and friends of the over 60 dead, and hundreds
    injured in the latest forest fire in Portugal. This has been a
    tragedy of great proportions, and it is seldom that we see this
    kind of tragedy today.
        Coming from Oregon, where timber and timber-based products
    have been historically one our largest industries, I know the
    pain that a forest fire can render and the burden that an
    entire people can feel. Mary and I continue to include the
    families of those who perished and the brave firefighters who
    battled mightily in our prayers. I hope, somehow, someday, we
    can help prevent something like this from occurring again in
    the future.
        Distinguished Senators, once again, I would like to thank
    each and every one of you for your time. Please have confidence
    that, if confirmed, I will serve our great country, the United
    States of America, to the best of my abilities. Thank you.
        [Mr. Glass's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of George Glass

        Thank you, Senator Wyden, for your gracious introduction. And thank
    you especially for your many years of public service to our great State
    of Oregon. Both Mary and I sincerely value your friendship and thank
    you for being here today.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members of
    the committee, It is with great humility and honor that I sit before
    you today. I am deeply grateful to President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for their trust and support in nominating me to be the
    Ambassador to the Republic of Portugal. If confirmed, I am committed to
    focusing all my energies to further the interests of the United States
    of America.
        If I could take a moment, I'd like to introduce you to my family,
    for without their support and love, I would not be here today. I would
    like to acknowledge my wife Mary who is sitting here with me, she
    traveled out from Oregon to be here. I'd like to acknowledge my 3 sons
    and their wives who are supporting me from afar. Our oldest Gordon and
    his wife Giau are currently living in Japan. Our middle Son George and
    his wife Emily are not here for the best of reasons. They are due with
    their first child, and our first Grandchild in August. And lastly Our
    youngest son Andrew, who has just graduated from College and in the
    throws of his first job in Dallas Texas. I would also like to
    acknowledge my mother and step-father, Mary and Jay O'Leary, and Mary's
    parents Joe and Laurie Ferguson. Lastly, I want to thank my father who
    is here in spirit; his courage and wisdom bring me strength every day.
        I take seriously the responsibility of representing the United
    States of America to the Republic of Portugal, which also includes the
    Azores and Madeira. Portugal is among our oldest and most reliable
    allies. The history of our two nations has always been one of mutual
    respect and support. Portugal was the second country to recognize
    America's independence, and our consulate in the Azores is the oldest
    continually operating consulate in the world. If confirmed, I also look
    forward to working with the outstanding Foreign Service personnel that
    currently serve our country at Mission Lisbon.
        Portugal's traditional and geographic orientation to the Atlantic,
    the presence of 1.5 million Portuguese Americans living in the United
    States, and a strong pro-American sentiment across the political
    spectrum combine to make the relationship between our two countries one
    of the three focal points of Portugal's foreign policy. This unique
    relationship has allowed us to turn to Portugal for political and
    material support in almost every peacekeeping effort the United States,
    NATO, and the United Nations has led since the end of the Cold War. If
    confirmed, it will be my job to lead Mission Portugal to further expand
    and enhance this political and economic relationship.
        More recently, the Republic of Portugal was hit especially hard by
    the 2008 global recession, to the point that a financial rescue package
    was adopted in May 2011. Mary and I were in Portugal for an extended
    trip in 2014 and saw for ourselves what the wage and spending cuts, and
    the tax increases were doing to the business environment. At that time,
    unemployment rates were over 15 percent and nearly twice that for young
    adults. What we witnessed on that trip endeared us to the people of
    Portugal for life. Even with that economic backdrop, they were focused
    on the same values that we hold dear in America: God, family, and the
    belief that hard work will ultimately help one to succeed. These
    observations were not unfounded.
        Merely three years later, Portugal is in the midst of a remarkable
    economic recovery. Strong export performance and rebounds in private
    consumption and investment led to a positive GDP of 1.4 percent in
    2016. And this year Portugal has posted its lowest deficit since the
    1974 revolution, allowing the country to exit the EU's Excessive
    Deficit Procedure.
        The United States is now Portugal's No. 1 trading partner outside
    the EU single market and the 5th largest trading partner overall. The
    most recent example of this resurgence in bilateral trade occurred in
    April of 2016 when Portugal received the first ever shipment of
    liquefied natural gas from the United States to Europe. This was
    followed by a second shipment in February 2017. The Portuguese
    Government has expressed its eagerness to further expand bilateral
    cooperation in regards to energy.
        It is this newfound momentum in Portuguese business that makes it
    such an exciting time to engage in commerce between our two countries.
    Lisbon is currently rated one of the hottest technology start-up cities
    in the EU. Given my former position as President of Pacific Crest
    Securities, I am uniquely situated to help partner U.S. and Portuguese
    businesses to build upon the technology boom we're seeing today. The
    emergence of small startups, incubators, and boot camps looks a lot
    like the San Francisco Bay Area of the 80's and early 90's. If
    confirmed, I can't wait to join the 200 strong of Mission Lisbon in
    their endeavor to support and expand these business ties between the
    United States and Portugal.
        Lastly, if I may, I would like to express my deepest sorrow for the
    family and friends of the over 60 dead, and hundreds injured in
    Portugal's recent forest fire. This has been a tragedy of proportions
    seldom seen in our world today. Coming from Oregon, where timber and
    timber based products have been historically one our largest
    industries, I know the pain that a forest fire can render and the
    burden that an entire people can feel. Mary and I continue to include
    the families of those who perished and the brave firefighters that
    battled mightily in our prayers. I hope, somehow, we can help prevent
    something like this from ever happening again.
        Distinguished Senators, once again I would like to thank each and
    every one of you for your time today. Please have confidence that, if
    confirmed, I will serve our great country, the United States of
    America, to the best of my abilities. Thank you.

                                   __________

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Glass.
        The final nominee will be Mr. Risch.
        Mr. Risch?

    STATEMENT OF CARL C. RISCH OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE AN ASSISTANT
                  SECRETARY OF STATE, CONSULAR AFFAIRS

        Mr. Risch. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, members
    of the committee, I am honored to appear before you as the
    President's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of State for
    Consular Affairs.
        I am joined today by my family, my wife of over 22 years,
    Wendy Taylor Risch, who has supported me throughout my career
    and accompanied me on three overseas assignments. Wendy also
    worked for the Department of State as a spousal employee during
    two of my overseas tours. I am also joined by our daughters,
    Anneke Risch, a rising 8th grader, and Ilse Risch, a rising 6th
    grader.
        My family is the center of my life, and instilling in our
    children a sense of kindness and empathy, as well as a respect
    for public service, is a priority for us.
        I am grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson for
    the confidence and trust they have placed in me. It is, without
    a doubt, the greatest honor of my professional life to be
    nominated. And, if confirmed, I will devote all of my skills,
    experience, and attention to performing my duties.
        My wife and I are both natives of central Pennsylvania,
    where we were born, raised, and educated. I practiced law there
    for 8 years. My father, a veteran of the Korean War, worked for
    30 years in a factory, now closed, which made automotive parts.
    My mother stayed home with me after my adoption.
        Being an adopted person, I have felt a special kinship with
    the abandoned, the orphaned, and the forgotten, and this
    kinship has influenced me throughout my life. For example, over
    the past 9 years, I have volunteered to serve on refugee
    processing trips for my agency, USCIS, in Thailand, Pakistan,
    Namibia, and Malaysia, where I worked toward resettlement to
    the United States of hundreds of victims of persecution and
    torture.
        As an attorney and civil servant, I will bring to the
    Bureau of Consular Affairs the same values and principles that
    have guided my career for the past 22 years--a commitment to
    the rule of law, to efficiency, to justice, and to
    transparency. My entire career has been focused on serving the
    public, especially Americans living and working abroad, and to
    the equal and fair application of the law.
        I began my government service as a Foreign Service Officer.
    My consular tour was one of the most professionally enriching
    and rewarding experiences of my life. I am grateful and honored
    to have had the opportunity to work with the dedicated men and
    women of the State Department, especially in the days and weeks
    after the attacks of 9/11. In 2006, I returned to public
    service as a civil servant with U.S. Citizenship and
    Immigration Services.
        It is at USCIS where I expanded my knowledge of immigration
    and nationality law. I rose through the ranks at USCIS, first
    as an appeals officer, then as a manager, and finally as chief
    of staff of the agency.
        In 2013, my wife and I made the decision to return to
    international service, and I have spent the past 4 years
    serving USCIS in our embassies in the Philippines and in South
    Korea. During those years, I had the pleasure of working side-
    by-side with consular sections throughout the world. I remain a
    dedicated civil servant to this day.
        If confirmed, it will be a privilege of a lifetime to lead
    the fine men and women of the Bureau of Consular Affairs.
    Consular officers are a first line of defense in our efforts to
    protect our country from those who will do us harm, and they
    are among the hardest working, most dedicated, and bravest
    employees in government service. They work in dangerous,
    uncomfortable places, all to serve the American people. This
    work is both complex and emotionally taxing, and I am immensely
    proud to say that I was once one of them, even for a short
    period of time.
        Since my days as a consular officer, so much has changed
    for the better at the State Department. A suite of interagency
    security review processes, continuous vetting of applicants
    using updated technology, biometrics capturing, a longer and
    better training program, a serious commitment to fraud
    detection, close cooperation with the Department of Homeland
    Security, and a culture of making national security a number
    one priority, this has strengthened State's shared mission to
    protect our homeland.
        Every visa decision the State Department makes thousands of
    times a day is a national security decision. If confirmed, I
    will strive to make sure our officers continue to have the
    training, resources, and leadership necessary to accurately
    adjudicate applications in accordance with the laws of the
    United States, while also facilitating legitimate international
    travel and protecting our national security.
        Should I be confirmed, I commit to working with members of
    this committee and to being responsive to your questions and
    concerns. Thank you for your time and I look forward to your
    questions.
        [Mr. Risch's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Carl C. Risch

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the committee, I
    am honored to appear before you as the President's nominee to be
    Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs.
        I am joined today by my family: my wife of over 22 years, Wendy
    Taylor Risch, who has supported me throughout my career and accompanied
    me on three overseas assignments. Wendy also worked for the Department
    of State as a spousal employee during two of my overseas tours. I am
    also joined by our daughters, Anneke Risch, a rising 8th grader, and
    Ilse Risch, a rising 6th grader. My family is the center of my life,
    and instilling in our children a sense of kindness and empathy, as well
    as a respect for public service, is a priority for us. In the past five
    years, my daughters have lived in three different countries and, thus,
    have attended three different schools, all due to my service to the
    Government. I'm in awe at their resilience and positive attitudes, and
    we are both very proud of them.
        I am grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson for the
    confidence and trust they have placed in me. It is, without a doubt,
    the greatest honor of my professional life to be nominated, and, if
    confirmed, I will devote myself to serving the American people in this
    important capacity within the Department of State.
        My wife and I are both natives of central Pennsylvania, where we
    were born, raised, and educated. I practiced law there for eight years,
    first as an associate attorney and later as a partner in a law firm. My
    father, a veteran of the Korean War, worked for 30 years at a factory,
    now closed, which made automotive parts. My mother stayed home with me
    after my adoption. I had a stable and happy childhood, and my parents
    encouraged my lifelong interest in--my passion for--international
    travel and public service. Being an adopted person, I have also felt a
    special kinship with the abandoned, the orphaned, and the forgotten,
    and this kinship has influenced me throughout my life. For example,
    over the past nine years, I have volunteered to serve on refugee
    processing trips for my agency in Thailand, Pakistan, Namibia, and
    Malaysia, where I worked toward the resettlement to the United States
    of hundreds of victims of persecution and torture, so that they could
    start new lives. My family and I have also served as cultural
    orientation volunteers for refugees already resettled in the United
    States.
        As an attorney and career civil servant, I will bring to the Bureau
    of Consular Affairs the same values and principles that have guided my
    career for the past 22 years--a commitment to the rule of law, to
    efficiency, to justice, and to transparency. My entire career has been
    focused on serving the public, especially U.S. citizens living and
    working abroad, and to the equal and fair application of the law. I
    began my government service as a Foreign Service Officer in 1999, after
    four years of private practice as an attorney. Choosing the consular
    cone was an obvious and easy choice for a young man entering the
    Foreign Service with an interest in immigration law. My consular tour
    was one of the most professionally enriching and rewarding experiences
    of my life, and leaving the Foreign Service to return to private
    practice and to start a family in Pennsylvania was a difficult career
    decision. Nevertheless, I am grateful and honored to havehad the
    opportunity to work with the dedicated men and women of the State
    Department, especially in the days and weeks after the attacks of 9/11,
    an experience that has profoundly affected me personally and
    professionally.
        In 2006, I returned to public service as a civil servant with U.S.
    Citizenship and Immigration Services. It is at USCIS where I expanded
    my knowledge of immigration and nationality law, as well as learned to
    manage adjudicatory systems and backlog reduction efforts. I rose
    through the ranks at USCIS, first as an appeals official, then as a
    manager, and finally as Chief of Staff. In 2013, my wife and I made the
    decision to return to international service, and I have spent the past
    four years serving USCIS in our embassies in the Philippines and in
    Korea, most recently as my agency's director in Seoul. During those
    years, I had the pleasure of working side-by-side with consular
    sections throughout the world, from Fiji to Namibia, to address thorny
    questions of law, policy, and process involving our shared mission of
    facilitating travel and lawful immigration to the United States. While
    abroad, I also had the honor of serving the interests of U.S. citizens
    living and working overseas, especially the men and women serving in
    the military. Assisting military families with lawful immigration was a
    highlight of my career, but my greatest honor was administering the
    oath of allegiance to hundreds of military members and spouses at
    dozens of overseas naturalization ceremonies. When I was asked by our
    career Acting Director to serve as Chief of Staff of USCIS, I was
    honored and immediately put in motion my family's early return to the
    United States. I remain a dedicated civil servant to this day.
        If confirmed, it will be a privilege of a lifetime to serve again
    in the Department of State and lead the fine men and women of the
    Bureau of Consular Affairs. Consular officers are a first line of
    defense in our efforts to protect our country from those who will do us
    harm, and they are among the hardest working, most dedicated, and
    bravest employees in government service. They often work in dangerous
    places, under challenging conditions, all to serve the American people
    and advance the interests of the United States. Many of those who work
    with us abroad are foreign nationals, lending their expertise in
    pursuit of our goals. Domestically, Consular Affairs' employees
    thoughtfully and promptly adjudicate millions of passports, work with
    colleagues at USCIS to process immigrant visa documents, and support
    the Bureau's global enterprise. Together, these talented professionals
    are responsible for advancing one of the Department of State's core
    responsibilities: protecting the lives and interests of U.S. citizens.
    The Bureau of Consular Affairs is committed to crisis management and
    response, assisting individual U.S. citizens who are imprisoned,
    injured, or in distress, and working with grieving family members when
    tragedy strikes. This work is both complex and emotionally taxing, and
    I am immensely proud to say that I was once one of them, even for a
    short period of time. If confirmed, I look forward to leading this
    critical organization in continuing to succeed in its important
    mission.
        Since my days as a consular officer, so much has changed for the
    better at the State Department and the Bureau of Consular Affairs has
    proved to be a center of innovation and leadership. An impressive array
    of interagency security review processes, continuous vetting of visa
    applicants using updated technology, biometrics collection, an improved
    training program, a serious commitment to fraud prevention, close
    cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security, and a culture of
    making national security a number one priority, has strengthened
    State's shared mission to protect our homeland. As my predecessor,
    former Assistant Secretary Michele Bond stated in her testimony before
    this committee two years ago, ``every visa decision we make, thousands
    of times a day, is a national security decision.'' If confirmed, I will
    strive to make sure consular professionals continue to have the
    training, resources, and leadership necessary to fulfill their duties
    in accordance with the laws of the United States, while augmenting our
    national security and facilitating legitimate international travel. As
    I have noted, CA's number one priority is the safety and protection of
    U.S. citizens overseas, and, if confirmed, I will make this my number
    one priority as well.
        Should I be confirmed, I commit to working with members of this
    committee and to being responsive to your questions and concerns. Thank
    you for your time and I look forward to your questions.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Risch.
        I want to thank all the nominees for your testimony.
        Mr. Glass, by the way, congratulations on your soon-to-be
    first grandchild. I have three now. They are everything they
    say, all of the joy with a lot less responsibility.
        Mr. Glass. Wonderful. I am looking forward to it.
        Senator Johnson. You will enjoy it.
        I want to thank all my colleagues for your strong
    attendance, and in respect of your time, what I will do is I
    will hold off on my questions until the very end.
        Senator Isakson, if you are ready?
        Senator Isakson. Mr. Chairman, I did not really come for a
    question. I came to pay tribute to Ms. Gingrich. We have
    something in common. She married Newt Gingrich. I replaced him
    in the House of Representatives.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Isakson. He got the best end of that deal, I can
    tell you.
        But Callista is a lady of great talent. In fact, one of her
    great, great persuasive talents is to not only convince Newt to
    marry her but convert him to Catholicism, which will serve him
    well in the Holy See, as well.
        Callista, we are mighty proud of you. We are very proud of
    Newt. I know you will do a great job, and I just want to be
    here to cheer you on and tell you how proud we are of you.
        Ms. Gingrich. Thank you so much, Senator.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you to all of the nominees for your willingness
    to take on these positions and to serve this country.
        I want to begin with you, Mrs. Gingrich, because you talked
    about the important role of Catholic charities and the Catholic
    mission around the world. I certainly agree with that. I had
    the opportunity to visit a nursing home in northern New
    Hampshire on Friday that is operated by Catholic charities in
    the State providing great care to people.
        So I wanted to ask you, I know that Pope Francis has called
    on America and the rest of the Western world to uphold our
    tradition of moral leadership by welcoming vulnerable refugees
    fleeing violence and oppression into our country. I just wonder
    how you would argue the United States' position that is taken
    by this administration that has been less welcoming of
    refugees, and how will you work with the Holy See on that very
    critical issue?
        Ms. Gingrich. The President and the Pope should have grave
    concerns regarding the global refugee and migration crisis, and
    this is a priority for our President to deal with right now. We
    have a deep commitment in this country to work to forward peace
    and stability, so people do not have to become refugees.
        The United States has been and will continue to be the
    largest provider of humanitarian aid in the world. We are not
    disengaging. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the
    Holy See to emphasize the impact that our foreign assistance
    will have, and our partners around the world.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, certainly, we are not disengaging on
    foreign aid. I agree with that, and I think that we should
    continue to support that in every way we can, especially in
    those places where we are seeing famine as the result of
    manmade conditions.
        But this administration has reduced the ability of refugees
    to come to the country, particularly Syrian refugees who are
    fleeing violence and a horrible situation in their own country.
        Is this something that you think we can work with Pope
    Francis and the Holy See to try to ensure that we can help
    those refugees who are trying to get into the country?
        Ms. Gingrich. I think we can communicate our commitment to
    help those most in need, yes.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Professor Sales, Secretary Tillerson has spoken repeatedly
    about the possibility of increased cooperation with Russia. In
    Syria, we have a ceasefire that still seems to be holding in a
    very small southern part of that country. But time and again,
    Putin has demonstrated that he is interested in preserving the
    Assad regime.
        So do you believe that we share the same interests and
    objectives in Syria? And if not, how would you describe our
    objectives differently?
        Mr. Sales. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I think the answer is yes and no. I think we do have some
    shared objectives in Syria. We face a common enemy in ISIS. We
    have other interests that diverge, as you well know, Senator.
        As to what we can do with Russia or other members of the
    international community to achieve our objectives in Syria, our
    number one priority, I think, as the administration has made
    plain, is to defeat ISIS. What that means is taking their
    leaders off the battlefield and their foot soldiers off the
    battlefield, liberating the cities that they have seized,
    defeating their ability to recruit foreign fighters from around
    the world, particularly Europe, and drying up their sources of
    funding.
        The key question after that goal is accomplished is what
    comes next? I think one important thing that has to happen is a
    political process involving all of the relevant stakeholders
    that can produce stability, such that the people of Syria can
    chart a way forward.
        That is something that cannot be accomplished entirely by
    military force. It is something that is going to require
    sustained diplomatic engagement.
        And, Senator, if I am confirmed to this position, that is
    going to be a priority of ours.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. One of the benefits that we
    have in fighting terrorism at home is engagement from the
    communities that terrorists have often come from. In the Muslim
    community, for example, making sure that there are good
    relations with people in the Muslim community here has been
    very helpful here.
        How would you see our promoting those kinds of positive
    relationships?
        Mr. Sales. I could not agree with you more, Senator. It is
    absolutely critical to maintain strong relationships with
    domestic populations, as well as international populations,
    because oftentimes, these are the groups of people who have the
    first insight into the fact that a problem may be taking place.
    It is critically important for us to have open lines of
    communication, such that our friends are confident that they
    can tell us we think that something amiss may be afoot without
    fear of stigmatization or any other sort of negative
    repercussion.
        So I strongly agree with the sentiment behind that question
    and look forward to maintaining those strong relationships,
    Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I have other questions for the
    panelists, but my time is up, sadly.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Thanks and congratulations to all the witnesses for your
    nominations.
        To Mr. Glass, the U.S.-Portugal relationship is a very
    important one. I do a lot of work in the Iberian Peninsula in
    my work on this committee, and I applaud you for that
    nomination.
        Mr. Risch, consular officials have very tough work. They
    really do. When I travel for the Foreign Relations Committee, I
    always ask to meet without the Ambassador with FSOs on their
    first or second tours, and they are almost always out of the
    consular section.
        I basically say, congratulations, you have achieved a
    wonderful job working for the State Department. What will be
    the difference as to whether you make it a career or whether
    you leave after a few years. That is usually all I have to say
    to engender about a 2-hour conversation. I really enjoy
    visiting with our consular officials. And your work will be
    very important.
        A question or comment for each Mr. Sales and Ms. Gingrich.
        Ms. Gingrich, I am very happy with your answer to Senator
    Shaheen's questions about refugees. I was at the Vatican in
    February and had an opportunity to meet briefly with the Pope
    and with other Vatican officials purely on the refugee issue.
    In my conversation with the Pope, I thanked him for his
    leadership.
        Obviously, a key aspect of his speech to Congress in 2015
    was about refugees. He had given a speech the day before my
    visit in Rome focused on refugee issues. And he was pleading
    with the United States to please be a leader on these issues. I
    was thanking him for his leadership, but he was not just going
    to accept the thank you. He wanted to put an ask on our
    shoulders. And, as you know, there are so many issues in this
    important bilateral relationship, and I know that that will be
    an important one.
        You are not the budget official, so I completely get this.
    You play the hand that you are dealt by a President's submitted
    budget, and also the budget that Congress comes up with. But
    the cut to the refugee bureau proposed in the President's
    budget, the refugee bureau within the State Department, is 31
    percent.
        I think that sends a very loud message. Rhetoric sends a
    message, and budget sends a message. Probably the two most
    significant messages you can send are with the rhetoric and
    with the budget. We are sending a message.
        I hope that it is the will of this body to do some repair
    on the budget, so that the message that we send is not one that
    we are reducing America's traditional commitment to those
    issues.
        I take you, because of your background, the comment that
    you made to Senator Shaheen, that you will do all you can to
    advance our longstanding policy of being a Statue of Liberty
    Nation that welcomes people who are oppressed, I appreciate
    your commitment to that.
        Mr. Sales, let me just ask you this. I am on the Armed
    Services Committee as well. Last year, we were able to get
    something done in the NDAA that I thought was pretty good, and
    my colleagues agreed. We enabled, through the NDAA, the DOD to
    transfer funds to State or USAID on the say-so of the SecDef
    for countering violent extremism, if the SecDef felt like,
    ``Well, I think State or USAID can do a better job at this than
    us.''
        So, in particular areas, it really has been more in the
    expertise of State or USAID to do particular programs that can
    counter violent extremism, and sometimes the State and
    diplomatic touch is better than the military touch.
        So if the SecDef agrees, there is no transfer authority. I
    hope that that is something that you will look at.
        But I have noticed there has been some discussion of
    stripping away some CVE aspects of the administration's
    counterterrorism strategy.
        To your knowledge, and I know we are not presuming
    nomination, so you are not there yet, but will CVE remain a
    strong priority of the CT Bureau at the State Department?
        Mr. Sales. Yes, Senator. If I am confirmed, it will
    continue to be a top priority for me and for the bureau that I
    would lead.
        I think all counterterrorism has to involve a countering
    violent extremism component. Terrorism is a global problem that
    presents all sorts of different facets, and some of those
    facets require different kinds of solutions. Sometimes military
    solutions are required. Sometimes law enforcement solutions are
    required.
        But it is not just hard power that has to be deployed to
    counter ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other like-minded groups. We also
    have to use the softer tools in the national toolkit, such as
    moral suasion, such as engaging at the community level, such as
    providing off-ramps for those who might be tempted to take a
    path toward radicalization.
        So I am grateful for this capability that you and others
    have worked to build into the State Department. And if
    confirmed, I will continue the good work that has been done,
    Senator.
        Senator Kaine. And, Ms. Gingrich, if I can just go back,
    because you have a communications background, too, and, of
    course, CVE is an important priority of the Vatican, as well.
        Could you talk a little bit about, to my last question, how
    you see your role as Ambassador to the Holy See and what you
    could do in the bilateral relationship with the Vatican to
    counter extremism?
        Ms. Gingrich. Well, it is very exciting to have the
    opportunity, if confirmed, to be working at an Embassy, to lead
    an Embassy, that has a global influence and works on a global
    scale.
        I am very interested in working on projects to advance
    religious freedom, to fight terrorism and violence, to combat
    human trafficking, to fight diseases like HIV/AIDS and Ebola,
    and to work on--to seek peaceful solutions to crises around the
    world. So this is an awesome opportunity, if I am confirmed.
        There are many issues on which we do agree. We have a very
    strong bilateral relationship with a shared agreement on many
    issues. Of course, there are always issues where diplomatic
    partners do not agree. But I look forward to working on those
    issues of our shared policy opportunities.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations to all of you.
        Mr. Risch, in 2007, you appeared before the House
    Subcommittee on the Civil Service, Census, and Agency
    Organization of the Committee on Government Reform in a hearing
    titled, ``Strengthening America: Should the issuing of vises be
    viewed as a diplomatic tool or security measure?''
        You said, and I quote, ``During my tenure as unit chief, I
    adjudicated approximately 25,000 visa applications. I resigned
    in May 2002, even though I received top evaluation in a
    challenging onboard assignment. While I longed to return to my
    private practice, I was also discouraged by the State
    Departments lack of dedication to the effective enforcement of
    the immigration laws of the United States. I took my job very
    seriously. The State Department did not.''
        So, Mr. Risch, do you believe the State Department is not
    committed to the rule of law and the national security of the
    United States?
        Mr. Risch. Thank you, Senator, for the question, and for
    the opportunity to address that testimony.
        I will point out that the testimony was in 2002, not in
    2007, so it was 15 years ago that that testimony took place. It
    was during the time when the Department of Homeland Security
    was just being stood up. It was in the almost immediate
    aftermath of 9/11.
        I believe a lot has changed at the State Department in 15
    years, and I am very enthusiastic about the future of the way
    the Bureau of Consular Affairs will be fulfilling its function.
    With interagency cooperation and continuous vetting.
        Senator Menendez. I do not want my time to expire. We have
    a lot of candidates here.
        Do you believe the State Department is committed to the
    rule of law and the national security of the United States?
        Mr. Risch. Currently, Senator, I absolutely do.
        Senator Menendez. All right. Let me ask you, you went on in
    the same hearing to say, ``The fact that even I was terrified
    by State's incompetence and apathy toward law enforcement
    proves just how far this problem has progressed. I urge the
    Congress to support the transfer of the visa-issuing function
    from State's Bureau of Consular Affairs to the new Department
    of Homeland Security, a department that will be committed to
    the rule of law and the national security of the United
    States.''
        Now, PRM's mission is to provide life-staining assistance
    to those who are persecuted, uprooted people, by working
    through multilateral systems, to build global partnerships,
    promote best practices in humanitarian response, ensure that
    humanitarian principles are thoroughly integrated into U.S.
    foreign and national security policy. For example, refugees and
    migration are important policy issues in our bilateral
    relations with countries like Turkey and Iraq.
        So do you believe that the Department of Homeland Security,
    which is notoriously bloated with a whole host of dysfunctional
    components, should be responsible still to have the visa, the
    very essence of the department you are being nominated to, to
    be transferred to the Department of Homeland Security?
        Mr. Risch. Well, 15 years ago, Senator, I stand behind my
    testimony. It was a completely different time, and there was a
    lot of talk about consolidating different things into the
    Department of Homeland Security.
        Currently, I watched the Deputy Secretary testify yesterday
    that it is currently not the intent of the Department of State.
        Senator Menendez. I am not asking what their intent is. I
    am asking you your view. You are being nominated for this
    position.
        Mr. Risch. My view is I would follow the leadership of the
    Department of State, if confirmed. But as of today, I intend to
    lead the Bureau of Consular Affairs as it is currently formed.
    I believe that I will be, if confirmed, a strong leader of all
    functions of the Consular bureau, including the visa function.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Sales, since 9/11, the United States
    has been developing and redeveloping strategies to counter
    terrorism and violent extremism. Our experiences in Iraq and
    Afghanistan lead very little doubt that extremist ideologues
    and terrorists flourish and find the best recruits in areas of
    conflict and poverty and where people have no hope for the
    future.
        The 2016 State Department and AID joint strategy on
    countering violent extremism outline five objectives. In those
    objectives, they talk to those very issues that I just spoke
    about.
        So my question is, how do proposed cuts to the State
    Department and USAID programs that are the foreign assistance
    tools that advance the goals of combating terrorism and violent
    extremism actually align with our very own policy?
        Mr. Sales. Thank you for the question, Senator. I spent
    some time in academic bureaucracies. I have spent some time in
    government bureaucracies. In my experience, it is usually the
    case that they can afford to tighten the belt a bit.
        Now, as far as the overall State Department budget is
    concerned, Senator, Congress has the power of the purse under
    the Constitution, so Congress will have to decide the levels at
    which it wishes to fund these activities.
        Senator Menendez. My problem with these answers is that you
    all want to kick the ball to someone else, but your nominations
    are, in essence, going to be part of policy decision-making.
    You will be in a room to be able to advocate at the State
    Department and interagency.
        So simply saying that Congress has the power of the purse,
    I am fully aware of that. The question is, what is your
    advocacy at a given point in time? Are these the essential
    programs that are necessary, as Secretary Mattis has said, that
    this is how we fight these ideologues? This is a guy who is a
    general.
        So I would like to get better answers.
        Finally, if I may, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Glass, we have a lot
    of Portuguese-Americans in New Jersey and from the Azores, an
    extraordinary group of citizens that have done extraordinary
    things in communities.
        Have you visited Portugal?
        Mr. Glass. I have.
        Senator Menendez. Do you speak Portuguese?
        Mr. Glass. At this time, no. I have had some Spanish, and I
    am working on Portuguese and will certainly utilize the experts
    that are in the Embassy to help us learn the language.
        Senator Menendez. I ask that question, because, in the
    past, these questions have been asked, when I was the chairman,
    of the nominees. And for some, it was disqualifying. For me, it
    is not. But I just wanted to know.
        Thank you very much.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. Glass, why don't you take this
    opportunity right now to provide some comfort to Senator
    Menendez. Talk about your experience on your trip to Portugal
    that you conveyed to me in my office.
        Mr. Glass. The trip that Mary and I took to Portugal was 3
    years ago. We were on a pilgrimage to Fatima. When we got
    there, it truly transformed our lives. It transformed the way
    we look at each other. It transformed the way we look at our
    religion.
        As we traveled throughout the country, we realized the
    hospitality of the people there was extraordinary. And this was
    at a time, 3 years ago, that they were under a very severe
    recession. They had an austerity program that was enacted, so
    there was a lot of unemployment. Yet, that did not stop
    everybody from welcoming us there.
        So we knew at the time when we left that we, frankly, left
    a big piece of our hearts there and that we wanted to come
    back. We certainly had no idea that we would possibly be coming
    back, if confirmed, in this role.
        But Portugal is very important to us, and we look forward
    to serving the United States in Portugal.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Udall?
        Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Chairman Johnson.
        New Mexico, my home State, has one of the oldest Catholic
    traditions in the country, and it has been over 400 years since
    the Catholic Church was first established in the State of New
    Mexico, which obviously was not a State at the time. Those
    traditions still run very strong in the State.
        Like Pope Francis, many New Mexicans have a strong
    reverence for St. Francis de Assisi. In fact, the Catholic
    missionary efforts in New Mexico were started by the order
    named for him, the Franciscans.
        The full name of my hometown of Santa Fe, the oldest
    capital city in the country, is also named for St. Francis. Its
    full name is La Villa Real de la Santa Fe de San Francisco de
    Assisi, the Royal Town of the Holy Faith of St. Francis of
    Assisi. The traditions of St. Francis run strong in New Mexico.
        The Pope honors the saint by taking his name and working in
    his tradition, writing in his encyclical, ``Laudato Si,'' or
    ``Praise Be to You,'' and it was subtitled, ``On Care for Our
    Common Home,'' Pope Francis stated, ``I believe that St.
    Francis is the example par excellence of care for the
    vulnerable, and of an integral ecology lived out joyfully and
    authentically. He is the patron saint of all who study and work
    in the area of ecology, and he is also much loved by non-
    Christians. He was particularly concerned for God's creation
    and for the poor and outcast.''
        Those are the words of the Pope. The Pope gifted his
    encyclical on climate change to President Trump when he visited
    the Pope at the Vatican.
        Pope Francis in ``Laudato Si'' and on many other occasions
    has called on Catholics and people from every faith to work
    together to address climate change and protect the environment.
        In New Mexico, my constituents are at the frontlines of
    global warming, and we are already beginning to see the impacts
    of extreme weather events.
        Ms. Gingrich, could you share your thoughts on ``Laudato
    Si'' and how you would dialogue with the Holy See regarding
    climate change and what Pope Francis calls a dialogue about how
    we shape the future of the planet?
        Ms. Gingrich. Well, the Pope and the President share a
    great concern about our environment. President Trump wants to
    maintain that we have clean air and clean water, and that the
    United States remains an environmental leader. As President
    Trump said, we will disengage and pull out of the Paris
    Agreement, and either we enter the Paris Agreement or an
    entirely new agreement, one that is fair to Americans.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Holy See
    as the United States pursues a balanced approach to climate
    policy, one that promotes American jobs, American prosperity,
    and energy security.
        Senator Udall. I really believe the essence and core of
    diplomacy is listening and having an open mind, and I hope that
    you will go over there with that approach and listen to the
    Pope.
        The Holy See has played an important role, along with the
    United States, to engage Cuba and to improve relations with our
    island neighbor. Cardinal Ortega in Cuba and Pope Francis have
    used the dialogue to help resolve differences between the
    United States and Cuba.
        What are your views on this dialogue? And would you be
    willing to work with the Vatican to increase ties between the
    United States and the Cuban people?
        Ms. Gingrich. Well, we certainly appreciate the Holy See's
    concern for a better relationship between the United States and
    Cuba. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Holy See
    to advance religious freedom and human dignity and human rights
    in Cuba.
        Senator Udall. Do any of the other panelists have a view on
    the Pope's encyclical on climate change?
        I take that as no? No, no, no, all three.
        Okay, thank you very much.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you all for being here.
        I wanted to follow up on Senator Menendez's line of
    questioning, especially to you, Mr. Risch, and to you, Mr.
    Sales, because it is an important point. You are going to be
    asked for your opinion. In fact, you are being nominated to
    your positions because of your policy expertise in both of
    these areas.
        So he is right. It is simply not enough to suggest that you
    are going to follow orders. It is important for the nominating
    committee and for the Senate to know what advice you are going
    to be giving.
        So, Mr. Risch, let me just drill down to ask you a question
    that you have not answered yet, which is, if you were asked for
    your opinion as to whether State should retain function over
    visa responsibilities, or it should be shifted to the
    Department of Homeland Security, what will your advice be?
        Mr. Risch. Thank you, Senator.
        This has been a subject of debate for quite some time. My
    understanding is, currently, the debate is framed around
    government efficiency. When I have seen this proposal bubble
    up, usually, it has been in the context of these efficiency
    initiatives and brainstorming sessions.
        I cannot speak to whether or not it would bring a certain
    efficiency to move that function from one department to the
    other. I do not intend to advocate for that. I am simply not in
    the position to make that efficiency call around that function.
        My concern in the past in criticizing the State Department
    was around a lack of respect for consular work, around national
    security concerns, and around the rule of law. I believe those
    issues have been addressed, so I do not intend to advocate for
    that change based on any concern around the way the State
    Department does its job.
        Senator Murphy. Okay. I think that is fairly clear. It is
    important for us to understand whether you are being nominated
    to this position to effectively end the functionality. And I
    hear you to be saying that that is not your intent.
        Mr. Risch. It is not my intent, Senator. I do not intend,
    if confirmed, to lead a diminished Bureau of Consular Affairs.
    I intend to lead a bureau that I believe will probably be
    gaining responsibility and importance in protecting our
    country.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you.
        Mr. Sales, I appreciate your answer around efficiency. I do
    not think any of us disagree that every bureaucracy can get
    more efficient. But that is not what is happening to the
    Department of State.
        This is a strategic focus on a greatly diminished capacity,
    and specifically some of the biggest cuts happen under your
    portfolio. So there is a 10 percent cut in funding for the
    counterterrorism bureau. But then more damaging, there is a 30
    percent cut to NADR funding proposed in the President's budget,
    and that is foreign aid for counterterrorism activities at
    State. That budget request moves a $1.1 billion fund down to a
    $680 million fund.
        So do you think that you can effectively carry out on the
    set of responsibilities you are given with a 30 percent cut to
    NADR funding, which seems to go beyond just those savings that
    can be captured by efficiency?
        Mr. Sales. Thanks for the question, Senator. I will answer
    it as best I can from my vantage point as an outsider, somebody
    who has not yet gotten a great deal of visibility on the
    internal deliberations on these very important questions.
        So with that caveat, what I can tell you is, if I ever
    thought--we talked about this yesterday in your office,
    Senator, so I can assure you that if I ever thought that I did
    not have the resources I needed to do the job to which I had
    been confirmed, I would have no hesitation whatsoever about
    raising that concern with my superiors and advocating for what
    I deem to be necessary.
        Senator Murphy. I appreciate that answer. I think if that
    is your sincere answer, you will be in a position of advocating
    very vigorously very early.
        The hiring freeze that at first applied to the entirety of
    the Federal Government now applies to only one agency, and that
    is the State Department. And you will all feel that, because
    you will not be able to hire individuals that you need in order
    to perform the tasks at your departments and your embassies.
    Extraordinary measures have been taken to prevent lateral
    transfers within the Department of State. Thus, you will see
    certain functionalities hollowed out because of the traditional
    ways in which State moved people back and forth are no longer
    available.
        There is something extraordinary happening right now, and
    many of us cannot derive the motivation for it. But you are all
    going to feel the brunt of it. I hope that all of your answers
    would be the same as Mr. Sales, that if you felt that you did
    not have the resources, that notwithstanding the decisions that
    have been made by the White House, you would argue for more
    resources.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman. If we have a second round, I might
    have more one or two more.
        Senator Johnson. Before I turn to Senator Merkley, as long
    as we are on the subject, Mr. Sales, talk about your experience
    at DHS and the coordination that is going to be incredibly
    important between the Department of State and DHS. I think that
    is a legitimate discussion point, in terms of where these
    activities are best carried out.
        Mr. Sales. Thank you, Senator.
        In my experience at DHS, one of the most important areas of
    international engagement that bears real fruit, in terms of
    counterterrorism, is information-sharing. It is really
    critically important for our international allies to tell us if
    they know about a known or suspected terrorist who might be
    trying to travel to the United States, to tell us if they know
    about somebody who has a criminal history as long as your
    forearm trying to travel to the United States.
        We have made some great strides toward ensuring more
    effective sharing of that kind of information since 9/11. Here
    in the United States, we have pioneered information-sharing.
    After 9/11, one of the refrains that we constantly heard was
    the need to tear down the wall. Well, there are not just walls
    in our domestic law. There are also walls in our international
    relations that impede the effective sharing of information.
        So if I were confirmed to this position, that would be, I
    think, a top priority of mine, working with our allies around
    the globe to talk about ways to share that information to
    enhance our counterterrorism effectiveness on both sides of the
    transaction.
        Senator Johnson. Okay, I just wanted to give you that
    opportunity, because I think when you take a look at this
    massive Federal Government, with the results of the 9/11
    commission talking about the stovepipes, it is a legitimate
    management discussion and, quite honestly, an initiative to
    take a look at where best these functions should reside.
        So I do not see any problem whatsoever in having this
    administration do a top-to-bottom review and take a look at
    that. And where it all shakes out, there is a second branch of
    government here, and Congress will certainly engage in that.
    Certainly, under my other committee, chairman of Homeland
    Security and Government Affairs, will be discussing these
    things. But this is what effective management does. You are
    always doing postmortems. You are always taking a look at what
    is the most effective way to spend the money to get the best
    result.
        So with that, Senator Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        It is a pleasure to join my colleague, Senator Wyden, in
    welcoming our fellow Oregonian, George Edward Glass, nominated
    to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Portugal. Mr. Glass has probably
    been introduced in terms of the details, that he is a native
    Oregonian, a proud graduate of the University of Oregon, but I
    want to emphasize those things again, and that he certainly has
    tremendous Oregon passions, like the love of Oregon's outdoor
    spaces and Ducks football--hopefully a good season ahead.
        I am grateful that he is willing to put those loves on hold
    to be overseas to serve our country.
        A warm welcome to Mr. Glass's wife, Mary. Thank you for
    joining us today.
        Ambassadorial posts are necessarily family affairs, so I
    appreciate the fact that Mrs. Glass is willing to join her
    husband in traveling and representing the United States in
    Portugal.
        Portugal has been a very important ally, and we have seen a
    very intriguing and successful economic story unfold there. I
    think nurturing this relationship will be of great service. I
    thank you, Mr. Glass, for being willing to undertake that
    mission.
        Mr. Glass. Thank you, Senator Merkley. Thank you for
    serving the great State of Oregon in the United States Senate.
    We really appreciate it.
        Senator Merkley. You are welcome.
        And, Ms. Gingrich, I wanted to follow up on the question
    that was asked in regard to the Pope's encyclical. He gave it
    as a present to President Trump when he was there. Has
    President Trump had a chance to read or digest that encyclical?
        Ms. Gingrich. I am not aware whether or not he has read the
    encyclical.
        Senator Merkley. In your preparation to serve, have you had
    a chance to take a look at it?
        Ms. Gingrich. I have looked at some of it, sir.
        Senator Merkley. Are there pieces of it that particularly
    resonate for you?
        Ms. Gingrich. Well, I think we are all called to be
    stewards of the land. You know, as I said earlier, President
    Trump cares for our environment. He wants to sustain our clean
    air and our clean water, and he wants the United States to be
    an environmental leader.
        We are not backing off of that. But we are looking to
    increase the security of this country, to promote more jobs for
    Americans, and to have better prosperity. So the focus is
    slightly different, but we do want to remain an environmental
    leader.
        Senator Merkley. The Pope has indicated that he feels that
    there is a huge urgency to acting quickly to address the basic
    factors driving climate disruption. Do you share that sense of
    urgency?
        Ms. Gingrich. Well, I do believe that climate change
    exists, and that some of it is due to human behavior. But I
    think as the President pursues a better deal for Americans, we
    will, indeed, remain an environmental leader in the world.
        Senator Merkley. I appreciate your confidence in that. I
    must say I must have missed a few of the President's statements
    that have given you that have faith. I wish it were so. I am
    not persuaded, but perhaps we will see more unfold in that
    regard.
        What other two or three things do you see as the key to
    your particular responsibilities, should you hold this post?
        Ms. Gingrich. If confirmed, I am looking forward to working
    with the Holy See to combat human trafficking. This is a
    horrific offense that threatens our global security. The
    President has made it a priority to combat human trafficking.
    Chairman Corker and other members of this committee have made
    it a priority as well. The Holy See is a valued partner in this
    regard, and the Pope has lent international focus to this
    issue.
        So if confirmed, I look forward to working with the White
    House, the Congress, and the Holy See to combat human
    trafficking around the world.
        Senator Merkley. My appreciation to all of you for putting
    yourselves forward in what can be a complex, difficult, and
    trying nominations process.
        With that, I will yield back the rest of my time.
        Senator Johnson. Thanks, Senator Merkley.
        Looking at my list of questions, when I did some follow-ups
    to some of the other Senator's questions, I have pretty well
    covered it and questioned everybody except for Mrs. Gingrich,
    my fellow Wisconsinite.
        So let me just give you an opportunity. George Santayana, I
    am probably mispronouncing it like I did ``basilica'' earlier,
    a senior moment, made the famous statement that those who do
    not remember history are condemned to repeat it. I know both
    you and your husband are serious students of history.
        In particular, your study of Pope John Paul II, your
    documentary, ``Nine Days That Changed the World,'' from my
    standpoint, that really puts you in a very good position to
    understand exactly the power of leadership. And I believe, as I
    am sure you do to, I think America has been a phenomenal force
    for good in the world. I think the Catholic Church has been a
    phenomenal force for good in the world.
        In my own community, one of the things I got involved in
    that got me involved in public service was trying to save the
    Catholic school system there as a private-sector alternative.
        So can you just talk a little bit about your study that
    produced those documentaries and how that leadership--what you
    learned in terms of leadership and how America and the Holy See
    can work together to really help change the world?
        Ms. Gingrich. Our movie, ``Nine Days That Changed the
    World,'' highlights this exact topic.
        In 1979, Pope John Paul II traveled to Poland on a historic
    pilgrimage to see the Polish people, and it was against the
    wishes of the communist government. Millions of Poles came out
    to greet the Holy Father. It was really seen as the beginning
    of the end of communism in Poland and Eastern Europe.
        Pope John Paul II worked very closely with President
    Reagan. Ten years later, you had the first free elections in
    Poland.
        So it is so important that we reach out to places like the
    Holy See to forward good in this world and to make it a better
    place to advance our peace and our freedom and our human
    dignity.
        Senator Johnson. I think an ambassador that understands
    that history, understands the power of that leadership, is
    perfectly suited for this position.
        Senator Murphy, do you have any further questions?
        Senator Murphy. Just an additional two questions.
        One for Mr. Risch. We have been talking about this
    administration's policy toward refugees. Multiple courts have
    held that the policy is illegal, in part because it appears
    discriminatory, given that it is targeted only to refugees of
    certain countries, when we have security vulnerabilities that
    still exist in many other refugee programs, in many other
    immigration programs, I would argue visa waiver at the top of
    that list.
        Can you speak to whether you believe that the only means of
    protecting this country is an outright ban on refugees? Or
    whether you believe that, at some point, there is going to be
    an amendment of this policy by the administration, may be
    advocated by you once you are in place, to provide additional
    screening within the program to allow it to restart? Do you
    need the ban or can you make changes to the program that
    satisfy the concerns that many people have about it?
        Mr. Risch. Thank you, Senator.
        As for refugee policy, I will point out that that really is
    not something that would fall underneath the Bureau of Consular
    Affairs. It would really be under PRM and their relationship
    with my agency now, USCIS.
        As for vetting, at least in the refugee context, I can
    speak as someone who has done refugee interviews over many
    years that the interviews are very detailed and go into great
    detail about their persecution story, biographic data. And
    every one of them is spoken to by an American officer.
        So as for whether or not refugees are screened, they most
    certainly are, in the sense that they are spoken to at great
    length about their qualifications.
        As for the current situation with a travel pause of certain
    countries and the way that is playing out, I certainly support
    any kind of steps that are necessary to review our national
    security posture and take a look at whether or not our vetting
    processes are sufficient to protect the United States.
        Senator Murphy. Mr. Sales, let me ask you one specific
    question, and then I will defer to written questions for the
    remainder.
        We talked a little bit in my office about some of the
    current conflicts in the Middle East today. The most recent
    intelligence estimate provided to Congress shows that AQAP,
    which has always been the most lethal and most homeland-
    oriented arm of Al Qaeda, is growing stronger and stronger
    inside Yemen because of the civil war. Under the Obama
    administration, there was a robust political process that
    Secretary Kerry was leading to try to end that violence and to
    try to end the benefit that was being provided to AQAP.
        I have talked to all of the players inside that conflict,
    and none of them see that political process happening today. It
    is, by and large, dead, in part because Saudis feel empowered
    by the green light that they interpret as having been given
    through the President's visit there.
        Can you just speak to the importance of a political process
    inside Yemen and the danger of allowing for this civil war to
    persist, given the growth of AQAP during that time?
        Mr. Sales. Senator, I could not agree more with the premise
    of your question that a purely military solution is never going
    to achieve the counterterrorism gains we need.
        What is needed is a stable environment, because as you
    point out, terrorists thrive in political vacuums. That is the
    lesson of Afghanistan. That is the lesson of Libya. That is the
    lesson of Iraq.
        So diplomatic engagement, I think, is absolutely essential
    to ensure that we have a durable and stable status quo in Yemen
    to bring the fighting to an end and empower local players to
    gain control over territory and borders.
        That is the only way you are going to get AQAP under
    control, Senator.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        Again, I want to thank all the witnesses for your
    testimony. Congratulations again on your nominations. I want to
    congratulate the President. I really think that the selection
    here, your unique backgrounds and capabilities I think suit you
    well for the positions to which you have been nominated.
        Thank you for your willingness to serve. I want to thank
    your families. You will probably be seeing less of your loved
    ones. These are serious responsibilities.
        But again, thank you very much.
        With that, I have to find the secret words here.
        For the information of the members, the record will remain
    open until the close of business on Thursday, July 20.
        Senator Johnson. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Callista Gingrich by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. For the past 10 years, my work as a documentary film
    producer and author has highlighted the fundamental importance of
    liberty and democracy in American history, and in America's exceptional
    place in the world.
        In our documentary film, Nine Days that Changed the World, we
    explored the quest for freedom and democracy in an international
    context, focusing on Pope John Paul II's historic pilgrimage to Poland
    in 1979--an event that inspired the Polish people to renew their
    hearts, reclaim their courage, and free themselves from the shackles of
    Communism. Nine Days that Changed the World is frequently used in
    religious education programs throughout the United States--helping to
    instill a strong appreciation for liberty and democracy in the next
    generation.
        My Ellis the Elephant American history series for children features
    the pivotal moments that have shaped our great nation. These books also
    highlight our American values of liberty and democracy and have reached
    a wide-ranging audience.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Holy See to
    support and promote human rights and democracy throughout the world.

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

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

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

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

        Question 4. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Holy See?
        Answer. No.

        Question 5. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I strongly believe that those who represent the United
    States abroad must represent the full beauty, strength, and diversity
    of the fabric of American society. As the State Department's Statement
    on Diversity and Equal Employment Opportunity notes, ``Our commitment
    to inclusion must be evident in the face we present to the world and in
    the decision-making processes that represent our diplomatic goals.''
        As a small business owner, I have made it a priority to build a
    strong, mutually supportive team. If confirmed, I will take the same
    approach to managing each member of the Embassy Vatican team, taking
    special care to ensure that each individual is able to draw upon his or
    her unique background and experience to contribute to the goals of our
    mission. I am fully committed to equal employment opportunity
    principles.

        Question 6. What steps will you take to ensure that each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. Just as I take seriously my own responsibility, if
    confirmed, to lead a diverse and inclusive mission, I am committed to
    ensuring the managers and supervisors at Embassy Vatican fully uphold
    equal employment opportunity principles and promote the success of each
    member of our embassy community. If confirmed, I will clearly and
    consistently articulate these principles as chief of mission, and I
    will ensure our embassy supervisors consistently prioritize them in
    their interactions.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to Nathan Sales by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. Hezbollah remains one of the world's most deadly
    terrorist organizations and is responsible for the deaths of hundreds
    of Americans. In addition to the funding it receives from Iran,
    Hezbollah runs a sophisticated network of criminal activities to fund
    its terrorist operations in Lebanon and throughout the world, including
    in the Western Hemisphere. Do you have recommendations on how the
    United States can better confront the threat posed by Hezbollah? Do you
    agree with long-held U.S. policy that there is no distinction between
    military and civilian wings of terrorist groups like Hezbollah or
    Hamas? If confirmed, will you press our EU allies to designate all of
    Hezbollah as a terrorist organization?

        Answer. Hizballah is a U.S. designated foreign terrorist
    organization whose global terrorist operations, and illicit activity
    and military operations in Syria and elsewhere, threaten global
    security and contribute to regional instability. If confirmed,
    disrupting Hizballah's far-reaching terrorist and military capabilities
    will be one of my top priorities. I will continue engaging in a range
    of efforts to counter Hizballah, including using designations tools and
    working closely with the Departments of Treasury and Justice and other
    U.S. Government entities to improve capacity and increase awareness in
    regions where Hizballah is most active, including Eastern Europe, the
    Arabian Peninsula, Southeast Asia, Latin America, and West Africa.
        The United States does not distinguish between Hizballah's
    different wings. This approach is based on a careful review of all
    available information, which indicates that Hizballah's numerous
    branches and subsidiaries share common funding, personnel, and
    leadership, all of which support the group's violent actions.

        Question 2. Although ISIS is steadily losing territory, it will
    remain a terrorism threat for years to come. Its foreign-born fighters
    will return to their homelands, including the United States. ISIS will
    also continue to have an online presence that will allow it to inspire
    and support potential homegrown terrorists. How do you believe ISIS
    will evolve after it loses its territory in Iraq and Syria? Once ISIS
    is stateless, how should the U.S. combat the group? Where will America
    be most vulnerable?

        Answer. As ISIS continues to lose territory, the group has had
    increasing difficulty attracting foreign terrorist fighters to travel
    to Iraq and Syria. Additionally, Coalition-backed military operations
    in Iraq and Syria are being conducted simultaneously both to accelerate
    the defeat of ISIS and to ensure that foreign fighters already on the
    battlefield are unable to escape. Nevertheless, we expect the group to
    continue to rely on its global networks and branches to carry out and
    inspire attacks beyond Iraq and Syria. ISIS will likely continue to
    urge its followers to carry out attacks in their home countries,
    including the United States, rather than calling for followers to
    travel to Iraq and Syria--a message the group began to disseminate last
    year when it began to lose large swaths of territory.
        In response, the United States has made important strides to defeat
    ISIS and reduce the number of terrorist safe havens around the world.
    If confirmed, I will continue to work with partners to improve
    information sharing; increase law enforcement and judicial capacities
    to detect, deter, investigate, and prosecute terrorists and terrorist
    financing; strengthen borders; and improve our ability to counter
    terrorist narratives.

        Question 3. What do you see as the most urgent counterterrorism
    issues for the U.S. Government to address? What would be the most
    important counterterrorism issues for you as the Coordinator for
    Counterterrorism at the State Department?

        Answer. Today's terrorist landscape is more complex, multifaceted,
    and localized than ever before and we should expect ISIS to adopt new
    tactics and targets as a result of Coalition success in Iraq and Syria.
    But we must also remain vigilant against threats posed by al-Qa`ida and
    its regional affiliates as well as by Iranian-backed terrorist groups.
        Anticipating new terrorist threats by ISIS outside of Iraq and
    Syria, the CT Bureau and its interagency partners will have to ensure
    that police, border security officials, prosecutors, and other
    civilian-led entities in foreign partner countries are prepared to
    counter more attacks by battle-hardened foreign terrorist fighters and
    homegrown violent extremists operating in places like Southeast Asia,
    Western Europe, Africa, and potentially the homeland. If confirmed, I
    will employ diplomacy and targeted programmatic assistance to ensure
    that our partners have the will and capacities to address evolving
    terrorist threats, tactics, and travel.
        If confirmed, I would carefully consider and prioritize which
    efforts the CT Bureau could lead or support to address the long-term
    drivers of extremism. Specifically, I would coordinate closely with
    other departments and agencies to coordinate the Department's
    international countering violent extremism (CVE) efforts.

        Question 4. Do you believe that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard
    Corps--not just the Qods Force--should be designated as a Foreign
    Terrorist Organization?

        Answer. My understanding is that the Department of State is
    committed to a whole-of-government approach that ensures appropriate
    action against the IRGC's illicit activities. The administration is
    currently reviewing its overall Iran policy. This review presents the
    U.S. Government with an opportunity to identify additional actions the
    U.S. can undertake to counter the IRGC.
        As an entity of the Iranian Government, my understanding is that
    the IRGC is currently subject to a range of restrictions and sanctions
    that derive from Iran's designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism
    (SST). There are other restrictions and sanctions that impact the IRGC,
    to include: numerous Executive Orders that collectively block Iranian
    property and interests from the U.S. commercial and financial systems,
    and which can have secondary sanctions consequences.
        I am aware that the administration is aggressively targeting Iran's
    destabilizing activities around the world, including its support for
    terrorism, by imposing sanctions on individuals and entities related to
    the IRGC-Qods Force and Iranian proxies like Hizballah and Al-Ashtar
    Brigades, as well as individuals and entities connected to Iran's
    ballistic missile program. Additionally, the State Department has
    recently announced multiple designations and sanctions targeting people
    and entities affiliated with Iran and the IRGC.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Nathan Sales by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democracy has been a top
    priority of mine, both during my government service and as a law
    professor; I believe that it is essential to preserve a durable balance
    between national security needs and the fundamental rights that are a
    bedrock of our democracy. For example, as a policymaker at the
    Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, I worked
    to ensure that new counterterrorism initiatives included concrete and
    specific protections for privacy and civil liberties, such as judicial
    review, congressional oversight, internal audits, and similar
    safeguards. During my time as a law professor, I have sought to instill
    in my students a deep appreciation for this country's basic
    constitutional values, especially the many foreign students I have
    taught over the years. I also have promoted those values overseas, by
    teaching classes and giving to lectures to students, lawyers, and other
    audiences around the world--including in post-Communist countries like
    Georgia, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia--about the rule of law, judicial
    review, and judicial independence. If confirmed, I would bring this
    enduring commitment with me to the State Department.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues related
    to counterterrorism? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy with respect
    to counterterrorism? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. Respect for human rights while combating terrorism is an
    essential part of any successful and sustainable counterterrorism
    strategy. If confirmed, I will ensure that principles of democracy,
    good governance, and human rights protections for all members of
    society are embedded in the CT Bureau's policies and programs.
        An effective approach to countering violent extremism (CVE)
    requires developing an understanding of the factors that may be driving
    individuals towards radicalization and violence. The denial of human
    rights and the inability of citizens to gain redress for grievances
    peacefully are some of the factors that can feed terrorist propaganda
    that seeks to justify violence. Conversely, freedom of speech and
    freedom of religion are important components in efforts in countering
    violent extremism.
        In addition to ensuring the protection of basic human rights, it is
    also important to make sure that the criminal justice system promotes
    and adheres to the rule of law in the course of detecting, disrupting,
    and prosecuting terrorist offenders. Countries need clear legal
    frameworks that are consistently and uniformly applied to all citizens.
    Criminal justice actors, who implement the law, must conduct their work
    in an accountable and transparent manner. Oversight mechanisms must be
    in place to ensure that criminal justice actors and institutions
    operate in accordance with domestic and international laws, including
    protections for human rights.
        In recognition of the important nexus between human rights and
    counterterrorism efforts, if confirmed, I will use diplomatic and
    foreign assistance tools to continue to press for well-functioning law
    enforcement agencies that respect citizens' basic rights; I will ensure
    that human rights are integrated in criminal justice efforts; and I
    will stress the importance of using a range of stakeholders to combat
    terrorism and counter violent extremism.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response?

        Answer. Political will is critical to ensuring that
    counterterrorism measures are carried out in accordance with human
    rights standards. Should I be confirmed, I will make it a priority in
    my dealings with foreign partners to emphasize the importance of a
    strong and enduring commitment to human rights. Another potential
    obstacle may be an insufficient understanding of the critical role that
    human rights play in a sustainable and effective counterterrorism
    approach. A government that regularly transgresses broadly accepted
    human rights standards in its approach to countering terrorism could
    contribute to radicalization. Given the U.S. experience balancing
    security and strong human rights protections under law, we can assist
    governments to improve their understanding and practice on this
    essential issue. If confirmed, I intend to marshal the diplomatic
    weight and resources of allied and other like-minded countries to
    underscore that counterterrorism efforts must be carried out with
    respect for human rights and the rule of law.

        Question 4. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. U.S. Government-funded security assistance initiatives must
    reinforce essential American principles and values, including respect
    for and promotion of human rights. All beneficiaries of such assistance
    must be fully vetted per the guidelines of the Leahy amendment. If
    confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Counterterrorism Bureau fully
    complies with Leahy vetting requirements. I also will emphasize, in my
    diplomatic outreach to counterparts globally, that a commitment to
    strong human rights protections is vital to effective counterterrorism
    practice.

        Question 5 Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention (and
    the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or U.S.
    actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the President's
    business or financial interests, or the business or financial interests
    of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 6. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms or productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that comes from backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups?

        Answer. I agree strongly that a diverse team is a stronger team. If
    confirmed, I will promote diversity across the organization and ensure
    full and equal opportunity for all individuals and voices no matter
    what their backgrounds. In so doing, I will remain committed to the
    following core principles: (1) respect for the dignity of the
    individual, (2) integrity, (3) trust, (4) credibility, (5) continuous
    improvement, and (6) robust and open lines of communication. In setting
    these expectations, I believe this will help to build a well-rounded
    organization. Ensuring access to, interaction with, and opportunity for
    employees of different backgrounds will bring their unique
    perspectives, experiences, and skills to bear on the challenges the CT
    Bureau will face, thereby improving our workforce.

        Question 8. Women have a key role to play in combatting terrorism
    and violent extremism. Unfortunately, women continue to be
    underrepresented in our security sector institutions. What do you plan
    to do to better include women in the security sector and bring in their
    ideas to more effectively counter terrorism?

        Answer. I strongly believe that women play a critical role in
    combatting terrorism and violent extremism, whether as community
    leaders, civil society members, or government officials and security
    sector practitioners. As a father of two young girls, I believe we
    cannot afford to allow women's roles in preventing and countering
    violent extremism to go untapped. Whether as observers, supporters,
    facilitators, preventers, or victims of terrorism, one thing is clear:
    we do a disservice to women, and all of society, if we disregard their
    perspectives in the analysis, research, advocacy, and partnership-
    building that is so essential to the work we do every day to counter
    terrorism and violent extremism. If confirmed, I would lead the CT
    Bureau's efforts to involve women in all of these arenas, particularly
    in key frontline states with active terrorist threats.

        Question 9. How will you ensure that soft power tools are
    sufficiently funded and properly implemented within our overarching CT
    and CVE policies?

        Answer. Countering terrorist narratives, messaging, recruitment,
    and inspiration to violence are critical soft power tools for defeating
    ISIS and other terrorist groups and networks. If confirmed, I am
    committed to working internally, with the interagency, and especially
    internationally to secure support and resources to fund these tools and
    efforts.
        When I feel it is warranted, I will not hesitate to advocate for
    resources to support these tools from within our own government. I also
    plan to encourage other donor countries, host-country governments, and
    local partners to take more responsibility for leading CT and CVE
    efforts; they are best positioned to ensure sustained success. Already,
    the State Department has leveraged hundreds of millions of dollars over
    the last several years from Western European and other donors to fund
    many CVE initiatives and programming around the world. I look forward
    to continuing that work to ensure we and our partners are committed to
    these soft power tools.

        Question 10. Do you believe these tools to be important in our
    fight against terrorism?

        Answer. These tools are a critical part of U.S. counterterrorism
    efforts. CVE is a whole of government and whole of society effort. Non-
    law enforcement, civilian agencies of government play a role in this
    effort--as do cities and municipalities. Women, youth, families,
    educators, social workers, religious leaders, and the private sector
    also need to be engaged in countering violent extremism. Bringing to
    bear the expertise of these diverse elements of society is critical for
    the design and implementation of CVE programming.

        Question 11. Do you agree with the administration's cuts to
    critical components of State's soft-power portfolio?

        Answer. Countering terrorist narratives, messaging, recruitment,
    and inspiration to violence is a critical part of defeating ISIS and
    other terrorist groups and networks. If confirmed, I would work
    internally at the State Department and with the interagency to secure
    support and resources to fund appropriate tools and efforts. In
    addition, my understanding is that the State Department encourages
    other donor countries, host-country governments, and local partners to
    take more responsibility for leading CT and CVE efforts; they are best
    positioned to ensure sustained success. In fact, the Department has
    leveraged hundreds of millions of dollars over the last several years
    from Western European and other donors to fund many countering violent
    extremism initiatives and programming around the world.

        Question 12. We are entering an era where our counterterrorism
    programs and activities have to be both more comprehensive and more
    flexible. The classic al-Qaeda model of centralized direction and
    financing of massive and complicated terror attacks against the West is
    largely obsolete, yielding to ISIL's decentralized, inspirational and
    entrepreneurial model. How should the U.S. adapt to meet these new
    challenges?

        Answer. Today's terrorism landscape is more complex, multi-faceted,
    and localized than ever before. I believe that the evolving terrorist
    landscape, especially given the Defeat-ISIS Coalition's military
    success in Iraq and Syria, will place a new premium on combatting
    terrorism through non-military approaches and will require that our
    partners in key areas have the will and capacities to address
    decentralized, regional terrorist threats. The State Department
    generally and the CT Bureau specifically will have an outsized role to
    play in this effort. If confirmed, I will work to improve the civilian-
    led capabilities--police, border security, prosecutors, and others--of
    key partners to ensure they are able to more effectively confront new
    terrorist trends and tactics. In particular, we and our allies must be
    prepared to address threats by foreign terrorist fighters (FTFs)
    returning from Iraq and Syria as well as by homegrown violent
    extremists (HVEs). Identifying and addressing these types of
    individuals, in the wake of our Coalition's success, will require
    improved capabilities and information sharing among front-line
    partners. If confirmed, I would invest the time and resources to ensure
    the United States and its allies increasingly coordinate and develop
    non-military approaches to identifying and addressing these and other
    emerging threats.

        Question 13. What can the CT Bureau and the State Department do to
    push for those changes?

        Answer. Anticipating new terrorist threats by ISIS and other
    terrorist groups outside of Iraq and Syria, the CT Bureau, working with
    interagency partners, will have to ensure that police, border security,
    prosecutors, and other civilian-led entities in foreign partner
    countries are prepared to counter more attacks by battle-hardened
    foreign terrorist fighters and homegrown violent extremists operating
    in places like Southeast Asia, Western Europe, Africa, and potentially
    the homeland. If confirmed, I will employ diplomacy and targeted
    programmatic assistance to ensure that our partners have the will and
    capacities to address evolving terrorist threats, tactics, and travel.
        If confirmed, I would carefully consider and prioritize which
    efforts the CT Bureau could best led or support to address the long-
    term drivers of extremism. Specifically, I would coordinate closely
    with other departments and agencies to coordinate the Department's
    international CVE efforts.

        Question 14. The administration is attempting to slash the
    resources for US diplomacy and foreign assistance for development
    across the board. Such actions deeply undercut any comprehensive
    strategy and effort to support and inoculate at-risk countries from
    terrorism and extremism. How should the CT Bureau and the State
    Department compensate for that?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson has made clear that countering
    terrorist narratives, messaging, recruitment, and inspiration to
    violence is a critical part of defeating ISIS and other transnational
    terrorist networks. Protecting U.S. national security and countering
    terrorism is the administration's top priority and the CT Bureau's
    budget request reflects this. This funding is critical to sustaining
    gains from the surge of assistance in FY 2016 and FY 2017 and will
    allow the Department to continue to address the rapidly evolving
    terrorist threat. If confirmed, and if I determine that additional
    resources are needed in the future to meet our global counterterrorism
    objectives, I would not hesitate to advocate for them.

                                   __________

                Response to Additional Question for the Record
                Submitted to George Glass by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. Portugal is a NATO ally and houses U.S. forces in the
    Azores. Still, NATO estimates that Portugal spent less than 1.4 percent
    of its GDP on defense, far below the NATO guideline of 2 percent. If
    confirmed, do you intend to encourage the Portuguese Government to
    increase its defense spending?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will press Portugal to meet the 2 percent
    defense spending pledge made at the 2014 Wales Summit and reaffirmed at
    Warsaw in 2016, to spend two percent of GDP on defense, with 20 percent
    of total defense expenditures on major equipment.
        I look forward to seeing Portugal's national plan later this year,
    which should articulate how Portugal will reach the Wales goals.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to George Glass by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. My wife, Mary, and I have served on numerous Educational
    Boards because we both feel deeply that Education is the fundamental
    tool used to defend human rights. (K-12, University, and Medical
    School). However, there are two missions that we serve now that have
    most profoundly affected our lives. We have recently begun working with
    the Catholic Charities organization in Portland Oregon in their Refugee
    Relocation Program and the Backpack for Kids program. In the refugee
    relocation program, hearing the accounts of numerous families and what
    they've been through to finally reach our shores is gut wrenching. The
    dangers, the loss of life, and the struggles of their journeys sets
    everything in perspective regarding how we live and govern in America.
    The impact of our efforts is never enough, but we have been trying to
    help individuals learn English, obtain housing, and find jobs. In the
    backpack for kids program, what we found was in some of the lower
    income level grade schools many kids were showing up Monday morning
    literally starved from lack of food over the weekend. The school we
    work in consists of a high percentage of migrant working families and
    in the off season work for their parents is difficult to find. The
    program consists of the children picking up a backpack Friday
    afternoon's loaded with enough square meals to feed both them and their
    siblings over the weekend. (The backpack is provided so that there is
    no public stigma for the kids regarding ``getting a hand out'' of
    food). This program has gained both religious and corporate sponsorship
    and is now feeding over 70 families at this school alone.

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

        Answer. Portugal has a strong record on human rights, but--like in
    any country--there are areas where improvements can be made. The
    biggest human rights problems in Portugal include excessive use of
    force and abuse of detainees and prisoners by police and prison guards;
    poor, unhealthy, and overcrowded prison conditions; and violence
    against women and children. Some of these issues have been brought to
    light in an ongoing case involving 18 officers of the Portuguese Public
    Security Police (PSP) and their alleged abuse of six black youths.
        Other problems include the incarceration of juveniles with adults,
    denial of legal counsel and family contact to detainees, disregard of
    detainees' rights by the Judiciary Police (PJ), lengthy pre-trial
    detention, detention of asylum seekers, some government corruption, the
    practice of female genital mutilation and cutting (FGM/C) of girls in
    the Bissau-Guinean and other African communities, societal
    discrimination and exclusion against Roma, hindrances to labor
    organizing, trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation and forced
    labor, and a growing gap between pay for men and women.
        If confirmed, I will press Portuguese authorities to work on these
    issues. I will also make clear the United States' support of human
    rights through public and private outreach. Through these actions I
    hope to improve Portugal's already-strong record on human rights.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Portugal in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. In general, Portugal has a strong record on human rights.
    Still, management mechanisms within the justice system need to be
    improved and cultural norms are largely to blame for ongoing violence
    against women and children. Portugal has a good record investigating
    and prosecuting these crimes but, if confirmed, I will work with my
    Portuguese contacts to improve their work in this area.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Republic of Portugal?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I am committed to meeting with all of
    these organizations and, if confirmed, I will continue Mission
    Portugal's close work with these groups. I will also ensure that
    Mission Portugal continues to support the Leahy Law and other
    provisions by maintaining stringent vetting standards and closely
    monitoring all security assistance and cooperation activities.

        Question 5. Will you engage with Portuguese Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will look to continue and expand
    Mission Portugal's proactive interactions with the full spectrum of
    government officials and NGOs dealing with human rights, civil rights
    and governance.

        Question 6. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 7. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Portugal?

        Answer. No. Neither I nor any members of my immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Portugal.

        Question 9. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would foster an open environment by
    encouraging hiring from diverse backgrounds. Enable individuals to
    connect with affinity groups at State to share experience and
    opportunities. Encourage officers with diverse backgrounds to take
    greater leadership roles within the community.

        Question 10. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, some steps that I would I would take to
    ensure that each of the supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an
    environment that's diverse and inclusive include encouraging
    supervisors to enroll in diversity training and being aware of and
    addressing unconscious bias in the workplace.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to George Glass by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. For decades the United States has maintained an air
    force base at Lajes Field in Portugal's Azores Islands as a strategic
    refueling point in the mid-Atlantic. The base's location and extensive
    infrastructure have been essential to the movement of U.S. forces to
    and from Europe and the Middle East.
        This capability remains strategically critical today, but over the
    past several years the Department of Defense has sharply reduced the
    U.S. operations at Lajes. Today there are only about 160 Americans
    there. Portuguese Government officials have said they want the U.S.
    presence to remain. However, Portuguese officials have said that if the
    Pentagon does not continue to use the facilities they could be opened
    to American, European, or Chinese institutes for scientific research.
        Last year Portugal's Prime Minister said that the Azores are ``very
    important both logistically in the Atlantic Ocean but also in terms of
    technology and research, in the field of climate change and deep water
    research.''
        The United States has a historic opportunity to capitalize both
    militarily and economically on a facility that we built in one of the
    most strategically important locations on earth. A U.S. withdrawal
    could open new opportunities for China to gain a political, economic,
    and security foothold in the Atlantic.

       If confirmed, what will you do to work with the Government of
            Portugal to ensure that the United States does not lose the
            opportunity to make full military and civilian use of the
            facilities we have built in the Azores?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to make this issue a priority as I
    believe it is in dire need of attention. While the United States Air
    Force Europe (USAFE) streamlined its presence at Lajes Field, the
    United States remains there. USAFE currently has 165 Americans and 417
    Portuguese working at Lajes Field, for a total of 582 personnel.
        We remain committed to our strategic relationship with Portugal,
    which is far broader and deeper than our presence at Lajes Field. We
    are proud of the increased bilateral military engagement and training
    in recent years, and we support initiatives to continue this positive
    trajectory. We appreciate Portugal's contribution to transatlantic and
    global security.
        We will continue to work with the Department of Defense to ensure
    an open and transparent dialogue with our Portuguese partners in order
    to assist Portugal in addressing economic and political challenges
    caused by the downsizing.

        Question 2. In an effort to cut costs, the Trump administration has
    indicated an interest in examining small diplomatic and consular posts
    with a view to possibly consolidating or eliminating some of them.

       What will be the impact of this process on the U.S. Consulate in
            Ponta Delgada?

        Answer. I understand that State Department staffing and resources
    are under review.  If confirmed, I would make the best use of the
    resources and staffing provided to Mission Portugal in order to serve
    the American people and the interests of the United States.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Carl Risch by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. My most important actions to promote human rights and
    democracy would be my participation in six refugee processing circuit
    rides in four different countries as an officer with U.S. Citizenship
    and Immigration Services (USCIS). In this capacity, I conducted
    hundreds of interviews of refugees being resettled to the United
    States. As part of this process, I recorded hundreds of instances of
    human rights abuses, persecution, and torture on account of race,
    religion, nationality, political opinion, and membership in a
    particular social group. The impact of these actions was the permanent
    resettlement of victims of persecution to the United States, where they
    could start new lives and contribute to our nation.
        In addition to my refugee work, I have promoted democracy through
    my cooperation with the U.S. military to naturalize hundreds of active
    duty service members, and their spouses, during their service overseas.
    Working with the military, we provided new citizens with information on
    voting, travel, and other rights and obligations associated with being
    citizens of the United States.

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

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

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

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

        Question 4. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What is your plan to ensure that the
    workforce in your Bureau, at all levels, is diverse, and how do you
    plan to ensure supervisors and managers are equipped to manage their
    teams effectively?

        Answer. The Department of State's Statement on Diversity and Equal
    Employment Opportunity underscores that our workforce must reflect the
    rich composition of our citizenry. ``The skills, knowledge,
    perspectives, ideas, and experiences of all its employees contribute to
    the vitality and success of the global mission,'' it continues. I agree
    that diversity improves businesses and teams in many ways, and, if
    confirmed, I intend to ensure that the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA)
    continues and enhances its current focus on the importance of diversity
    and inclusion in our workforce.
        In accordance with the Department's Diversity and Inclusion
    Strategic plan, CA's Executive Office (CA/EX) has taken steps to
    promote diversity, not only in recruiting and hiring qualified
    candidates from a multitude of backgrounds, but also in providing
    opportunities for career advancement for all employees. Further, CA's
    Bureau Training Team held a training session on diversity and inclusion
    in partnership with the senior leadership of the Office of Civil Rights
    in January of this year.
        With regards to hiring, Human Resource Specialists and all hiring
    managers in the Bureau currently are required to complete training on
    federal hiring procedures such as the Merit System Principles (MSP) and
    Prohibited Personnel Practices (PPP), ensuring that CA adheres to
    federal regulations in promoting diversity among prospective
    candidates. The Bureau has utilized special hiring programs such as
    Veterans' Recruitment Appointment (VRA), Schedule A appointments, and
    the Pathways Programs to recruit and retain employees from a diverse
    array of backgrounds. Currently, CA's workforce is 55 percent female,
    61 percent white, 22 percent African American, 10 percent Hispanic, 6
    percent Asian, and 10 percent have a disclosed disability, making the
    Bureau one of the most diverse bureaus in the Department. In addition,
    CA prides itself on its regional diversity, a benefit of having
    passport agencies and visa and passport centers across the country.
        CA aims to promote diversity in supervisory and managerial
    positions through offering professional development opportunities and
    training to all levels of its bureaucracy. The Bureau accomplishes this
    not only through the Department's Foreign Service Institute, but also
    through its own Training Team located in the Human Resources Division,
    working directly with employees and leadership to address the Bureau's
    unique challenges with creative training solutions. By offering a
    multitude of learning and development opportunities across the Bureau,
    CA strives to offer career advancement for all CA employees and
    encourage diversity in senior-level positions. Furthermore, CA actively
    pursues diversity and sensitivity training for its current supervisors
    and managers, primarily through its Consular Managers Human Resources
    Workshop which highlights inclusion, sensitivity training, and
    promoting the benefits of diversity in the workplace.

        Question 5. The federal workforce has made progress in hiring
    diverse professionals in most agencies. There is, however, work that
    remains to be done in order to cultivate work environments where all
    employees feel valued and included. What plans do you have to ensure
    your Bureau leverages the diversity of its employees and develops an
    inclusive work environment?

        Answer. The Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) recognizes, and I
    personally firmly believe in, the benefits of a diverse and inclusive
    workforce. If confirmed, I will build upon the groundwork already laid
    to enhance and further leverage the diversity and inclusive work
    environment of the entire Bureau.
        In line with the Department's Diversity and Inclusion Strategic
    Plan, CA has taken tangible steps to promote diversity in both hiring
    and learning and development. In addition to hiring a diverse
    workforce, CA's Bureau Training Team works to highlight the benefits of
    workplace diversity through various learning and development
    opportunities. This includes providing hiring managers training on the
    Merit System Principles and Prohibited Personnel Practices,
    coordinating diversity and inclusion training opportunities with the
    Department's Office of Civil Rights, and providing supervisors with
    ample training on proper management, workplace sensitivity, and
    promoting inclusion in their offices. In addition, employees are
    encouraged, and in some cases mandated, to take Foreign Service
    Institute (FSI) courses that foster diversity and inclusion. For
    example, FSI offers trainings to help managers identify the
    commonalities and differences across generations that in turn promote
    creativity and differing ideas within the Department.
        CA has created Leadership and Management Tenets that set forth
    clear expectations to guide all aspects of our work and in the way we
    interact with our colleagues. CA strives to ensure all consular
    supervisors hold themselves accountable for modeling these tenets and
    consular professionals at all levels are encouraged to cultivate the
    qualities embodied in these tenets and integrate them into their
    approach to work.

        Question 6. Members of the Foreign Service who are Lesbian, Gay,
    Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, and Intersex (LGBTQI) do
    not receive the same equal treatment as their fellows Foreign Service
    personnel when they are assigned to countries that do not recognize
    same-sex marriage. The spouses and partners of these FSOs are unable to
    attain spousal Visas, even though the State Department provides full
    benefits to the diplomats coming to the United States from these
    countries. If you are confirmed, will you commit to producing a report
    on countries not issuing visas to the spouses or partners of all
    Foreign Service personnel posted overseas due to their sexual
    orientation? Additionally, will you work to find a solution to this
    problem, including eliminating visa reciprocity with countries found to
    be instituting these practices against the spouses of Foreign Service
    personnel in order to ensure that all spouses of Foreign Service
    personnel receive visas for the country to which their spouse is
    assigned, regardless of sexual orientation?

        Answer. As Secretary Tillerson said in a statement recognizing
    LGBTQI Pride Month, ``Dignity and equality for all persons are among
    our founding constitutional principles, and these principles continue
    to drive U.S. diplomacy.'' If confirmed, I will work to continue the
    push for dignity and equality for all persons, including our LGBTQI
    Foreign Service personnel who face reciprocity issues with host nations
    as we deploy our personnel around the globe. I will work with the
    Department's Bureau of Human Resources--the leader on LGBTQI
    accreditation issues--Congress, social groups, and the LGBTQI community
    of Foreign Service personnel to seek ways to ensure their rights are
    respected.
        As a matter of current practice, the Department seeks to accredit
    same-sex domestic partners from countries that reciprocally accredit
    U.S. same-sex domestic partners. If confirmed, I will ensure the
    Department continues to keep reciprocity at the center of its response
    to this important issue for the Foreign Service community.

        Question 7. Will you commit to ensuring that the core operations
    and functions of the Bureau of Consular Affairs, particularly the visa-
    issuing functions, remain with the State Department and the Bureau, and
    will not be transferred to another department or agency?

        Answer. I do not support moving the core operations and functions
    of the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA), out of the State Department. As
    the Secretary has noted, CA is vitally important to our mission at the
    Department of State, and consular work is essential to the Department's
    mission highest priority--to secure our borders and protect the
    American people.
        The Department's unique experience and skills in dealing with
    foreign governments, cultures, and languages add a critical layer to
    our border security. Decisions on passport and visa operations can have
    profound implications for foreign and economic policy in addition to
    security. By having a seat at the table on border security issues, the
    Secretary of State can ensure all equities are presented for the
    President's consideration. The Department's cadre of language qualified
    Foreign Service Officers, Consular Fellows, Civil Servants, and Local
    Employees bring broad knowledge of regional and local cultures to visa
    and passport decisions. It would be costly, time-consuming, and
    duplicative to develop a separate corps in another department or agency
    to do this work when State is already proficient in this field.
    Transfer of these functions would also weaken the Secretary's ability
    to fulfill the responsibility for the security of U.S. citizens abroad.
        U.S. border security depends on a system of ``layered defense'' for
    maximum effectiveness, and the current system of vetting and
    adjudicating visas has built-in checks and balances that strengthen our
    national security. DHS sets visa policy, CA vets applicants' biometric
    and biographic data against U.S. law enforcement and intelligence
    community databases, and Consular officers review the vetting results
    and use their expertise to interview applicants and determine their
    eligibility for a visa, seeking input from CA, as appropriate. For
    example, when a visa applicant raises potential security concerns,
    consular officers are required to request Security Advisory Opinions.
    That process involves a hands-on review by a Visa Office analyst, after
    the analyst has collected input from relevant interagency partners and
    other components of the State Department, as appropriate. When an
    application raises legal questions or questions about the appropriate
    visa classification, the adjudicating consular officer may reach back
    to a team of lawyers in the Visa Office who are dedicated to addressing
    those questions. When fraud is suspected, in addition to fraud
    prevention expertise and tools available at the overseas post, consular
    officers may reach back to CA's Office of Fraud Prevention Programs
    analysts and subject matter experts to assist with complex or
    multinational fraud cases.
        If the intending traveler is found eligible and issued a visa, DHS
    then vets inbound passengers before they board flights, and at U.S.
    ports of entry. Visa and passport data is widely shared with law
    enforcement and intelligence agencies, and all visas are subject to
    continuous interagency vetting, which can lead to the Visa Office
    revoking the visa at any time, if information arises after issuance
    suggesting the visa holder may no longer eligible for the visa. This
    layering and sharing of responsibilities ensures complete and careful
    attention to security, foreign policy, economic and other dimensions of
    visa-issuance decisions.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                  to Krishna Urs by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Over the course of 31 years in the Foreign Service, I have
    worked to promote human rights in many different contexts and
    countries. At one point in my career, I advocated for and prepared a
    statement issued by the Department of State calling for an end to
    spiraling political violence involving security forces and a specific
    political party in one country. In several countries, I worked with
    national and local governments to establish safe houses for victims of
    human trafficking and to step up awareness campaigns about trafficking
    in persons. At my urging, the U.S. Government ended all assistance to a
    national police force in one country in which I served due to our
    concerns about the use of extrajudicial killings as a crime prevention
    tactic. In several countries, I advocated public statements by the
    Embassy to highlight areas of eroding respect by foreign governments of
    democratic institutions and norms.
        My actions in support of human rights over the course of my career
    produced concrete results. To provide just a few examples--our
    statement decrying spiraling political violence involving security
    forces resulted (at least temporarily) in fewer exchanges of gunfire
    involving the police. After we cut off assistance to the police in
    another country, the Government replaced the police chief (who had been
    linked to human rights abuses) with another official publicly committed
    to protecting human rights. Our statements in support of democracy
    served as encouragement to like-minded allies in the local society,
    helping to protect institutions and norms.

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

        Answer. Our close relationship with Peru is built on shared
    interests and values, including the importance of human rights. Peru
    has made significant strides in support of human rights since the end
    of its 20 year internal conflict in 2000. Human rights challenges,
    however, persist in the areas of violence against women and children,
    trafficking in persons, and discrimination against Afro-Peruvians,
    Indigenous persons, and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and
    Intersex (LGBTI) persons. Corruption enables an environment allowing
    these and other human rights challenges to exist.
        If confirmed, I will use all the tools at my disposal to assist
    Peru in addressing its human rights challenges.
        By working together to promote human rights, social inclusion, and
    poverty reduction, we can achieve a more prosperous, inclusive, and
    democratic future for Peru.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Peru in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The Peruvian Government has shown a commitment to address
    many human rights challenges. If confirmed, I will encourage the
    Peruvian Government to continue its efforts to improve social inclusion
    and respect for human rights, seek opportunities for public-private
    partnerships toward this end, and cooperate with non-governmental
    organizations to multiply the effect of our assistance.
        I will work with Peru's Government to combat corruption, which can
    exacerbate social conflict, enable human rights abuses, and undermine
    confidence in government institutions.
        If confirmed, one of the challenges I will face will be to help the
    Peruvian Government and civil society find new ways to include the
    country's historically marginalized communities in Peru's economic
    success story.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Peru?

        Answer. Yes. Developing strong relationships with human rights
    advocates, civil society, and non-governmental organizations is one of
    the cornerstones of our partnership with the Peruvian people. If
    confirmed, I will continue the United States' longstanding practice of
    closely engaging Peruvian civil society to ensure I am fully attuned to
    Peru's human rights landscape. I will work closely with the Peruvian
    Government, civil society, and all relevant agencies of the U.S.
    Government to ensure every dollar of U.S. assistance is used wisely and
    in accordance with our human rights goals and the Leahy Law.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. As a U.S. Government employee with 31 years standing, I am
    firmly committed to implementing all relevant U.S. laws and
    regulations, including the Leahy law, when fulfilling my duties. If
    confirmed, I will work to ensure no assistance is provided to foreign
    security force units where the Department has credible information that
    such units engaged in gross violations of human rights, in accordance
    with the Leahy law. I will also work to ensure the U.S. Mission in Peru
    works with the Government of Peru to help them take effective steps to
    bring those responsible for any violations of human rights to justice.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Peruvian Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will engage the Peruvian Government
    and civil society on human rights, civil rights, and democratic
    governance. Peru has a critical role to play in encouraging regional
    stability and is an important partner of the United States.
        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Peru?

        Answer. No. Neither I, nor any members of my immediate family, have
    financial interests in the Republic of Peru.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am a strong believer in the value of diverse teams in
    identifying, analyzing, and addressing issues and problems. Diversity
    helps prevent ``groupthink,'' ensuring that issues get a thorough
    examination from all possible perspectives and making sure that all
    viable options are explored. If confirmed, I can assure you that I will
    take diversity into consideration in filling high level positions at
    the U.S. Mission in Lima, as I have done in past assignments. I am
    committed to mentoring for all staff members, but especially for those
    from diverse backgrounds and under-represented groups.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with each member of my country
    team to ensure they are giving proper consideration to assembling a
    diverse and representative team. I will also ensure country team
    members understand their responsibility to provide mentoring and
    guidance to mid-level and junior members of their teams, with specific
    emphasis on diverse and under-represented groups.

        Question 12. Earlier this year, Peru issued a new decree to
    establish a payment process to service longstanding debt related to
    agrarian reform bonds. Numerous U.S. firms and citizens hold an
    interest in these bonds, including several Maryland pension plans. If
    confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Peru, will you commit to
    working with the Peruvian Government to achieve a final resolution of
    this issue? Will you work with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
    Commission and the Department of the Treasury to ensure that they have
    accurate information about the amount owed on the bonds?

        Answer. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Peru, I look
    forward to learning the details of this complicated case. I fully
    commit to engaging with the Government of Peru to press for a fair and
    timely resolution of these complex issues. I understand the independent
    regulator with jurisdiction over Peru's U.S. law bonds, the Securities
    and Exchange Commission, has been asked for views on this case, and I
    will follow up. I will also engage Treasury for its views on the
    appropriate treatment of these particular domestic obligations in
    national economic statistics. I understand there is considerable debate
    on the appropriate valuation of these securities, the resolution of
    which could impact on the value of other U.S. investors' holdings of
    Peru's domestic and international debts, and I will press for a speedy
    resolution of the related methodological issues.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:20 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Rubio [presiding] and Menendez.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Rubio. Thank you all for being here. My apologies.
    We were at a meeting at the White House.
        This meeting on the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
    will come to order.
        Again, I apologize to our nominees. We were at the White
    House. It took a few minutes to get here and my apologies to
    the ranking member.
        With that, I am going to defer my opening statement in the
    interest of your time and that of the ranking member and just
    defer to him, if he has an opening statement.

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

        Senator Menendez. Well, Mr. Chairman, in the interest of
    time, I am going to keep it really brief compared to what I
    normally would do, not that it is long, but I am going to keep
    this one really brief.
        I will just say that, as we often do on this committee,
    despite our presence, we overlook the western hemisphere. But
    on migration, trade, and national security what happens in our
    own hemisphere impacts us here in the United States most
    directly. So it is critical that we have capable, experienced
    professionals representing the United States in our embassies
    in the hemisphere. So to our career nominees, we salute your
    service and we welcome your insight, and, Ms. Day, we look
    forward to hearing from you as well.
        And I will defer the rest, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you to the ranking member. And again,
    my apologies for it. I hate being late.
        With that, let me introduce the nominees. I will introduce
    you for your opening statements, and then we can go into
    questions.
        Obviously, we have one panel testifying today: the
    Honorable Luis Arreaga of Virginia to be the Ambassador to
    Guatemala; Ms. Sharon Day of Florida to be the Ambassador to
    Costa Rica; and Mr. Krishna Urs to be the Ambassador to Peru.
    They all have impressive resumes.
        Mr. Arreaga was appointed Principal Deputy Assistant
    Secretary of State for the Bureau of International Narcotics
    and Law Enforcement in January 2016. He is responsible for the
    State Department's programs combating illicit drugs and
    organized crime.
        Ms. Day is someone I know personally and known for a
    significant period of time. She is a dedicated person. She is a
    hard worker. She is a friend and someone that under different
    circumstances I would be at the table presenting her, but we
    are up here. So I am presenting you now. I am happy you are
    here today. I am encouraged that the President nominated you,
    and I know, if confirmed, you will represent our country well
    in Costa Rica.
        Krishna Urs has served the Department of State and the
    American people for more than 31 years, and that includes posts
    in the Dominican Republic, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Mexico. He
    has served as the Director of the Office of Economic Policy in
    the Bureau of Western Hemisphere affairs, and given his wealth
    of experience in the region, we are encouraged today to hear
    from him about his views on how to lead this embassy.
        We thank you all for being here today. And we will begin
    with Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you.

    STATEMENT OF HON. LUIS E. ARREAGA, OF VIRGINIA, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
     BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
             STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA

        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
    Ranking Member Menendez. I am honored to appear before you as
    President Trump's nominee to serve as United States Ambassador
    to Guatemala.
        If you allow me to indulge a bit, I would like to
    acknowledge my wife Mary, to whom I owe everything, and my
    beloved family who are here with me today back here somewhere.
        If confirmed by the Senate, I will work with the Congress
    and our Guatemalan partners to meet the commitments made by
    President Jimmy Morales and Vice President Pence in mid-June
    when they met in Miami.
        Our common agenda has three pillars: prosperity,
    governance, and security. Of particular note will be an
    emphasis on fighting corruption, narcotrafficking, gangs,
    trafficking in persons, and strengthening the rule of law. If
    confirmed, I will also work to create conditions to attract
    investment and to protect human rights, labor rights, and
    advance health, nutrition, and education, especially in the
    western highlands of Guatemala.
        Ultimately, however, my duty will be first and foremost to
    the American people.
        I thank you for the privilege of appearing today and
    welcome your questions.
        [Ambassador Arreaga's prepared station follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Luis Arreaga

        Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear
    before you as President Trump's nominee to serve as the United States
    Ambassador to the Republic of Guatemala. I am deeply grateful for the
    trust the President and Secretary Tillerson have placed in me. If
    confirmed by the Senate, I will work with the Congress to advance our
    interests in Guatemala.
        If you allow me to indulge, I am an immigrant born to a migrant
    worker and an elementary public school teacher whose sacrifice and
    teachings inspired me to come to this great nation and earn the
    privilege of becoming one of its adopted citizens. I have many people
    to thank for this moment and I cannot name them all. I do want,
    however, to single out my beloved family, for they have been a source
    of inspiration and indispensable support. Foremost is my wife Mary, to
    whom I owe everything. My children are here to share this special
    moment. They include my daughter Melania, who is also a Foreign Service
    Officer, my son-in-law Vince, grandchildren Elena and Sebastian, and my
    sons Juan Carlos and Luis.
        I previously had the privilege of serving as the U.S. Ambassador to
    the Republic of Iceland, so I understand what is required to represent
    the United States abroad. I have served in Latin America, Europe, and
    Canada as an economist and diplomat and have great respect for the
    importance of working with strong U.S. allies to protect our nation and
    the American people.
        The United States and Guatemala have strong relations. These are
    rooted in common interests and people-to-people connections that go
    back generations. We work closely with our Guatemalan partners to
    promote prosperity, good governance, and security all of which are in
    the interest of our country.
        Our engagement is at the highest levels. Vice President Pence,
    Secretary Tillerson, and Secretary Kelly met with Guatemalan President
    Jimmy Morales and his team in Miami at the Conference on Prosperity and
    Security in Central America. At that meeting, we pledged to work
    together to promote investment and facilitate sustainable growth, and
    to combat corruption, narcotics trafficking, gangs, and transnational
    criminal organizations, all of which undermine stability there,
    threaten our country, and drive fleeing migrants to the United States.
        If confirmed, I will work tirelessly with our partners in Guatemala
    to comply with these commitments. I look forward to expanding our
    programs on information sharing and capacity building that strengthen
    border security, dismantle criminal networks, and stem the tide of
    violence affecting the region. A safer and more secure Guatemala will
    have a positive effect on communities in both of our countries. Our
    work will also include programming that strengthens the rule of law,
    transparency, accountability, and especially the protection of human
    rights.
        Security cooperation is just one part of our joint strategy. If
    confirmed, I will also strive to foster sustainable economic growth in
    Guatemala. By supporting efforts to facilitate trade, promote
    education, and minimize red tape, we can improve the business climate,
    spark investment, and help to reduce unemployment. We'll continue our
    emphasis on the Western Highlands, where most of the migrants
    originate. We seek to create opportunities that benefit both
    Guatemalans and U.S. businesses looking to engage in the region.
        Underlying all these efforts is a commitment by both governments to
    fight corruption and build upon the successful efforts by President
    Morales, CICIG, and the Attorney General to end impunity.
        Let me conclude, by reiterating that, if confirmed, my duty would
    be, first and foremost, to the American people. There is much to be
    gained through cooperation with Guatemala as our safety and security
    are inextricably linked. In this role, I will be vigilant in protecting
    the interests of American citizens, both abroad and at home.
        I thank you for the privilege of appearing today and welcome your
    questions.

        Senator Rubio. We thank you.
        Ms. Day, welcome and it is great to see you here.

         STATEMENT OF SHARON DAY, OF FLORIDA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                 AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA

        Ms. Day. Senator Rubio and Senator Menendez, it is my honor
    to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    represent the United States as Ambassador to the Republic of
    Costa Rica.
        I am humbled by both President Trump and Secretary of State
    Tillerson's trust, and I am mindful of the responsibilities
    that are being asked of me to share our country's principles of
    freedom and democracy and to protect our mission family and all
    Americans in country.
        I want to thank my loved ones, my family and friends, for
    their love, support, and guidance and especially for all their
    encouragement on this journey. I have been blessed to witness
    firsthand Costa Rica's natural beauty and her biodiversity, its
    rich culture and the kindness of its people.
        The United States and Costa Rica share a long and close
    relationship that centers on both our countries' commitments to
    democratic principles, strong commercial ties, and the
    relationship between our people. The strong bilateral
    relationship between our two countries is strengthened by our
    longstanding and meaningful ties, which are something I have
    witnessed firsthand in my home State of Florida.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with our
    professional embassy team and to continue to build on the long
    history of bilateral cooperation on regional and global issues.
        Thank you for your time and your consideration, and I look
    forward to your questions.
        [Ms. Day's prepared statement follows:]

                        Prepared Statement of Sharon Day

        Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Menendez, and members of the
    committee, It is my honor to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to represent the United States as Ambassador to the
    Republic of Costa Rica. I am humbled by the President's trust and I am
    also very mindful of the responsibilities that are being asked of me--
    to both share our country's principles of freedom and democracy, and
    protect our Costa Rica Mission family and all Americans in country. I
    want to emphasize that, if confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Costa Rica;
    my duty would be, first and foremost, to the American people.
        I want to thank my loved ones and my family--my mother, Mary
    Swartz, my son, Coby, his wife Stephanie, my beautiful grand babies
    Aidan, Tristan, and Maci, my sisters and brothers, and my stepson Aaron
    Day and his family. I also want to thank my friends who have helped
    guide me on my journeys and successes. And to my late husband, Larry,
    thank you for always encouraging and believing that all things were
    possible for me. Our loved ones pay the biggest price for our passion
    of serving, and I will always be thankful for their love and support.
        I sit before you today mindful and appreciative of the journey my
    life has taken. I am thankful for the opportunities and the
    understanding that in our country anything is possible. I grew up in
    San Antonio, Texas in a middle class family--my dad was an electrician
    and my mom was a stay at home Mom. We weren't rich with money, but I
    was rich by the principles that I was taught--that hard work matters--
    that honesty matters--that lying about a misdeed was worse than the
    deed itself--to have respect for every individual, in fact, even today
    I say ``sir'' or ``ma'am'' to everyone I meet in person or that I may
    come in contact with--it was instilled in me that you can do anything
    you put your mind to--and no dream was too big if you had an education.
    My home was also where I learned you can have very divergent beliefs--
    very different political philosophies--and you can also sometimes have
    loud discussions while still being united in ways that really matter
    and count because you see, as I mentioned my dad was a union
    electrician and also a Democrat while my mom was a Republican.
        I thank you for the opportunity to share the principles that have
    been instilled in my life. I could have never imagined or dreamed that
    I would be sitting before you today as the nominee for United States
    Ambassador to the Republic of Costa Rica.
        I have travelled to Costa Rica and witnessed firsthand its world-
    renowned natural beauty and biodiversity, its rich cultural and
    historical attractions, and the kindness of its people. The United
    States and Costa Rica share a long and close relationship that centers
    on our commitment to democratic principles, strong commercial ties, and
    the relationships between our people. The strong bi-lateral
    relationship between our two countries is strengthened by our
    longstanding and meaningful people-to-people ties which is something I
    have witnessed firsthand in my home state of Florida. Costa Rica is a
    key tourist destination for my fellow Americans with over a million
    visitors annually and the number one destination for U.S. students
    studying abroad in Latin America. If confirmed, I look forward to
    continuing to build on our long history of bilateral cooperation, as
    well as cooperation on regional and global issues.
        The administration is engaging with Costa Rica at the highest
    levels. In March, Vice President Mike Pence welcomed President Luis
    Guillermo Solis to the White House. In June, Secretary of State Rex
    Tillerson met with his counterpart, Foreign Minister Manuel Gonzalez
    Sanz, at the Conference on Prosperity and Security in Central America
    in Miami.
        This early engagement is emblematic of the close and cooperative
    relationship the U.S. Embassy in San Jose has established with
    President Solis and his administration. If confirmed, I would promote
    U.S. policy in three priority areas:

     1. Working with Costa Rica to ensure U.S. citizen visitors and
            residents are safe;
     2. Improving the capacity of the Costa Rican Government to disrupt the
            northward flow of illicit drugs and illegal migrants through
            Costa Rica to the United States; and
     3. Supporting Costa Rica's efforts to strengthen its economy and
            improve its business climate, which will provide greater
            opportunities for U.S. companies.

        If confirmed, I will work with our Costa Rican partners to help the
    country disrupt trafficking and smuggling operations of people and
    goods in order to ensure that organized crime does not destabilize the
    country's democratic institutions. Costa Rica has already proven to be
    an excellent, willing partner with the United States in these efforts.
    A safe and secure Costa Rica is beneficial for both the U.S. citizens
    who visit this beautiful country, and for those who call Costa Rica
    home.
        Additionally, if confirmed, I would focus on expanding and
    deepening the economic ties between our nations. Improving the Costa
    Rican business climate would give U.S. businesses greater export and
    investment opportunities.
        We talk of the American dream. Today I am the embodiment of the
    American dream. The principles and values that my parents instilled in
    me are the ideals that make America great and it is these beliefs that
    will serve me well in the important role for which I am asking your
    consideration and support--the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Costa
    Rica.
        Thank you for your time and consideration, and I look forward to
    your questions.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Mr. Urs?

    STATEMENT OF KRISHNA R. URS, OF CONNECTICUT, A CAREER MEMBER OF
     THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSEL, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
               STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF PERU

        Mr. Urs. Thank you, Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member
    Menendez. It is a great honor to appear before you today as
    President Trump's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the
    Republic of Peru.
        I am very pleased also to have family members with me: my
    wife, Denise, who is also everything to me, and my son David.
    Unfortunately, my daughter Katie could not be here today.
        The Republic of Peru is a steadfast partner in a sometimes
    turbulent region. Successive Peruvian administrations have
    pursued market-based economic and trade policies yielding 2
    decades of robust, inclusive growth. As Peru's economy has
    boomed, the country has taken a more active role
    internationally, leading efforts to resolve Venezuela's current
    crisis and agreeing to host the Summit of the Americas in April
    2018.
        But some significant challenges remain. Transnational
    organized crime, persistent rural poverty, weak institutions,
    environmental degradation, and endemic corruption threaten the
    country's progress.
        In President Kuczynski and his government, we have a strong
    partner. U.S. Government programs in the country advance U.S.
    priorities by supporting Peru's efforts to combat transnational
    criminal networks, address remaining pockets of poverty, and
    halt environmental degradation.
        Mr. Chairman, for many of the 31 years that I have been in
    the Foreign Service, I have been fortunate to work on western
    hemisphere issues. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    our truly extraordinary U.S. mission team in Peru to advance
    our interests, ensure the safety and welfare of all Americans
    and U.S. Government employees, and to further strengthen
    bilateral relations. I look forward to working with the
    committee in the furtherance of these goals.
        I am happy to answer any questions now or in the future.
        [Mr. Urs's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Krishna R. Urs

        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: It is an honor to appear
    before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador
    to the Republic of Peru. If confirmed, I will work closely with this
    committee and other interested Members of Congress to advance U.S.
    interests and values in Peru and to help the Peruvian people move
    towards a prosperous, inclusive, and democratic future.
        Accompanying me here today is my wife Denise, who is also a senior
    Foreign Service Officer, and my children, Katie and David, who have
    come from Oklahoma and Madrid respectively.
        The Republic of Peru, with a population of more than 30 million, is
    one of the United States' most steadfast partners in a sometimes
    turbulent region. Successive Peruvian administrations, including both
    center-right and center-left governments, have pursued market-based
    economic policies yielding two decades of robust and inclusive economic
    growth. Peru has cut poverty rates in half, reduced infant mortality,
    and expanded access to education.
        Peru has staked its future on expanding international trade and the
    U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement spurred an increase in bilateral
    trade from some $9 billion in 2009 to more than $14 billion in 2016.
    The United States enjoys a cumulative surplus of more than $18 billion.
    As Peru's economy has boomed, it has taken a more active role in the
    region and the world. The Government of Peru has been a leader in
    efforts to find a solution to the crisis in Venezuela. Peru hosted the
    APEC Economic Leaders Meeting in 2016, and it will host the Summit of
    the Americas in April 2018.
        But even as Peru has emerged as a regional leader and staunch
    partner, it still faces challenges. Transnational organized crime,
    persistent rural poverty, weak institutions, and endemic corruption
    threaten the country's progress. Peru remains among the world's largest
    coca and cocaine producing countries. Environmental degradation
    associated with illegal drug production, logging, and mining is a
    serious concern.
        The United States is committed to partnering with Peru to address
    threats to our common security. In President Kuczynski and his
    government, we have a strong partner. U.S. Government programs in the
    country advance U.S. priorities by supporting Peru's efforts to combat
    transnational criminal networks. We also support Peruvian Government
    efforts to overcome persistent rural poverty and improve the livelihood
    of marginalized populations.
        Mr. Chairman, for much of my 31 years in the Foreign Service, I
    have been fortunate to work on Western Hemisphere issues. I had the
    privilege of serving four years as Economic Counselor in Lima, from
    1996 to 2000. I also served as Deputy Chief of Mission in its Andean
    neighbor, Bolivia. Prior to my Foreign Service career, I spent my
    junior year in college studying in Quito, Ecuador. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with our truly extraordinary U.S. Mission team in
    Peru to advance U.S. interests, to ensure the safety and welfare of all
    Americans and U.S. Government employees, and to further strengthen
    bilateral relations with the Republic of Peru. I look forward to
    working with the committee in furtherance of these goals, and I am
    happy to answer any questions you might have, now or in the future.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you all for being here.
        I am going to begin with just two questions to all three of
    you. The answers I do not think will take long, and then I am
    going to turn it over to the ranking member for his series of
    questions.
        The first question is, as many of you are aware, the
    President recently announced a change in policy towards Cuba.
    As we know, U.S. policy towards Cuba has often been a point of
    contention with our friends and allies in the western
    hemisphere. And I just want the assurances of each of you that
    irrespective of whatever personal views you may have about that
    policy, are you prepared, willing, able, and determined to
    defend the policy decisions of this administration in our
    interactions with the countries in which you will be
    representing the United States? Ambassador Arreaga?
        Ambassador Arreaga. Senator, you can count on me in terms
    of supporting all of the President's policies, regardless of
    what I think personally.
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And yes, I
    will.
        Mr. Urs. Thank you for the question, Senator, and I will as
    well.
        Senator Rubio. The second challenge in the hemisphere, as
    we are all aware of, is the deteriorating situation in
    Venezuela. It is my sincerest hope that, in combination with
    the countries that each of you, if confirmed, will be serving,
    along with the other four G5 nations in the hemisphere, Mexico,
    Canada, Brazil, and Argentina, we can pursue a way forward that
    restores the democratic order in Venezuela in a way that we
    hope is peaceful and leads to reconciliation. It is our hope
    that that can be done in conjunction with our partners in the
    region. It is possible, however, that the administration, as
    they have signaled, are prepared to act unilaterally, if
    necessary, should the illegal and unconstitutional assembly in
    Venezuela move forward on the 30th of July.
        Are each of you committed and prepared, able, and willing
    to defend such unilateral measures on the part of the
    administration if that is the direction they go with regard to
    punishing those responsible for basically trying to nullify the
    democratic process in Venezuela?
        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you for your question. The answer
    is yes.
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator. And, of course, we will do all
    we can to confirm democracy and freedom across the globe.
        Mr. Urs. Thank you, Chairman. Yes, absolutely.
        Senator Rubio. The ranking member.
        Senator Menendez. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I got worried that somehow the lunch consumed you.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. So I am glad to see that you are back
    with us, and we are happy to be here with you.
        Congratulations to all of the nominees. It is a significant
    honor to be nominated to be the United States Ambassador to any
    country in the world. And so we congratulate you and all of
    your families because families are part of the sacrifice that
    is made here, and so we appreciate your families being here.
        Let me start with you, Ms. Day. So what is your view--I ask
    these questions of all of the nominees. I am going to turn
    around and ask each one of them because I am creating a
    historical precedent here or following a historical precedent,
    led by others, not that I believe in it, but I want to make
    sure we continue it.
        So you said you visited Costa Rica.
        Ms. Day. Yes, Senator, I have.
        Senator Menendez. Do you speak Spanish?
        Ms. Day. I do not, Senator.
        Senator Menendez. So that is not disqualifying as far as I
    am concerned, but for some it has been for other nominees.
        Let me ask you what do you see as the main items that you
    will be engaged in as our U.S. Ambassador in Costa Rica? What
    do you see as the top three things that your mission will be,
    if you are confirmed?
        Ms. Day. I think the top issue is to make sure that the
    mission runs in a manner that is the best use of our taxpayers'
    dollars and the opportunity to promote the safety and security
    of not just our friends and staff and members of the mission
    team, but also all Americans in country, and then to help with
    security issues to protect--Costa Rica to protect its borders
    and stop the infrastructure that is happening with narcotics.
        Senator Menendez. So what is your evaluation of--I do not
    know if you have had any briefings about the U.S.-Costa Rican
    joint patrol agreement that we have been involved in
    intercepting illicit narcotics destined for the United States.
    Have you had a chance to be briefed on that? Do you have any
    sense of it?
        Ms. Day. I have had some briefing information on it,
    Senator. Thank you for your question. The one instance that we
    do, it is a very great bilateral partnership with Costa Rica.
    They understand the importance of security in their countries
    and the problems that narcotics coming into its country for
    transportation and warehousing is an important issue. And they
    work very strongly with us, as well as the information and the
    staffing, the tools, the training, and the equipment that the
    United States is giving to Costa Rica for this cause.
        Senator Menendez. Now, Costa Rica has borne part of a
    significant share of addressing the crisis of unaccompanied
    minors from Central America. The last administration developed
    a comprehensive strategy for engagement in Central America that
    was largely in line with something we called the Alliance for
    Prosperity. How do you believe the United States should be
    engaged with Costa Rica as it relates to this question of
    within Central America, since it is one of the key Central
    American countries, and with the question of the flow of
    migrants?
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        If confirmed, we will continue to work with the mission to
    make sure this happens. Costa Rica understands that there is an
    issue there, and from that end of it, we have worked very hard
    with the United States again with the training, with judicial
    training, some again efforts in place and systems in place to
    help those that have been trafficked to protection of it. So we
    will continue to work with them. We are working with them on
    language that meets U.N. regulations to strengthen that
    position. So we will continue at the mission. If confirmed, I
    will be glad to lead that support and effort for our country
    and to help the Costa Rican people.
        Senator Menendez. Finally, it is not a question but more of
    a statement. I know the chairman, I, and the chairman of the
    full committee have very much engaged in the question of human
    trafficking, and while Costa Rica is a great ally in so many
    different ways, I hope that you will pay some attention, when
    you are confirmed, to looking at the question of human
    trafficking in Costa Rica as part of your mission. Can we get
    you to say that?
        Ms. Day. I will. Thank you, Senator. It will be a high
    priority.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
        Ambassador Arreaga, you have a distinguished career serving
    in a variety of posts. So let me thank you for your service up
    front. Only in America can someone who is born in Guatemala
    become a United States citizen and return as the United States
    Ambassador to Guatemala. So it is an extraordinary story. It is
    also a great example of how immigration can be a positive thing
    for our country. So we salute you.
        I want you to follow on the question I asked Ms. Day about.
    Do you believe the U.S. strategy for engagement in Central
    America has been successful? What do you see are some of the
    major challenges as someone who is going to be in one of the
    key countries that we are engaged with, particularly as it
    relates to the movement of unaccompanied minors and others?
    Guatemala is one of those. Talk to me about what your views are
    on that.
        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        This is an issue which I have been working with over the
    last 3 years. We have a very clear agenda to deal with this
    problem with Central America, one with Guatemala specifically.
    As I mentioned earlier, President Jimmy Morales met with Vice
    President Pence in Miami and they laid out a plan to deal with
    the three pillars of our engagement: prosperity, governance,
    and security.
        What we are going to be focusing on--the drivers of
    migration are security and the lack of economic opportunity.
    The prosperity piece is designed to address the lack of
    economic opportunity, and we are focusing it on the western
    highlands where most of the migrants come from. The security
    piece is absolutely essential because it is a driver of
    migration, and we have, I think, made significant progress in
    reducing crime rates, particularly in the areas where U.S.
    assistance has been provided, which is in training the police,
    in establishing community policing, and in working with the NGO
    community particularly in the most--in the areas we have the
    highest crime.
        And underlying all of this is, of course, our efforts to
    support President Morales' efforts to fight corruption. CICIG
    is a pillar of that. This is an institution that we have been
    supporting for years. We will continue to support because it
    has shown that it can actually address the problem of
    corruption in a systematic way.
        Senator Menendez. I am glad you mentioned CICIG because
    that was my next question to you. It has been, I agree, a very
    positive and innovative and successful justice model. But I
    have heard some alarming reports, including from Commissioner
    Ivan Velasquez Gomez himself, that it may be coming under
    pressure from the powers that be in Guatemala. It has been the
    U.S. policy to support CICIG, which has not only been
    successful in addressing impunity in Guatemala but also serves
    as a model for other countries in the region.
        So is it your intention, upon your confirmation, to be a
    voice in support of CICIG on behalf of the administration?
        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you for your question, and the
    answer is an unqualified yes. CICIG is an underlying linchpin
    for our efforts in Central America--in Guatemala.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Urs, I have been very concerned about
    reports of increased coca production in Colombia and have
    concerns about the impact this will have on transnational
    criminal organizations in the region. So have you had an
    opportunity to assess Peru's new national strategy against
    illicit drugs? And if so, what are your views of it?
        Mr. Urs. Yes. Thank you very much for that question, Mr.
    Senator.
        Peru earlier this year issued a new strategy that runs from
    2017 to 2021. It is an integrated strategy that attempts--a
    comprehensive strategy that attempts to attack narcotics
    trafficking and transnational criminal efforts in a broad range
    of areas. It looks at interdiction, eradication. It sets a
    target of 25,000 hectares of eradication each year for the 5-
    year period. It has also alternate development as one of the
    pillars of it. And it has some other elements, health, and some
    other reform elements.
        So we have supported Peru's counternarcotics efforts and
    efforts against transnational crime for an extended period of
    time, and the country has made important inroads in terms of
    dealing with the problem. I think when we look at the total
    amount of hectares of coca there, the numbers have come up and
    down, as they have in many countries around the region. But
    when we look at the areas of the country that are now largely
    free of coca cultivation, the upper Huallaga Valley, Monzon, we
    find coca cultivation concentrated in smaller and smaller parts
    of the country. So I think our feeling is that Peru has been
    somewhat successful in this effort, and that we ought to
    continue to support their efforts.
        Senator Menendez. Have you visited Peru?
        Mr. Urs. I have. I spent 4 wonderful years in Peru from
    1996 to 2000 as the economic counselor there.
        Senator Menendez. Do you speak Spanish?
        Mr. Urs. I do.
        Senator Menendez. Now, two last questions, if I may, Mr.
    Chairman.
        What do you see as the most significant bilateral issues,
    if confirmed, that you will be dealing with as it relates to
    Peru?
        Mr. Urs. Thank you very much, Mr. Senator.
        We have four items that we list generally as our top
    priorities in Peru. They are combating transnational crime, and
    that includes not only drug trafficking but also illegal mining
    and illegal logging. Actually it is estimated that illegal gold
    mining may produce as much revenue, $2.6 billion in illegal
    revenue, as is produced by narcotics activity. And then in
    addition, illegal logging is also increasingly a problem. These
    types of issues, the illegal logging and illegal mining, also
    bring with them problems of trafficking in persons,
    environmental degradation. So there is a whole series of
    associated problems that are there with these other illegal
    activities and, of course, with narcotics as well. Narcotics
    production also causes very, very severe environmental
    degradation. So that is a top priority. We want to help the
    Peruvians in their efforts. They are front and center on this.
    We are being supportive of them so the main burden falls on
    them.
        We also have an institutional reform program that we are
    working with the Government of Peru. This is, again, their
    effort. We are being supportive. They are looking at dealing
    with issues about weak institutionality, corruption, those
    kinds of things by trying to move to an adversarial system of
    justice so that rather than the civil system, the Napoleonic
    Code type of system where investigations are done by an
    investigating judge and held in paper files, these cases are
    argued in a public way, in a verbal way. We feel that--and I
    think the Government of Peru feels--that that will allow the
    best disinfectant of all, which is public attention and air to
    resolve some of the issues that there are regarding
    institutionality in Peru.
        We also are working with Peru in many areas regarding
    environment, especially as I mentioned, in the gold mining area
    where mercury contamination is a byproduct of illicit gold
    mining. So there we just recently signed an agreement with the
    Government of Peru, a memorandum of understanding, that
    provides for cooperation in terms of dealing with the illegal
    mining problem.
        So those are some of our priorities.
        Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate it. That is a very
    thoughtful answer.
        Let me just say we have a lot of Peruvian Americans in New
    Jersey, a very large concentration and a very industrious
    people, a very fine community. They have been very helpful. I
    hope at some point when you are back in the States, after
    confirmation, we might get you involved with them to listen to
    some of them. They are also great potential investors in their
    own country.
        Mr. Urs. Thank you very much for that, and Mr. Senator, I
    would be delighted to do that.
        Senator Menendez. And finally, I want to echo the
    chairman's remarks about Venezuela. I hope in Peru, which I
    want to applaud and, for that fact, Costa Rica as well and I
    believe Guatemala to some degree--has been good at the OAS.
    Unfortunately, we cannot seem to get our Caribbean neighbors to
    be as good on the issues of promoting the democratic charter of
    the OAS.
        So I hope that you and your respective missions will work
    with those countries, number one, to applaud them when they are
    actually out there doing things that are good for democracy and
    human rights in the hemisphere to give them a sense of support
    of that so that they will continue to stand up at the OAS and
    to urge them to find ways in which their relationships in the
    hemisphere are used to also promote at the OAS an opportunity.
        We are going to have the Secretary General here at a
    hearing with the chairman a little later, and it is not very
    normal that the OAS Secretary General comes before a committee.
    It is an extraordinary opportunity, and I would like to see it
    amplified by our Ambassadors.
        Thank you all for your answers.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you to the ranking member.
        I am not going to be outdone. We have a lot of Peruvians in
    Florida too. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. And so on your way, as you are connecting
    flights, you got to stop in Florida and meet with them and with
    Guatemalans and people from Costa Rica.
        But let me just start with Costa Rica because there is an
    interesting angle to it, and it is in the phrase of both a
    question and asking for an assurance. We have a lot of U.S.
    travelers to Costa Rica. We have a growing number of Americans
    who have made it a part-time or permanent residence in Costa
    Rica but obviously retain their citizenship and the like.
        And one of the debates that is going on here in the
    Congress and on the Hill is about these budget cuts. A lot of
    times when people talk about budget cuts to State, they think
    we are talking about a bloated bureaucracy. And I think even
    those within the State Department would admit that there is
    always the need for reform. But part of what we do in our
    embassies is serve Americans when they are abroad. You lose
    your passport. You want there to be multiple consulates in a
    big country and an embassy that is well staffed that can come
    in and help you out. If you are living there for a significant
    period of time and have any needs from medical needs or the
    like, you want an embassy or consulates that are well staffed
    and well manned. And in the case of Costa Rica in particular,
    we have a significant number of American visitors and people
    spending months at a time.
        And so I would just ask your commitment, irrespective of,
    obviously, the chain of command, obviously, that you need to
    follow within the State Department. But this is really for all
    of you, but in particular Costa Rica. If at any time there is a
    need for greater services, it is important for those of us here
    on these committees to know about it. It is important for us so
    we can advocate for it. It is also important for us so we can
    point to it as an example that our embassies are not just these
    nice buildings that host cocktail parties, and they are not
    just there to interact with governments. They are also there
    primarily in many cases to serve our fellow Americans abroad
    who are in need of consular services for a variety of different
    topics.
        And I start only with Costa Rica because I know the sheer
    volume of travelers and visitors and increasing number of
    Americans who have made it home for a significant period of
    time throughout the year.
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator, again for that comment. And it
    is absolutely true. As we know, we are one of the top tourists
    groups of visitors that come from America to Costa Rica, 1.2
    million last year, plus about 160,000 expats that live there
    full-time as American citizens. So I will make it my highest
    priority to make sure that all Americans, whether in the
    embassy staff or team or Americans that are visiting or
    actually have decided to live there part-time, are protected
    and make sure that we have the funds and the mechanism in place
    and the security controls in place to protect those individuals
    while we continue to grow the embassy mission.
        Senator Rubio. And, Ms. Day, the other question on Costa
    Rica and comment is because of its geography and location, it
    has also become a transit point for migration. The volume is
    significant. This is actually true for Guatemala as well, but a
    place where a lot of people wind up because they cannot get
    somewhere else on transit and the like.
        Let me ask this. As you prepare for this assignment, what
    are your views? What have you sensed are some of the things we
    can be doing to help Costa Rica? I know you were asked about
    human trafficking and you alluded to it a little bit with some
    of the U.N. reforms and the like. But what resources could we
    be providing or cooperating with the Costa Rican Government to
    help? Because, obviously, many of those who are migrating
    through are headed towards the southern border of the United
    States and oftentimes have fallen victim to some of these
    horrifying trafficking groups that do horrible things to
    people. So what is your sense, as you prepare for this
    assignment, as to what we can be doing to partner with them to
    improve their capacity?
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator.
        Well, I think to continue to work closely in bilateral
    relationships with Costa Rica is vitally important. And we have
    seen an opportunity to do that with, again, whether it be the
    drug interdiction to try to help to stop the transportation and
    the warehousing that is going on, to fight organized crime
    because, as we know, again, when you have a strong and secure
    country, it does stop a lot of the issues.
        We have helped control and worked with them in tools and
    training and the necessary funding to help with our border
    security to try to prevent the migration again following into
    the United States. They are working with our data team, working
    with the tools, whether it be three additional Hueys or, again,
    vessels and docking opportunities for those vessels on the
    Pacific coast to stop, again, the migration of drugs into the
    country that way, and then again to help support the issues
    with the additional vetting for immigrants that come into
    country to try to help them relocate those that have come to
    Costa Rica for, again, safety.
        Senator Rubio. Ambassador Arreaga, I am an enormous
    supporter, as is the ranking member, of the Alliance for
    Prosperity. We think it is critical on multiple fronts, first
    because we do think it helps with some of the irregular
    migration patterns. The second is these countries face an
    extraordinary burden from the trafficking in drugs destined
    towards the U.S. consumer markets. So it is in our national
    interest to be of assistance.
        What you learn as you engage on these issues is that the
    three nations, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, have
    similar issues that they confront. They also have differences
    among them in terms of some are more advanced in one direction
    and another in terms of capacity.
        In your view, in the case of Guatemala, if they were here
    today with us and we were to propose to them this is where we
    think we can be most helpful in the short term, what would you
    say in the next 2, 3, 4 years is the most important part of the
    Alliance for us to focus on first in order to increase their
    capacity to do what I believe--and I think I shared with you
    and you share the share the same view--is their desire to make
    advances? Of all the components that they need, is there one or
    two key areas that we should focus on as we construct the
    future of the Alliance?
        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        And, indeed, I would say that corruption remains the top
    priority. Nothing can move unless corrupt officials and corrupt
    members of the private sector are removed from what they are
    doing. That remains an important part.
        The other part I think is very important is to have greater
    engagement from the private sector. The private sector is part
    of the solution, and there are elements of the private sector
    in Guatemala that are interested in being part of the solution.
    So we need to get the private sector more engaged and
    continuing with a lot of the Government reforms.
        For instance, tax collections. Tax collections in Guatemala
    are among the lowest in the world. President Morales has
    appointed a very effective director of the tax office, and he
    is already showing some results. So we need to continue along
    these areas and also to discuss with Guatemalans the
    commitments that they made in Miami for the various elements of
    the plan and keep that moving.
        Senator Rubio. I am not sure about Peru, Mr. Urs. I am
    concerned that with the loss of the Trans-Pacific Partnership,
    at least the U.S. participation in it, that the hope of some
    vehicle by which greater economic engagement, even at a
    bilateral level, has perhaps been set back. I think Peru is a
    nation that has made extraordinary economic progress over the
    last few years and has the opportunity to do so much more.
        Irrespective of the decision made with regard to the Trans-
    Pacific Partnership, what do you view are the opportunities to
    increase economic engagement between the U.S. private sector
    and that in Peru?
        Mr. Urs. Thank you very much for that question, Mr.
    Senator.
        Peru and the United States have a free trade agreement that
    came into force in February of 2009. That has actually been
    quite a dynamic agreement. We had two-way goods trade of about
    $9 billion in 2009. That has grown to $14 billion by 2016. We
    have done very well in that trade. We have about a $1.8 billion
    surplus, and we have done well in the agriculture sector as
    well where we have seen a tripling of our agricultural exports,
    which is always of great interest in the United States.
        I think the agreement, in addition to setting very high
    standards for market access, intellectual property rights
    protection, investor protections, environment, and labor, also
    provides for mechanisms for us to work together to try to
    further expand trade between the United States and Peru.
        And in that regard, I think one of the important challenges
    for us actually--Peru has seen enormous growth, as you pointed
    out, and they have seen a reduction in poverty as a result as
    well, about a half-way reduction in poverty in Peru, a halving
    of poverty in Peru. But what they have seen is there are some
    pockets of areas where they have not seen that kind of
    reduction, certain areas of the mountainous center of the
    country, the highlands, in some of the communities, the Afro-
    Peruvian community, for example.
        So one of the things I would like to do, if confirmed,
    would be to look at how we could use the agreement and see if
    there are not some ways to link into the agreement so that
    these communities might possibly benefit from the agreement.
        I think there is an alternative side to that as well,
    another side to that, which is in the United States, there are
    also communities that might benefit from the agreement more
    than they currently do. And there might be parts of the United
    States, perhaps the center of the United States where perhaps
    the demise of manufacturing companies have really affected
    those areas, we could try to see if there is not some way to--
    --
        Senator Rubio. I am not trying to trap you into a position
    where you are taking on the current administration's decisions.
    So let me rephrase it this way because, obviously, the existing
    trade agreement is in place.
        I will just cut to the chase. My concern is that if, in
    fact, Peru continues to move forward on free trade engagement
    with the region, multiple other countries, some of the
    competitive advantages of our bilateral free trade agreement
    erode as free trade with other countries become more available.
    So assuming that that will continue to be the policy for the
    foreseeable future, I guess the question really I should have
    asked--the way I should have phrased it was what can we do to
    ensure that we continue to grow our bilateral relationship in
    free trade even as the Peruvian economy may have multiple other
    options other than the United States in which to engage in
    greater trade. I think you have largely answered it in your
    answer.
        The more people they are trading with in some instances and
    that we are not a part of, the potential for some erosion is
    always there because they are getting a better deal from
    somewhere else. And so that is why I think our engagement is
    critical. You have touched upon some of the unique niche
    opportunities.
        My final question really has to do with the way the region
    is so interlinked, and that has to do with whether it is
    instability in Venezuela or--I want to be frank about this--the
    decision by President Santos as part of the peace negotiation
    to cut back on aerial-eradication leading to a massive increase
    in coca production in Colombia. It is not just impacting
    Colombia. It is impacting every nation along the supply line. I
    think that is true of Costa Rica. It is certainly true of Peru.
    It is especially true of Guatemala.
        Anytime you have an increase in production of cocaine, you
    have to sell it somewhere, and obviously, the United States is
    that destination. And we have an internal issue that we need to
    confront with consumption. But all these countries, some of
    which, like in the case of Guatemala, have limited consumption,
    are going to face the pressure as that supply races to meet the
    demand.
        From the perspective of that challenge, do any of you have
    concerns that our existing security, law enforcement engagement
    with the countries that you are about to, hopefully, represent
    our country in, that our existing programs are built adequately
    with enough resources to confront this additional challenge of
    a massive increase in coca production that is quickly on the
    way? And I imagine in large extent that question is about
    Guatemala.
        Ambassador Arreaga. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        And, indeed, we do have a very effective demand reduction
    program worldwide. And we always try to integrate supply
    reduction with demand reduction programs because we do know
    that anytime you have drug trafficking in a particular area,
    the potential for some of the citizens of the country where the
    drugs travel for becoming a drug addict is there. So we do have
    programs, and we have the ability to expand them as needed. But
    the answer is a short yes. We have it.
        Senator Rubio. Would anyone else care to comment?
        Ms. Day. Thank you, Senator.
        Again, with Costa Rica--and the President has spoken out
    very strongly about the support of the United States in helping
    Costa Rica and, again, gather strength in protecting that
    border and protecting the influence of drugs coming into Costa
    Rica for transportation. So absolutely, if confirmed, I will do
    everything that I can to make sure that we support their effort
    and we are there. The United States is in a bilateral
    arrangement with Costa Rica. Thank you.
        Mr. Urs. Mr. Senator, thank you for the question.
        I would just add one point, which is it is unlikely that
    many of the drugs that are produced in Colombia will come
    towards Peru. Peru is producing quite a number of drugs
    themselves.
        But what is true is that an increase in drug production in
    Colombia will strengthen the transnational criminal
    organizations, and those transnational criminal organizations,
    some of the same which we are fighting against in Peru--that
    strengthens the opponent, so to speak. So even in a place like
    Peru, which is not likely to be the destination of drugs coming
    from Colombia, can be affected in a negative way by an increase
    in production in Colombia.
        Senator Rubio. Well, I am out of questions, and the ranking
    member indicates he is as well.
        Just for those that perhaps have not been to one of these
    before, the fact that it is not full of Senators is actually a
    good sign, not a bad one.
        And we appreciate you being here today, your record of
    service, your willingness to continue to serve your country.
        Just as a matter of record keeping, the record of this
    hearing will remain open for 48 hours. It is possible the
    members of the committee may submit questions in writing for
    the record, and I encourage you to answer those expeditiously
    so we can continue to move forward.
        With that and without objection, this hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 2:58 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                 Additional Matertial Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
            to Ambassador Luis Arreaga by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. During 1994-1998, I was responsible for the Africa
    humanitarian assistance portfolio at the Department. In this capacity I
    managed our relationship in Geneva with the U.N. High Commissioner for
    Refugees, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, at a
    time when these institutions were grappling with the aftermath of the
    Rwandan genocide. I worked to ensure that the hundreds of millions of
    dollars of U.S. Government funding to these institutions was directed
    to the most vulnerable populations in Rwanda (mostly internally
    displaced persons and the prison population) and surrounding countries
    (refugees from Rwanda). My engagement contributed to the protection of
    human rights for the most vulnerable populations in the Great Lakes
    region of Africa.
        Beginning in 2013, I have overseen the design and implementation of
    the Department's INCLE-funded programs in the Western Hemisphere. These
    programs encompass a range of activities (training, equipping,
    mentoring, and policy reforms) aimed at strengthening justice systems.
    We have placed particular emphasis on programs that protect vulnerable
    and historically marginalized groups (women, LGBTI persons,
    journalists, human rights defenders, and children). We have seen the
    positive impact of these programs, particularly in Central America,
    where special task forces are investigating emblematic cases, and where
    the law enforcement authorities are trained to investigate and
    prosecute crimes against vulnerable groups.

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

        Answer. As Secretary Tillerson said before this committee, our
    mission is at all times guided by our longstanding values of freedom,
    democracy, individual liberty, and human dignity. Our foreign policy is
    motivated by the conviction that the more we engage with other nations
    on issues of security and prosperity, the greater our opportunities to
    shape the human rights conditions in those nations. The United States
    remains committed to advancing the human rights and fundamental
    freedoms of all persons. Dignity and equality for all are among the
    fundamental principles, which guide U.S. diplomacy.
        If confirmed, I will uphold these principles and continue to
    support the work of the U.N. Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala
    (CICIG) and the Guatemalan Public Ministry to combat impunity.
        If confirmed, I will also encourage CICIG to do more to transfer
    capacity to the Attorney General's office and other justice sector
    entities to strengthen their ability to prosecute human rights abusers.
    If confirmed, I look forward to continuing our commitment to addressing
    the most pressing human rights concerns in Guatemala.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Guatemala in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. Lack of transparency, corruption, weak institutions, and
    high impunity rates pose significant obstacles to advancing human
    rights, civil society and democracy in Guatemala. The United States
    Government has partnered with like-minded leaders in Guatemala to
    address these issues. If confirmed, I will continue to support the work
    of CICIG and the Guatemalan Public Ministry to combat impunity and
    corruption, while supporting the transfer of capacity to the Attorney
    General's office and other justice sector entities, which will be
    better positioned to address human rights violations as a result.
    Robust vetting programs, done with the assistance of the U.S.
    Government and CICIG, have begun to remove bad actors from historically
    closed institutions like the police, corrections, and court systems.
        If confirmed, I will continue to support these leaders and the
    reforms they propose, which will ultimately lead to substantial
    improvements in human rights protections within Guatemala. I welcome
    the progress that has been made by CICIG to investigate and prosecute
    individuals engaged in criminal activities.
        If confirmed, I will continue to voice support publicly and
    privately for CICIG, the Public Ministry, and the Attorney General's
    office and other justice sector entities. If confirmed, I will also
    continue to support USAID's long-term National Institution
    Strengthening project to assist the Government of Guatemala in
    improving tax administration and public financial management of key
    institutions responsible for the planning, processing and execution of
    the national budget. Through a combination of these projects USAID
    supports the Guatemalan Government's efforts to be more responsive to
    its citizenry and increase investment in key areas such as health and
    education.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Guatemala?

        Answer. Yes; if confirmed, I am committed to meeting with human
    rights, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations in the
    U.S. and with local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Guatemala.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, we will continue to thoroughly vet all
    individuals and units nominated to participate in U.S.-funded security
    assistance activities, in accordance with the Leahy law. If we find
    credible information of a gross violation of human rights, we will take
    the necessary steps in accordance with the law and Department policy,
    including working to ensure the responsible parties do not participate
    in U.S.-funded training and will assist the Guatemalan Government to
    bring them to justice.

        Question 6. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Guatemalan Government officials to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted?

        Answer. Yes; if confirmed, my embassy team and I will actively
    engage with Guatemalan Government officials to address cases of key
    political prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Guatemalan Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes; if confirmed I will engage with Guatemalan Government
    officials on matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance as
    part of my bilateral mission.

        Question 8. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Guatemala?

        Answer. Neither I, nor any member of my immediate family (spouse,
    children or their families), have any financial interests in Guatemala.

        Question 11. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. A diverse and inclusive team is the type of team that, if
    confirmed, I will aim to foster. If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S.
    Mission in Guatemala continually strives to promote equal opportunity
    for our officers, including women and those from historically
    marginalized groups.

        Question 12. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, under my leadership, the Embassy will reflect
    our whole-of-mission commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion. I
    will make certain each of the supervisors at the Embassy has the
    opportunity to receive proper formal training and regular guidance to
    ensure they are helping to foster a work environment that is diverse
    and inclusive.

        Question 13. The administration's FY 2018 budget request to
    Congress includes a 39 percent cut in foreign assistance to the three
    countries of Central America's ``Northern Triangle''--El Salvador,
    Guatemala, and Honduras. Currently, U.S. assistance to those countries
    supports the ``U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America,'' a
    plan initiated in FY 2016 to address the root causes of irregular
    migration and related humanitarian challenges. If the USG cuts these
    violence-prevention, economic development, community policing, and
    criminal justice reform efforts, what is the risk that violence and
    insecurity will worsen and exacerbate migration and humanitarian
    challenges?

        Answer. The United States will continue to play a strong role in
    Guatemala, and in Central America overall to promote prosperity,
    governance, and security. Between FY 2015-17, the United States
    provided almost $2 billion in assistance to Central America. These
    resources, combined with the $460 million Central America request for
    FY 2018, emphasize continued U.S. commitment to reducing insecurity and
    violence, enhancing the business climate, and promoting improved
    governance. To complement U.S. assistance efforts and ensure long-term
    sustainability, we are also encouraging increased private sector
    investment in the Northern Triangle countries and seeking to mobilize
    additional support from other partner nations and global financial
    institutions.
        If confirmed, I will use the full range of tools available to me as
    Ambassador to advance U.S. priorities with Guatemala. We are also
    encouraged by the 23 percent increase in the Guatemalan Government's
    2017 budget for Alliance for Prosperity (A4P) activities ($83 million
    total), compared to 2016.

        Question 14. One of the main elements of current efforts to
    strengthen the rule of law and combat impunity in Guatemala is the need
    to improve the capacity and independence of the judicial sector, which
    has been vulnerable to interference from powerful sectors and internal
    corruption. What is the administration's strategy to support efforts to
    strengthen Guatemala's judicial sector, ensure judicial independence,
    and rid justice institutions of corruption?

        Answer. The administration is committed to expanding good
    governance through transparency and anti-corruption programs, and
    support for the work of CICIG, the Guatemalan Public Ministry, and the
    Attorney General's office.

        Questionn 15. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to
    Guatemala, how would you address these issues?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to support our ongoing
    efforts to improve the capacity and independence of the judicial sector
    and seek to rid these institutions of internal corruption. If
    confirmed, I would also continue to support the work of CICIG, the
    Guatemalan Public Ministry, and the Attorney General's office to combat
    impunity.
        If confirmed, I would also support ongoing joint efforts between
    USAID, the Guatemalan Government, and civil society organizations to
    achieve greater security and justice for Guatemalans, and work with
    these partners to strengthen institutions, including through 24-Hour
    Courts and the High Impact Court model, as well as courts dedicated to
    responding to the high incidence of gender-based violence cases. U.S.
    assistance to the police academy, to investigators, to prosecutors, and
    to judges, is giving Guatemalans the tools they need to reduce impunity
    and bring about long-term institutional change.

        Question 16. If confirmed, will you prioritize continued support
    for the important work of the CICIG and the Attorney General's Office
    in tackling corruption and impunity?

        Answer. Yes; if confirmed, I will prioritize continued support for
    the important work of the CICIG and the Attorney General's Office in
    tackling corruption and impunity.

        Question 17. Guatemala still has one of the lowest levels of tax
    revenue in the world, limiting the state's capacity to provide basic
    services, improve economic conditions, and increase citizen security.
    At the same time, several recent high-profile corruption cases have
    implicated members of the private sector in bribery and other illicit
    activities. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Guatemala, what
    will the administration do to encourage the Guatemalan Government to
    strengthen the tax code and improve tax collection?

        Answer. During the June 15-16 Conference on Prosperity and Security
    in Central America, the Northern Triangle governments committed to
    pursue reforms to improve their business climates, including
    eliminating red tape, improving transparency, and streamlining business
    formalization processes. They agreed to maintain macroeconomic
    stability and to fund their development, including ongoing efforts to
    raise revenues efficiently while improving the investment climate.
    These changes will help companies, including U.S. firms, expand their
    businesses in the Northern Triangle markets. Through USAID, we are also
    working to help modernize and promote transparency in institutions
    through our work with the Ministry of Finance, support reforms at the
    Tax and Customs Agency (SAT), and help the Morales administration reach
    its target of increasing tax revenues by 3 percent of GDP. The
    Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
    (INL) provides training, equipment and a Customs and Border Protection
    (CBP) customs advisor to SAT, and Treasury's Office of Technical
    Assistance has supported several advisors in Guatemala to improve tax
    collection and other issues. These efforts have demonstrated progress.
    SAT collected a total of 7.5 billion in taxes, exceeding its annual
    target by 33 million.
        If confirmed, I will continue to engage with the Guatemalan
    Government on ways to increase tax revenues, expand the tax base, and
    make it easier for companies to pay taxes, while continuing to root out
    corruption at all levels.

        Question 18. How would you ensure that U.S. assistance is not
    benefiting businesses or individuals implicated in corruption scandals?

        Answer. Thorough vetting is an essential component of U.S.
    assistance programs. We do not provide assistance to businesses or
    individuals implicated in corruption scandals. U.S. assistance is not
    used for direct budgetary support to the Guatemalan Government. INL
    vets government units prior to providing assistance, training, or
    information, and assists the Attorney General and police with vetting
    before special units are established. If confirmed, I stand ready to
    adjust our programming to prevent assistance from reaching corrupt
    individuals and to ensure that we continue to administer programs
    directly with implementing partners.

                                   __________

         Responses to an Additional Question for the Record Submitted
             to Ambassador Luis Arreaga by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. As you know, the United States recently lost a dispute
    settlement case against Guatemala regarding the country's enforcement
    of labor provisions of the CAFTA-DR trade agreement. Despite accepting
    that Guatemala had failed to protect its workers and enforce its own
    labor laws, the arbitral panel decided that these actions did not
    constitute a violation of CAFTA-DR. Now that we appear to have lost the
    leverage provided by the agreement, what will you do to ensure that the
    Guatemalan Government addresses these longstanding labor abuses?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to continue working with the
    Guatemalan Government to ensure effective of its labor laws, modernize
    labor commitments, and advance labor and related political rights in
    Guatemala. Ongoing U.S. Government-funded programs are helping to
    strengthen the capacity of worker organizations to advocate for
    internationally recognized worker rights. I support the Guatemalan
    Government's commitment to strengthening national labor reform efforts
    and meeting job creation goals under the Plan of the Alliance for
    Prosperity and, if confirmed, will ensure these commitments are aligned
    with respect for labor rights.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                 Submitted to Sharon Day by Senator Bob Corker

        Question 1. Are you concerned that the judicial persecution of
    American citizen Ann Patton--who may be subjected to a fourth trial
    after two acquittals--is based on a defect in criminal procedure that
    unintentionally vitiates double jeopardy protections under Costa Rican
    law?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize the safety, security, and
    protection of the legal rights of U.S. citizen visitors and residents,
    which includes retirees, veterans, students, and tourists. I will lead
    the Embassy in working with the Costa Rican Government to carry out
    this mission and to strengthen the bilateral relationship. The Costa
    Rican legal system, like that of many other countries, does not have
    the same double jeopardy protections provided under U.S. law.

        Question 2. Should U.S. citizens seeking investment and retirement
    opportunities abroad be concerned that they will face arbitrary and
    ceaseless prosecution, even after they have been acquitted?

        Answer. Costa Rica is an attractive destination for U.S. citizens
    seeking to invest or retire. An estimated 100,000 private U.S. citizens
    reside in the country, many of whom reside without legal resident
    status. A significant number are retirees and veterans. Costa Rica
    actively courts foreign direct investment, placing a high priority on
    attracting and retaining high-quality foreign investment. U.S. products
    and services have a favorable reputation in Costa Rica and U.S.
    companies continue to be interested in entering the market. Many
    companies have operations providing back office services in Costa Rica,
    and the medical device manufacturing sector has substantial U.S.
    investment. However, I understand that some concerns facing Costa Rica
    remain, including infrastructure, navigating bureaucracy, intellectual
    property enforcement, corruption, real legal property rights
    enforcement, electricity prices, and liberalization of key sectors. If
    confirmed, I will continue the strong bilateral relationship between
    our two countries and build on the efforts to continue to address these
    challenges.

                                   __________

                Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Sharon Day by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have spent many years promoting the importance of voting
    and helping individuals register to vote, monitoring voting locations,
    promoting Election Day voting, early voting, absentee voting and
    driving voters to the polls. I have educated, empowered, and encouraged
    women candidates to run for elected office. I have proudly shared
    across our country, as well as in foreign countries, America's proud
    principles of democracy, freedom and liberty.
        In 2000, I was responsible for coordinating volunteers to prepare
    for an election recount in my county and a neighboring county.
    Additionally, I served as a witness for each of the various media
    recounts. After the 2000 election, I was asked by Governor Jeb Bush to
    serve on Florida's Committee for Election Reform, a committee that was
    tasked to look at every aspect of the voting system in Florida.
        I believe, Human Rights are something you live every day--it is the
    way you live your life not just in a moment, but every day and with
    every action. It is the actions you take and the beliefs that you serve
    that every individual should live in freedom and have an equal
    opportunity. This my belief and it is how I live my life.
        I am someone who believes every child deserves the best education
    no matter their economic status or their zip code. I have stated this
    belief loudly and often. I believe that without an education a child
    cannot achieve their American dream and if every child does not fulfill
    his or her American dream, America cannot live up to our American
    dream.
        I was elected to serve as president of a women's club back in the
    mid-1990s, and part of the function of the club was community service.
    Before I was elected, community service consisted of buying a book for
    a library--usually for a school that didn't need it, to be honest. I
    created, and along with my board members' support, we initiated a book
    gifting program, a backpack program and a mentoring program for the
    students at an underserved school in Broward County. It was a ``D''
    rated school (which became an A rated school in a few short years)
    whose students included, I believe at the time, 83 percent subsidized
    breakfast and lunches, some children that were homeless and majority
    made up of minority students. We adopted this school with our actions
    and our hearts. We developed a three stage program. First, we acquired
    books that were appropriate for K through second grade students. On the
    last week of school we hosted an end of school party with cookies and
    punch, and each class was brought to the library where they selected a
    book, wrote their name in it and kept it as their own. On a personal
    note, as hard as it may be to believe, many of the students had never
    owned their own book. Second, at the beginning of the next school year
    we provided a backpack for every student in K-2 with all the school
    supplies they would need for the year. Third, club members signed up to
    mentor children that needed help. Those three things happened for the
    four years that I served as President, and I am very proud to say the
    club still supports this wonderful elementary school even adding
    additional support not just for the students, but also for the teachers
    with grants to help advance their success too.
        In 1961, Hurricane Carla hit the Texas coast and many of my fellow
    Texans from Houston and the coast were forced to evacuate to my home of
    San Antonio. I spent the entire night and next day and night in my
    school cafeteria offering warm clothes and blankets, helping to make
    sure people had a hot meal, helping children settle in, setting up cots
    and trying to soothe and play with the children who had been displaced
    and were scared. We all do these things to help people in need, and to
    play with the children was easy for me and not a problem at all, as I
    was only 11 years old. I did not come home from school that day as they
    were setting up things nor the next two days until my mother and father
    insisted that I come home to rest. It was an event that still vividly
    lives in my memory today of time when I was able to help others who
    were so much in need and so scared.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the
    Republic of Costa Rica today? What are the most important steps you
    expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in
    the Republic of Costa Rica? What do you hope to accomplish through
    these actions?

        Answer. Some of the human rights concerns that Costa Rica faces are
    trafficking in persons, conditions in overcrowded prisons, and
    discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
        Trafficking in persons is not just a crime against the person, but
    a crime against a society. Costa Rica shares our same concerns and is
    working to continue progress in this area. While I commend Costa Rica
    for its efforts in the fight against trafficking in persons, as
    demonstrated by its Tier 2 ranking in the Department's 2017 Trafficking
    in Persons report, I will, if confirmed, encourage Costa Rica to
    intensify efforts to investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses,
    convict and punish traffickers, and improve victim identification,
    referral, and assistance.
        If confirmed, I will make it a priority to lead with a passion and
    intensity to explore avenues in which the United States can help Costa
    Rica fight against the scourge of human trafficking and continue our
    efforts to encourage Costa Rica to seek a legal definition of
    trafficking consistent with international law.
        If confirmed, I will continue to work with the Government of Costa
    Rica and encourage the continuation of bilateral programs that will
    assist in advancing the protection of human rights. For example, the
    United States is providing technical assistance to Costa Rica to
    improve prison conditions, including in management and security, and
    increase the country's capacity to address gender-based violence. The
    Department advances reforms to Costa Rica's prison structure and
    facility operations including human rights training for the
    penitentiary police and a K-9 unit to reduce drug and cell phone
    smuggling into facilities. The Department also supports training
    focused on gender-based violence crimes, including an interagency
    training program for sexual assault response teams to develop the
    skills of medical professionals, social workers, police, prosecutors,
    and judges to support victims and understand the evidence in sex
    crimes. Materials donated in a successful pilot project have expanded
    access to medical care for victims.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Costa Rica in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. President Solis prioritized anti-trafficking efforts and
    led a whole-of-government effort to focus on and invest resources in
    the fight against trafficking in persons. There is always the risk that
    future governments would not prioritize the fight against trafficking
    in persons, which could also present a challenge in advancing human
    rights, civil society and democracy in general.
        In addition, the United States has provided anti-trafficking in
    persons training to law enforcement officials, prosecutors and judges
    in the past, as well as technical assistance to Costa Rica to improve
    prison conditions, including in management and security, and increase
    the country's capacity to address gender-based violence. A significant
    change in this support may negatively impact Costa Rica's capacity.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Costa Rica?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I am committed to meeting with human
    rights, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations in the
    United States and with local human rights NGOs from the Republic of
    Costa Rica.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, in accordance with the Leahy law, we will
    continue to vet all personnel and units nominated to participate in
    USG-funded security assistance activities. If we find credible
    information of a gross violation of human rights, we will work to
    assist the Costa Rican Government to take effective measures to bring
    the responsible parties to justice with the goal of creating a more
    accountable and professional security partner.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Costa Rican Government officials
    on matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will engage with Costa Rican
    Government officials on matters of human rights, civil rights, and
    governance as part of my bilateral mission.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Costa Rica?

        Answer. No. Neither I, nor any member of my immediate family, have
    any financial interests in Costa Rica.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. A diverse and inclusive team is the type of team that, if
    confirmed, I will strive to foster. If confirmed, I will ensure the
    U.S. Mission in Costa Rica continually strives to promote equal
    opportunity for our officers, including women and those from
    historically marginalized groups.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, under my leadership, the Embassy will reflect
    our whole-of-mission commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion. I
    will ensure each of the supervisors at the Embassy have the opportunity
    to receive proper formal training and regular guidance to ensure they
    are helping to foster a work environment that is diverse and inclusive.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                  to Krishna Urs by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Over the course of 31 years in the Foreign Service, I have
    worked to promote human rights in many different contexts and
    countries. At one point in my career, I advocated for and prepared a
    statement issued by the Department of State calling for an end to
    spiraling political violence involving security forces and a specific
    political party in one country. In several countries, I worked with
    national and local governments to establish safe houses for victims of
    human trafficking and to step up awareness campaigns about trafficking
    in persons. At my urging, the U.S. Government ended all assistance to a
    national police force in one country in which I served due to our
    concerns about the use of extrajudicial killings as a crime prevention
    tactic. In several countries, I advocated public statements by the
    Embassy to highlight areas of eroding respect by foreign governments of
    democratic institutions and norms.
        My actions in support of human rights over the course of my career
    produced concrete results. To provide just a few examples--our
    statement decrying spiraling political violence involving security
    forces resulted (at least temporarily) in fewer exchanges of gunfire
    involving the police. After we cut off assistance to the police in
    another country, the Government replaced the police chief (who had been
    linked to human rights abuses) with another official publicly committed
    to protecting human rights. Our statements in support of democracy
    served as encouragement to like-minded allies in the local society,
    helping to protect institutions and norms.

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

        Answer. Our close relationship with Peru is built on shared
    interests and values, including the importance of human rights. Peru
    has made significant strides in support of human rights since the end
    of its 20 year internal conflict in 2000. Human rights challenges,
    however, persist in the areas of violence against women and children,
    trafficking in persons, and discrimination against Afro-Peruvians,
    Indigenous persons, and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and
    Intersex (LGBTI) persons. Corruption enables an environment allowing
    these and other human rights challenges to exist.
        If confirmed, I will use all the tools at my disposal to assist
    Peru in addressing its human rights challenges.
        By working together to promote human rights, social inclusion, and
    poverty reduction, we can achieve a more prosperous, inclusive, and
    democratic future for Peru.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Peru in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The Peruvian Government has shown a commitment to address
    many human rights challenges. If confirmed, I will encourage the
    Peruvian Government to continue its efforts to improve social inclusion
    and respect for human rights, seek opportunities for public-private
    partnerships toward this end, and cooperate with non-governmental
    organizations to multiply the effect of our assistance.
        I will work with Peru's Government to combat corruption, which can
    exacerbate social conflict, enable human rights abuses, and undermine
    confidence in government institutions.
        If confirmed, one of the challenges I will face will be to help the
    Peruvian Government and civil society find new ways to include the
    country's historically marginalized communities in Peru's economic
    success story.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Peru?

        Answer. Yes. Developing strong relationships with human rights
    advocates, civil society, and non-governmental organizations is one of
    the cornerstones of our partnership with the Peruvian people. If
    confirmed, I will continue the United States' longstanding practice of
    closely engaging Peruvian civil society to ensure I am fully attuned to
    Peru's human rights landscape. I will work closely with the Peruvian
    Government, civil society, and all relevant agencies of the U.S.
    Government to ensure every dollar of U.S. assistance is used wisely and
    in accordance with our human rights goals and the Leahy Law.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. As a U.S. Government employee with 31 years standing, I am
    firmly committed to implementing all relevant U.S. laws and
    regulations, including the Leahy law, when fulfilling my duties. If
    confirmed, I will work to ensure no assistance is provided to foreign
    security force units where the Department has credible information that
    such units engaged in gross violations of human rights, in accordance
    with the Leahy law. I will also work to ensure the U.S. Mission in Peru
    works with the Government of Peru to help them take effective steps to
    bring those responsible for any violations of human rights to justice.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Peruvian Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will engage the Peruvian Government
    and civil society on human rights, civil rights, and democratic
    governance. Peru has a critical role to play in encouraging regional
    stability and is an important partner of the United States.
        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Peru?

        Answer. No. Neither I, nor any members of my immediate family, have
    financial interests in the Republic of Peru.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am a strong believer in the value of diverse teams in
    identifying, analyzing, and addressing issues and problems. Diversity
    helps prevent ``groupthink,'' ensuring that issues get a thorough
    examination from all possible perspectives and making sure that all
    viable options are explored. If confirmed, I can assure you that I will
    take diversity into consideration in filling high level positions at
    the U.S. Mission in Lima, as I have done in past assignments. I am
    committed to mentoring for all staff members, but especially for those
    from diverse backgrounds and under-represented groups.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with each member of my country
    team to ensure they are giving proper consideration to assembling a
    diverse and representative team. I will also ensure country team
    members understand their responsibility to provide mentoring and
    guidance to mid-level and junior members of their teams, with specific
    emphasis on diverse and under-represented groups.

        Question 12. Earlier this year, Peru issued a new decree to
    establish a payment process to service longstanding debt related to
    agrarian reform bonds. Numerous U.S. firms and citizens hold an
    interest in these bonds, including several Maryland pension plans. If
    confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Peru, will you commit to
    working with the Peruvian Government to achieve a final resolution of
    this issue? Will you work with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
    Commission and the Department of the Treasury to ensure that they have
    accurate information about the amount owed on the bonds?

        Answer. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Peru, I look
    forward to learning the details of this complicated case. I fully
    commit to engaging with the Government of Peru to press for a fair and
    timely resolution of these complex issues. I understand the independent
    regulator with jurisdiction over Peru's U.S. law bonds, the Securities
    and Exchange Commission, has been asked for views on this case, and I
    will follow up. I will also engage Treasury for its views on the
    appropriate treatment of these particular domestic obligations in
    national economic statistics. I understand there is considerable debate
    on the appropriate valuation of these securities, the resolution of
    which could impact on the value of other U.S. investors' holdings of
    Peru's domestic and international debts, and I will press for a speedy
    resolution of the related methodological issues.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Rubio,
    Gardner, Young, Barrasso, Portman, Paul, Cardin, Menendez,
    Shaheen, Coons, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, and Booker.

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

        The Chairman.  The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        We have a number of distinguished nominees here today, and
    we welcome them.
        We also have a number of very distinguished introducers,
    and we welcome you. We thank you for coming to our committee.
    In order for you to be able to go ahead and do other business
    today, Senator Cardin and I will defer, relative to making
    opening comments, and let you go ahead and do what you need to
    do. We look forward to those comments, and then, we realize,
    you will probably like to go elsewhere.
        I know Senator McConnell is also coming today, and Senator
    Rubio. But why don't we just start in the order of seniority?
    We appreciate so much you being here.
        Senator Cardin. That would be Senator Lieberman. Oh, you
    are not talking about age.
        The Chairman.  Actually, I was.
        But we welcome you all.
        And, Senator Cornyn, why don't you start? We thank you for
    your distinguished service to our country, and for being here
    today.

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

        Senator Cornyn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
    Cardin, and members of the committee.
        It is a pleasure to be back here. It is the second time in
    less than a couple weeks. It is not often that I darken the
    door of the Foreign Relations Committee, but as long as the
    President keeps nominating Texans, I promise to come back
    often.
        I cannot think of a better nominee to an important
    ambassadorship to Brussels than our dear friend, Kay Bailey
    Hutchison. She truly is someone who needs no introduction, but
    I am going to give her one anyway.
        I had the honor of serving alongside of Kay for 10 years in
    the Senate. And when I got here, there were some things that I
    figured out pretty quickly about her.
        Number one, she is tireless. You would be hard-pressed to
    find a Senator in the Chamber who worked harder than Kay
    Hutchison.
        Second, she was relentless. She would not stop until she
    achieved her objective.
        And most importantly, she always did what she thought was
    the right thing for Texas. Whether it was working with
    Republicans or Democrats, that was always her guiding star.
        As I think about the type of individual best-suited to
    represent the U.S. on the world stage, I can think of no one
    better than Kay.
        She has always been a trailblazer. After graduating from
    the University of Texas Law School, she became the first female
    on-air news reporter in Houston. Years later, she became the
    first woman to represent Texas here in the Senate.
        When she was here, as you will recall, her leadership was
    quite evident. She served as the ranking member of the
    Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and chaired the
    Republican Policy Committee.
        Kay was not and is not afraid of working across the aisle.
    It was the way she was able to get so much done during her time
    here, not only on behalf of Texas but on behalf of the Nation.
        She has always been a fierce advocate for military
    families. It is no exaggeration to say that every base in our
    State has felt the impact of her work. And she has worked hard
    for veterans, to make sure they get the medical assistance, job
    training, and support that they needed when they came home.
        And she has worked hard to promote things like tax relief
    for hardworking Texas families. And she made it easier for
    women to save for their retirement and worked to reduce the
    unfair marriage penalty tax.
        During her time here, Kay served on the Intelligence
    Committee, and the Armed Services Committee as well. So I know
    that promoting American global leadership and strong diplomacy
    guided her committee work and will prepare her well for her
    duties in Brussels.
        So I think her time in this chamber was instructive as to
    how she will serve in this new position. We are, as we all
    know, in a time of increasing instability across the globe. And
    now more than ever, our friends and allies need a determined
    and steady hand representing the United States.
        Senator Hutchison has the experience, determination, and
    tact required for our representative to Brussels. And there is
    no one better prepared to successfully navigate and strengthen
    our relationships on the world stage. Kay will do it, and she
    will do it with poise and grace.
        So I look forward to supporting her confirmation on the
    Senate floor.
        Once again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Cardin, and
    members of the committee for allowing me to say a few words on
    behalf of Kay Bailey Hutchison.
        The Chairman.  We thank you so much for being here.
        Senator McConnell, you are welcome to go next, or if you
    want to get your thoughts together, we can go to Senator Cruz.
    It is your choice. We defer to you.
        Senator McConnell. Mr. Chairman, since I also need to also
    open the Senate, if you would not mind, if Senator Cruz would
    not mind, I would like to go ahead.
        The Chairman.  We thank you very much for being here. It is
    an honor to have you, and we look forward to your comments.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MITCH McCONNELL,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY

        Senator McConnell. It is my privilege to be here today to
    recommend Kelly Knight Craft, a native of Glasgow, Kentucky, to
    serve as the next United States Ambassador to Canada.
        President Trump made a strong choice when he nominated her,
    and in today's hearing, this committee will learn of her
    experience and skill in advancing the priorities of the United
    States.
        Ms. Craft has a distinguished record of service in my home
    State of Kentucky and to our Nation. She helped lead
    organizations like the United Way of the Bluegrass, the YMCA of
    Central Kentucky, the Salvation Army of Lexington, and the
    Center for Rural Development. She has also served on the board
    of trustees of our shared alma mater, the University of
    Kentucky.
        In 2007, President Bush named her to serve as an alternate
    representative for the U.S. delegation to the United Nations
    General Assembly. The Senate confirmed Ms. Craft to that
    position by unanimous consent. In the General Assembly, she
    represented the United States' position on the New Partnership
    for Africa's Development.
        Her ability to build consensus among international
    stakeholders toward a common goal served her well at the U.N.,
    and I believe it also makes her an ideal candidate to be the
    next Ambassador to Canada.
        The United States and Canada are closely interconnected,
    sharing a common history and set of values, while boasting a
    strong bilateral relationship founded on robust security and
    trade relations.
        The relationship with Canada is particularly important for
    Kentucky. Direct investment from Canada supports thousands of
    Kentucky jobs, and Canada is the Commonwealth's number-one
    export market. Maintaining this strong relationship between our
    two nations is vital.
        So Ms. Craft has the necessary skills and experience to
    continue the long history of friendship between our nations.
    Her work will continue to serve the interests of the United
    States very well.
        I would also like to recognize her husband, my good friend,
    Joe Craft, another extraordinary Kentuckian, who is here today
    to support his wife's nomination.
        So thanks, again, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to testify
    on behalf of Kelly. I appreciate your consideration of her
    nomination, and we look forward to her confirmation.
        The Chairman.  Thank you so much for being here.
        Senator Cornyn, if you feel like you want to help open the
    floor, you are welcome to leave also. Thank you so much for
    coming.
        Thank you both.
        Senator Cruz?

                      STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

        Senator Cruz. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, members
    of the committee, it is a privilege to join you this morning,
    especially with the great honor of introducing my friend and a
    true Texas legend, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison.
        Many of you served with Kay and know her well as a friend
    and colleague. All of you, I know, respect Kay. And a great
    many, I know, were grieved when you saw her successor.
    [Laughter.]
        The Chairman.  I don't think that is the case.
        Senator Cardin. Ayes and nays? [Laughter.]
        Senator Cruz. I object. [Laughter.]
        Senator Cruz. But I have to say I think Kay Bailey
    Hutchison is an extraordinary choice to be Ambassador to NATO.
    The President has chosen well, and I am confident that the
    Senate will agree in that assessment.
        Kay's history in Texas, she was born in Galveston and grew
    up in La Marque. She is a proud Texas Longhorn, having earned
    her law degree at the University of Texas. Her late husband,
    Ray, was also a Texas public servant, having served in the
    Texas House and also as chairman of the State Republican Party.
    And their two children, Bailey and Houston, are the joys of her
    life.
        Senator Hutchison began her public service career in the
    Texas House, and honorably served our home State for 20 years
    in this body, where she built a distinguished record of service
    on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense and
    Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittees that will
    give her direct and powerful insight into the security issues
    facing Europe and North America.
        Few statesmen have the qualifications, the relationships,
    and the gravitas that Senator Hutchison brings to this
    position.
        After years of inadequate resourcing, Kay led an effort in
    the Senate to rebuild our military and helped prepare to meet
    the new, more stringent demands of the global war on terror.
        After the Kosovo conflict, Kay led the first Senate codel
    to the region. There, she met with NATO leaders to discuss the
    future of our NATO endeavor and to help bring stability and
    democratic elections to the region.
        In fact, Kay has toured every major conflict since her
    arrival in the Senate in 1993. From Bosnia to Iraq, Afghanistan
    to Serbia, Senator Hutchison made it a priority to meet with
    commanders in the field, with troops in areas of combat, and
    with international leaders to make sure that they had the
    resources that our military needed to carry out their mission.
    She has a heart for the men and women serving our Nation.
        Her commitment to safeguarding America's national security
    will serve her well in this new role protecting America's and
    our allies' interests as U.S. Ambassador to NATO.
        Kay also has an eye for talent. When I arrived in this
    body, in my office among the staff, we had a John Cornyn mafia
    as part of the staff. We had a Rick Perry mafia as part of the
    staff. But there was no bigger group than the KBH mafia, which
    was and is a very large chunk of our team because she has such
    a good eye for talent and she trains them well. That will serve
    her well as our Ambassador.
        You know, I agree with the President's effort to extract
    more from our allies in support of NATO. I think that is a
    positive direction for our country. But I think it is also very
    good to have a U.S. Ambassador who has a strong will and a
    gracious smile to represent America, to represent America with
    our allies and strengthen those friendships and alliances. And
    I am proud to support her nomination.
        The Chairman.  Thank you for being here. I think we would
    all agree we have had two very strong-willed Senators in this
    seat.
        And so we can save the best for last, Senator Lieberman, I
    am going to Senator Rubio.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Rubio. Thank you for this opportunity and the
    privilege of introducing Mr. Lewis Eisenberg of Florida to be
    the Ambassador to the Italian Republic and to the Republic of
    San Marino.
        Mr. Eisenberg is a cofounder and managing partner of Iron
    Hill investments in New York. From 1995 to 2001, he was
    chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,
    responsible for overseeing the region's international airports
    and seaports, bridges, tunnels, and the World Trade Center. He
    was named a founding board member of the Lower Manhattan
    Development Corporation, which was formed after the terrorist
    attacks of 11th of September 2001. He chaired its Victims'
    Families and Transportation Advisory Councils for 2 years, from
    2001 to 2003.
        Mr. Eisenberg was a senior adviser for Kohlberg Kravis
    Roberts from 2009 to 2015, cochairman of Granite Capital
    International Group, both in New York, from 1990 to 2011. He
    spent 23 years at Goldman Sachs, where he served as a general
    partner and cohead of the equity division.
        He is a recipient of numerous awards and has been honored
    by the American Jewish Committee, the National Conference for
    Community and Justice, Monmouth University, Liberty Science
    Center, the Boys and Girls Clubs of Newark, New Jersey, and the
    New Jersey Alliance for Action.
        As you can see, has strong links to New York and New
    Jersey, so you may ask, what does that have to do with Florida?
    Well, that is very typical of Florida, strong links to New York
    and New Jersey.
        But I know him as a resident of Florida, and I have known
    him for quite a while, along with his family. I am excited for
    him and for the country. He will be an incredible
    representative of the United States with an important ally.
        He is, I believe, deeply qualified for this position, and
    we are, frankly, grateful for his willingness to serve his
    country and our country.
        So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you. Thank you very much.
        Senator Lieberman?

                  STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN,
                  FORMER U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Lieberman. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, Senator Cardin,
    members of the committee. It is good to be back here.
        Let me say, first, just a loud, sincere amen to all of the
    positive words said about Kay Bailey Hutchison, someone who I
    have been privileged to know well.
        I am honored to be here this morning to introduce to the
    committee K.T. McFarland as the President's nominee to be our
    Ambassador to the Republic of Singapore.
        K.T. has had a remarkable career, which just says so loudly
    that she is ready to take on this post. You can see it in the
    documents before you. If you had a chance to meet her, I think
    you probably appreciate it.
        There have been two letters filed with the committee that I
    think speak really in a very unique way about the arc of K.T.'s
    life in service. The first is from Dr. Henry Kissinger who
    writes on her behalf, as a student at George Washington
    University, K.T. worked as an assistant for Henry Kissinger
    when he was National Security Adviser in the early 1970s, and
    stayed with him through the Nixon and Ford administrations.
        The second letter is from General H.R. McMaster, who K.T.
    has worked with over the last several months as Deputy National
    Security Adviser.
        I think those two letters together tell you how qualified
    she is.
        But I am really here as a friend of K.T.'s, and as a friend
    of her husband's, Alan McFarland. I just want to speak briefly
    about them in that regard.
        Alan and I went to college and law school together. I will
    not embarrass either of us by telling you how long we have
    known each other. Maybe I will say, in general terms, that we
    are in the sixth decade of our friendship, and it has been a
    good friendship that has taken us through all the ups and downs
    of life.
        I can tell you, based on that, that K.T. and Alan are
    people of great character, high principle, a commitment to
    living an ethical life. They will bring with them, if
    confirmed, to Singapore a spirit of patriotism and honor, and a
    commitment to improving the relationship between our two
    important countries that are such great allies.
        I thought that I would tell you two stories to indicate
    briefly who these people are.
        On Election Night, the first time I ran for the U.S. Senate
    when I got elected, I was an underdog. It was very close. It
    was not until well after 11 p.m. that I felt confident enough
    to go down and declare victory. We all remember the maxim that
    victory has a thousand parents but defeat is an orphan.
        My suite at the hotel in Hartford had filled up amazingly
    as the returns began to come in. And finally, when I was
    heading out, somebody came over to me and said there is
    somebody named Alan McFarland on the phone. So it was such a
    drawing back to a friendship and earlier life, I went and took
    the call. And Alan was full of excitement and congratulations.
    And he said, hey, incidentally, K.T. had an apartment in
    Washington that we are not using since she is in New York with
    me. If you need a place to live for a while, why don't you use
    it?
        So I totally forgot about it, went down, got swept up in
    all the post-election stuff. About a month later, because
    Hadassah was going to stay in Connecticut with our kids until
    June when they finished school, I had one of those pre-
    senatorial moments when you say, where am I going to live? And
    I remembered the call, and they graciously had me as their
    tenant for 5 or 6 months.
        So I would add to K.T.'s resume that she once operated a
    shelter for a homeless Senator, and did it well. [Laughter.]
        Senator Lieberman. The second is a very different kind of
    story. You will note on K.T.'s resume that her work life has
    been divided into two. In between, beginning in the mid-1980s,
    she made a tough decision, which was that she was going to
    devote herself to being a wife and mother, eventually of five
    children.
        One of them is a story that says a lot about Alan and K.T.
    In 1995, Alan's first wife, Nell, who was married to a man some
    of us knew named David Sawyer, they died within a short period
    of time of each other, and they left a son who was essentially
    alone. And it is a long story, but the bottom line is that Alan
    and K.T. stepped forward and adopted Luke and have raised them
    as their child. It really says a lot about them.
        I grew up with the phrase from the Talmud that, if you save
    one life, it is as if you save the entire world. And they saved
    one life, and, in that, I think the entire world.
        So for all of these reasons, both professional and
    personal, I recommend K.T. McFarland to you without hesitation.
    I truly believe she deserves your support, that she deserves
    nonpartisan support from the Senate.
        Thank you very much.
        The Chairman.  We thank you both very much for being here.
        Before I turn to Senator Menendez, who is going to
    introduce our next Ambassador nominee, you all are welcome, if
    you wish, to go about other business. We really do appreciate
    both of you being here and elevating our meeting.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Lieberman. Thank you very much.
        The Chairman.  Senator Menendez?

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

        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        We generally say that the United States and the United
    Kingdom have a special relationship. And, indeed, there are few
    other nations with whom our bilateral relationship is as
    expansive and as important as the United Kingdom. And that
    relationship is based on shared values of our two nations,
    democracy, respect for human rights, and having helped shape
    the postwar, rules-based international order.
        Maintaining and strengthening this relationship is critical
    for the United States' national security, for our transatlantic
    relationships in general, and many of our foreign and military
    engagements around the world.
        Being a diplomat requires certain qualities and the ability
    to navigate uncertain waters. Some new diplomats try their hand
    at this endeavor with the best intentions but fumble in their
    execution.
        Hailing from the great State of New Jersey, however, I have
    no doubt that Robert Wood Johnson is up to the task and would
    be an excellent representative of the United States.
        Mr. Johnson is the chairman and CEO of the Johnson Company.
        He is the CEO of the New York Jets. It is the one few
    things that I have in disagreement with him. It should be the
    New Jersey Jets. But in any event, they are the New York Jets.
        And he has a wide range of civic endeavors, and also sits
    on the Council on Foreign Relations.
        As the United Kingdom continues to sort out the practical
    implications of Brexit, including future trade deals, his
    successful private sector experience, I think, will be
    critical.
        In our conversation earlier this week, he expressed his
    appreciation for the importance of our robust security
    relationship and intelligence-sharing operations with the
    United Kingdom. He has spoken on how he will draw on the
    knowledge and experience of the career officers with whom he
    has met. And his extensive management experience will be an
    asset in running a large Embassy in London.
        He has assured me that he will consult with this committee,
    something we always like to hear from our nominees. And I
    believe it is critically important that our Embassy in London
    has the leadership it needs to continue strengthening the
    already deep bond between our two nations.
        And I believe Mr. Johnson can provide that leadership. And
    I welcome him to the committee, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you so much. I apologize for not
    knowing you were introducing until just a moment ago. We thank
    you for that introduction.
        And I thank all of you for being here. I think we have an
    extremely distinguished panel here today. I am glad that all of
    you are here together, and I appreciate your desire to serve
    our country in the way that you have.
        We are going to consider, as we all know, the nominee to be
    U.S. Ambassador to Canada, our single largest trading partner
    as of May 2017.
        Throughout the Cold War and to this day, Canada has stood
    shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States through the North
    American Aerospace Defense Command, better known as NORAD.
        Canada's military is an important NATO partner, and we have
    close intelligence-sharing and law enforcement ties.
        Canada values its relationship with the United States, and
    we value our very close relationship with our neighbor to the
    north. This week, Prime Minister Trudeau joined Vice President
    Pence in speaking to the U.S. National Governors Association.
        Canada also supports working with the U.S. and Mexico to
    update the North American Free Trade Agreement.
        We will also have a conversation with our nominee to be the
    U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO.
        NATO faces the threat of an increasingly antagonistic
    Russia, which has occupied the Crimean and eastern regions of
    Ukraine, a country once considered a contender for NATO
    membership.
        NATO has increased its deployments in the Baltic region in
    recent months due to fears of a potential clash with Russia
    there. Both NATO itself and individual member states are
    members of the U.S.-led coalition conducting airstrikes against
    ISIS.
        Maintaining a strong NATO depends not just on the United
    States but on all members meeting their commitments on defense.
        And we thank you for being here to do that.
        We will look to the nominee to be Ambassador to the United
    Kingdom as well, one of the United States' most critical
    allies. The bilateral U.S.-U.K. relationship has grown into a
    global network of military, intelligence, and trade
    partnerships that together fight terrorism, resist Russian
    aggression, and drive economic growth.
        The United Kingdom has not just deployed its military
    beside ours, it has helped us build the international framework
    that includes the United Nations and NATO. Our countries work
    together with these institutions to help make the world a safer
    and more prosperous place.
        We thank you for being here.
        We will also have a chance to engage the nominee to be
    Ambassador to Italy, where we also have positive and strong
    relations.
        Italy is now on the U.N. Security Council and continues to
    play a key role in European and Mediterranean security policy.
        We thank you for being here.
        Lastly, we will consider the nominee to Singapore.
    Singapore is one of our strongest security partners in
    Southeast Asia and plays rotational host to the U.S. naval
    vessels operating in the region.
        Singapore is also a key economic and trading partner for
    the United States in the region. Our strategic partnership is
    vital to maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific.
        We thank you for being here.
        I really am elated that all of you are here together. I
    think you are going to do an outstanding job for our Nation. I
    know you are honored to be nominated to these positions.
        And with that, I will turn to our distinguished ranking
    member, my friend, Ben Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND.

        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me welcome all
    five of our nominees and their families.
        First, I really want to thank each of you for being willing
    to serve your country, and thank your families as we recognize
    this cannot be done without a supportive family, so we thank
    you.
        The five positions that are being nominated are extremely
    important to our country.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I hope that you will be a little bit
    lenient as far as the time limits are concerned, because these
    are extremely important countries, and I know members may have
    questions that they want to ask more than one witness.
        Secondly, I would ask our nominees that we do questions for
    the record. I know Kay is well-aware of that. I would ask that
    you give that personal attention. I know sometimes there is a
    volume issue here. I know that we are not going to be able to
    get through all the questions we want to ask you directly, and
    the questions for the record are very important.
        I know I am going to defer a lot of my questions for the
    record, so I just ask that you recognize that, because of the
    large number who are here, and the importance of the countries
    that are represented, that this is our opportunity to get
    important issues aired that are in the portfolios that you will
    be responsible for.
        It is particularly a pleasure to have Kay Bailey Hutchison
    back before our committee, and it must be a little different
    experience on the other side of the dais, but we thank you very
    much. I know that you are going to do an incredible service to
    our country at NATO.
        We had a chance to go over some of those issues in my
    office. NATO is so important to our national security. Probably
    today more than ever before, there are challenges. We know that
    Russia's aggression really is a major concern to many of our
    NATO partners. And our strategies on how we deal with Russia's
    incursions into Ukraine and Georgia and Moldova is a real
    challenge to NATO. We know Afghanistan is a continued
    challenged NATO.
        So you are going to have your plate full, and we look
    forward to working with you and this committee.
        I particularly, Mr. Chairman, like one of the suggestions
    that Senator Hutchison made on how we can formally observe the
    work at NATO and have representatives of our committee work
    directly with our Ambassador, so I thank you very much for that
    suggestion. I thought it was an excellent suggestion.
        With all four of the countries that are represented here,
    there is a common thread. We have democratic countries that
    share our principles of democracy that are critically important
    to us for intelligence gathering and sharing of intelligence
    information. They are major trading partners that are
    critically important to our economy. And many of these
    countries share directly in our military burdens, and whenever
    we need help, it is those countries that we turn to first that
    help us in regard to our national security concerns. So these
    are really close partners.
        The chairman knows that I always raise issues concerning
    human rights. You might think that when you are looking at four
    democratic countries, that maybe that is not as important.
    Promoting American values is always important. Our strength is
    in our values, and our values are respect for human rights for
    all citizens.
        So particularly as it relates to Singapore, we do have
    issues. Singapore does not protect people against
    discrimination based upon their sexual orientation or gender
    identity. They also are ranked near the bottom in their
    protection in many of the human rights issues.
        Reporters Without Borders ranked Singapore 151st out of 180
    nations in its annual World Press Freedom Index behind
    neighbors such as Burma, Cambodia, and Malaysia.
        So we will be asking you, Ms. McFarland, how you will
    represent American values in Singapore, a friend and trading
    partner, and a major commerce center, as to how we can get
    advancements on these universal human rights, which I believe
    are very, very important.
        I really did enjoy the conversations I had with several of
    you, and I want to just underscore a point that Senator
    Menendez said in regard to Mr. Johnson, the same thing is true
    of Ms. Craft, that there is a real genuine desire to work with
    this committee, members of Congress, to further the missions of
    the United States in the countries that you represent.
        So I look forward to a robust discussion, and I again thank
    you all for your willingness to serve our country.
        The Chairman.  Thank you for your comments.
        Senator Hutchison, we are glad to have you back. Since you
    have done this so many times on this side of the dais, we
    thought it would be good for you to lead off and help the
    others get started.
        I understand that at least the first five rows are family
    members and friends. It may be that the entire audience is
    that. We hope so.
        But please feel free, as you come to your turn, to
    introduce your family and friends who are here with you. We
    thank them for their willingness to support you in the effort
    that you are getting ready to undertake.
        With that, Senator Hutchison, thank you for being here.

     STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON OF TEXAS, TO BE UNITED
      STATES PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE COUNCIL OF THE NORTH
       ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION, WITH THE RANK AND STATUS OF
              AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY

        Senator Hutchison. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
        I do not have my two teenagers here. Many of you knew my
    teenagers when they were little babies, and I was walking the
    halls with them. They are both back in Dallas. I have my
    neighbor from Virginia, Mary Jarrett.
        The Chairman.  We do hope to get you to NATO by the time
    school enrollment starts.
        Senator Hutchison. Thank you. It is so important that my
    son starts school on time, so I thank both of you for
    acknowledging that.
        And I also want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking
    Member, for your courtesies throughout this process and your
    leadership and the way you work this committee together. I
    appreciate it so much.
        I appreciate all the members of the committee, and I know
    how much you spend in time and effort to make sure that our
    foreign policy, our Ambassadors, our State Department, our
    military and the Defense Department are covered in the Senate.
    You do a great job, and I thank you.
        I am not used to being on the side of the podium, as you
    have said, but I had many great years here.
        I am here, if you consent, to have the opportunity to
    represent our country in a different way, but in an area with
    which I am very familiar. As my colleagues have said before, I
    have visited U.S. troops in harm's way in every conflict that
    we had when I was in the Senate, and very often, there were
    NATO members with those troops--Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, and
    Afghanistan.
        I have met with military and diplomatic leaders as well,
    and I have to say that our diplomatic side, which is one that I
    had not been as familiar with, was amazing.
        In Bosnia, when we went in, the Serbs were still shooting
    from the hills. Our Ambassador resided in a bombed-out building
    that did not have running water. He slept on a cot in his
    office to serve our country, when we first went into Bosnia.
        I visited Afghanistan right after our troops started going
    in. I stayed in a Russian-built institution in the hanger that
    the Russians had built near a runway in Afghanistan. It was the
    only place that the troops could sleep. So there were hundreds
    of cots under this leaky-roofed hanger, and all they had with
    them was a duffel bag with their uniforms. They were making way
    for the presence that we would have there, for the building of
    a hospital, for the building of barracks, so that those who
    followed would have a place to do their job.
        That is what our people to in the Foreign Service and the
    military. And my appreciation for them is boundless.
        I look forward to being an effective partner for our
    policies, for our military, for our allies, who are also making
    sacrifices for our mutual defense.
        NATO is the most successful defense alliance in the history
    of the world. It was formed in 1949. And at the time, President
    Truman said, following two terrible World Wars in that century,
    ``By this treaty, we are not only seeking to establish freedom
    from aggression and from the use of force in the North Atlantic
    community, but we are also actively striving to promote and
    preserve peace throughout the world.''
        It was determined that an alliance between Europe and North
    America sends a message of solidarity that would deter
    aggression and help avoid a third World War and, in the event
    of conflict, make earlier action against a common enemy more
    effective in protecting freedom for its democratic members.
        Does NATO exist to protect allies against any threat of
    aggression? Yes. That was one of NATO's original mission. It
    remains relevant today.
        But NATO has also evolved into much more, because today's
    security environment now encompasses a much broader array of
    challenges, including asymmetric warfare.
        Terrorism by ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other extremist elements
    seek a caliphate to displace religious freedom where it is
    protected throughout the world. Rogue nations, such as Iran and
    North Korea, have developed ballistic missile capabilities and
    may be close to achieving nuclear weapons, a threat to all the
    29 members of the alliance and our partners.
        Russian disinformation campaigns and malign influence
    targeting NATO allies and partners seek to undermine Western
    democratic institutions and principles, and sow disunity in our
    longstanding transatlantic bonds.
        In its evolution, many questions are raised. Does every
    country in the alliance meet its agreed commitment? No.
    Improvements are in order.
        President Trump has called for a stronger effort from
    allies not meeting the Wales pledge on defense investment--2
    percent of GDP on defense, and 20 percent of total defense
    expenditures on defense modernization. Allies need to meet this
    commitment.
        We also stand firm on Article 5. President Trump has said
    that each ally should honor the pledge to increase spending
    because it will make all of our efforts more robust, our
    deterrence credible, and the cost of our collective defense
    will not unfairly rest on the shoulders of American taxpayers.
        I believe, as you have said in your opening statements,
    that the shared values of democracy, protection of human
    rights, individual liberty, and rule of law bind all NATO
    members. This bond must be reinforced because it does unite us.
        I have said as a U.S. Senator, and will continue to say,
    that that this alliance is something like the world has never
    seen. Our allies have been by our side throughout history. Our
    allies especially have been with us in Afghanistan, which has
    been a tough road. They have stood with us in solidarity in
    Afghanistan, where over 900 troops of our allies and partners
    have given their lives alongside U.S. soldiers for more than 15
    years.
        Our NATO allies are our core partners in diplomacy and on
    the battlefield, our partners of first resort in dealing with
    old and new threats to the security of our people.
        The strength of this alliance benefits every member.
        If confirmed, I hope to represent the integrity of the
    American commitment to be a formidable enemy and a reliable
    ally. America should be both.
        In closing, I want you to know how much I appreciate the
    hard work you do. I have been there, and I know that every one
    of you love America like I do, and you are here to make sure
    that our country is the strongest and safest for all of your
    constituents.
        And I want to make sure that we are able to preserve what
    our fore-fathers and -mothers gave to us and fought for and
    died for, in many instances: security, freedom, and an
    indomitable spirit.
        Thank you so much.
        [Senator Hutchison's prepared statement follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison

        Good Morning Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin and all of the
    committee.
        I'm not used to being on this side of the podium, but I am pleased
    to be where I spent so many great years working with my colleagues for
    my state and our united country.
        I am here if you consent, this time, to have the opportunity to
    represent our country in a different capacity, but in an area with
    which I am very familiar.
        I have visited U.S. troops often, sometimes together with service
    members from other NATO nations, wherever they have been in harm's
    way--Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan. I have met with military and
    diplomatic leaders during their deployments, sometimes as in Bosnia,
    where our Ambassador resided in a bombed-out building, sleeping on a
    cot in his makeshift office, or in a Russian-built hanger next to a
    runway in Afghanistan, where hundreds of troops slept under a leaky
    roof with only a duffel bag of uniforms under their cots as they began
    to build a headquarters, barracks and hospital for the larger
    contingent to follow.
        My appreciation for the work of our military and the crucial role
    of the diplomatic corps is boundless and I look forward to being an
    effective partner for our policies, for our military and for our
    Allies, who are also making sacrifices for our mutual defense and
    protection.
        NATO is the most successful defense and security alliance in the
    history of the world. It was formed in 1949 after the sad experience of
    the two world wars last century. President Truman said at the time,
    ``By this treaty, we are not only seeking to establish freedom from
    aggression and from the use of force in the North Atlantic community,
    but we are also actively striving to promote and preserve peace
    throughout the world.''
        It was determined that an Alliance between Europe and North America
    sends a message of solidarity that would deter aggression and help
    avoid a third World War, and in the event of conflict, make earlier
    action against a common enemy more effective in protecting freedom for
    its democratic members.
        Does NATO exist to protect Allies against any threat of aggression?
    Yes, that was one of NATO's original missions and it remains relevant
    today. But NATO has also evolved into much more because today's
    security environment now encompasses a much broader array of
    challenges, including asymmetric warfare. Terrorism by ISIS, Al Qaeda
    and other extremist elements seek a caliphate to displace religious
    freedom where it is protected throughout the world. Rogue Nations such
    as Iran and North Korea have developed ballistic missile capabilities
    and may be close to achieving nuclear weapons; a threat to all of the
    29 members of the Alliance. Russian disinformation campaigns and malign
    influence activities targeting NATO Allies and Partners seek to
    undermine Western democratic institutions and principles, and sow
    disunity in longstanding transatlantic bonds.
        In its evolution, many questions are raised. Does every country in
    the alliance meet its agreed commitment? No. Improvements are in order.
    President Trump has called for a stronger effort from Allies not
    meeting the Wales Pledge on Defense Investment--2 percent of GDP on
    defense, and 20 percent of total defense expenditures on defense
    modernization. Allies need to meet this commitment because it is
    necessary for their security.
        I am encouraged by the recent meeting of Alliance Heads of State
    and Government where, under the leadership of the Secretary General,
    Allies agreed to redouble efforts to meet their commitments on defense
    spending and burden sharing.
        In addition there are moves to become more focused on the common
    threat of terrorism, including efforts to ramp up counter terrorism
    initiatives.
        I believe the shared values of democracy, protection of human
    rights, individual liberty, and rule of law bind all NATO members. This
    bond that unites us must be reinforced. Those values underscore why we
    need to remain firm in dealing with Russian aggression, balancing an
    Alliance commitment to strong deterrence with political dialogue,
    foremost on issues like the situation in Ukraine. I want--I think all
    NATO Allies want--a constructive relationship between NATO and Russia,
    but there can be no return to ``business as usual'' between NATO and
    Russia as long as Russia fails to live up to the deal it signed in
    Minsk and continues to ignore basic norms of international law and
    responsible international behavior.
        President Trump stands firm on the U.S. commitment to Article 5 of
    the North Atlantic Treaty. He has also asked that each Ally honor the
    pledge they made to increase defense spending so that our capabilities
    will be robust, our deterrence credible, and the cost of our collective
    defense will not rest unfairly on the shoulders of the American
    taxpayers.
        I have said this as a U.S. Senator and I will continue to encourage
    our allies to equitably share the responsibility for our common
    defense.
        We are stronger together than any one of our countries would be
    alone. Our Allies have been by our side throughout NATO's history. The
    first--and only--time in the Alliance's decades' long history NATO
    invoked Article 5, the collective defense clause of the Washington
    Treaty, was when America was attacked on September 11th, 2001. Allies
    stood with us in solidarity, and there is no better example of this
    than Afghanistan, where over 900 troops from Allies and partners have
    given their lives alongside U.S. soldiers for more than 15 years. Our
    NATO Allies are our core partners in diplomacy and on the battlefield,
    our partners of first resort in dealing with old and new threats to the
    security of our people. The strength of this alliance benefits every
    member.
        If confirmed, I hope to represent the integrity of American
    commitments. To be a formidable enemy, we must be a reliable Ally. I
    want America to be both.
        In closing, I appreciate the role of the Senate. I know how hard
    you work and the dedication of each of you to represent your state and
    build the strongest and safest union for those who elected you to be
    their representative in Washington.
        Thank you for your consideration. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you to represent this Country that we love and to protect
    what our forefathers and mothers fought for us to keep--security,
    freedom and an indomitable spirit.

        The Chairman.  Thank you so much for your comments.
        Ms. Craft?

     STATEMENT OF KELLY KNIGHT CRAFT OF KENTUCKY, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                           AMERICA TO CANADA

        Ms. Craft. Thank you. I would like to express our thoughts
    and prayers for Senator McCain and his family.
        Thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and
    members of the committee.
        And a special thanks to my fellow Kentuckians, Leader
    McConnell, who has been such a dear friend to our family for so
    many decades, and Senator Paul, who, as a friend and a member
    of this committee, makes me feel right at home.
        It is an honor to be with you today as the President's
    nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Canada. I am humbled to be
    entrusted with this responsibility to lead our engagement with
    such an important friend, ally, and neighbor.
        I have not made this journey alone. With me today are my
    husband, Joe; two of our children, Jane and Kyle; my brother
    Marc and his wife, Elisabeth; our close friend John Wyatt. My
    daughter, Mia, is home preparing for her wedding in 2 weeks. My
    sister, Micah, is watching from our hometown of Glasgow,
    Kentucky. Our other children and grandchildren are watching
    from Oklahoma.
        Although my parents, Dale and Bobby Guilfoil, have passed
    away, they gave me the gift of unconditional love and an
    unwavering faith in God, for which I will always be grateful.
        I appreciate the confidence that President Trump, Vice
    President Pence, and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me, and,
    if confirmed, I commit to work every day to live up to their
    trust, in collaboration with the most talented and dedicated
    public servants. They are truly exceptional.
        On a personal note, I am a testament to the fact that if
    this young girl, who grew up 671 miles southwest from here, can
    be nominated by the President of the United States as the first
    woman to serve as Ambassador to Canada, anything is possible
    when you work hard.
        And I know that Senator Shaheen knows this firsthand, as I
    have been so inspired by her public service.
        My first diplomatic experience with Canada was in 2007 when
    I represented the U.S. Government with the American people at
    the opening of the United Nations General Assembly. While
    observing several multilateral negotiation teams, I experienced
    how the American-Canadian relationship could be a powerful
    force around the world.
        I share the President's belief that the United States is
    deeply fortunate to have a neighbor like Canada. Just 3 weeks
    after his inauguration, on February 13th, President Trump
    hosted Prime Minister Trudeau. As President Trump said that
    day: Our two nations share much more than a border. We share
    the same values. We share the love, truly a great love, of
    freedom. And we share a collective defense. American and
    Canadian troops have gone to battle together, fought wars
    together, and forged the special bonds that come when two
    nations have shed their blood together.
        Today, the economies of the United States and Canada are
    similarly intertwined. We are one another's number one trading
    partner.
        If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to further enhance our
    strong economic partnership, the most extensive and integrated
    economic relationship of any two nations in the world. The
    nearly $2 billion in goods and services and 400,000 people
    crossing the border every day are testaments to the strength of
    this relationship.
        I believe we can do better. If confirmed, I will seek new
    opportunities to foster further growth to create more jobs for
    both countries while promoting free and fair trade to ensure
    that American businesses and workers can compete on a level
    playing field.
        A significant part of our economy is our energy
    relationship, the world's largest. If confirmed, I will advance
    our shared goals of energy security, a robust and secure energy
    grid, and a strong and resilient energy infrastructure.
        Recognizing that our cooperation on energy is inextricably
    linked with the environment, I will also work to advance our
    shared environmental goals, stewardship of our common
    watersheds, landmass, wildlife, farm life, and the air we
    breathe, from coast to coast to coast as the Canadians say, the
    Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Arctic.
        At 5,525 miles, the U.S.-Canada border is the longest
    shared border in the world. We in Kentucky know a few things
    about borders. We have seven States with whom we share a
    border. And the only trouble comes when they go home, like to
    Tennessee and Indiana after losing to the Kentucky Wildcats.
    [Laughter.]
        Ms. Craft. The United States is fortunate to have a
    neighbor that shares a strong commitment to democratic values
    and works tirelessly to promote peace, prosperity, and human
    rights around the world.
        Canada is our partner in NORAD and NATO, and it is with
    great appreciation that I acknowledge the Canadian troops who
    have served bravely alongside Americans throughout our shared
    history.
        If confirmed, I will be a respectful steward of this
    partnership with Canada. Thank you for this opportunity to be
    with you today.
        [Ms. Craft's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Kelly Craft

        Thank you Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of
    the committee. And a special thanks to my fellow Kentuckians, Leader
    McConnell who has been such a dear friend to our family for so many
    decades, and Senator Paul, who as a friend and a Member of this
    committee makes me feel right at home.
        It is an honor to be with you today as the President's nominee to
    be the U.S. Ambassador to Canada. I am humbled to be entrusted with
    this responsibility to lead our engagement with such an important
    friend, ally and neighbor.
        I have not made this journey alone. With me today are: my husband
    Joe, and two of our children, Jane and Kyle, my brother Marc and his
    wife Elisabeth, and our close friend John. Our daughter Mia is home
    preparing for her wedding in two weeks, my sister Micah is watching
    from our hometown of Glasgow, Kentucky, and our other children and
    grandchildren are watching from home. Although my parents, Dale and
    Bobby Guilfoil have passed away, they gave me the gift of unconditional
    love and an unwavering faith in God, for which I will always be
    grateful.
        I am appreciative of the confidence that the President, the Vice
    President and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me and, if confirmed, I
    commit to work every day to live up to their trust, in collaboration
    with the most talented and dedicated public servants--they are truly
    exceptional.
        On a personal note, I am a testament to the fact that if this young
    girl, who grew up 671 miles Southwest from here, can be nominated by
    the President of the United States as the first woman to serve as
    Ambassador to Canada, anything is possible when you work hard. I know
    that Senator Shaheen knows what I'm speaking of, as I have been so
    inspired by her public service.
        My first diplomatic experience with Canada was in 2007 when I
    represented the U.S. Government and the American people at the opening
    of the United Nations General Assembly. While observing several
    multilateral negotiation teams, I experienced how the American-Canadian
    relationship could be a powerful force around the world.
        I share the President's belief that the United States is deeply
    fortunate to have a neighbor like Canada. Just three weeks after his
    inauguration, on February 13, President Trump hosted Prime Minister
    Trudeau in Washington.
        As the President said that day, ``our two nations share much more
    than a border. We share the same values. We share the love, and a truly
    great love, of freedom. And we share a collective defense. American and
    Canadian troops have gone to battle together, fought wars together, and
    forged the special bonds that come when two nations have shed their
    blood together.'' He added that ``both of our countries are stronger
    when we join forces in matters of international commerce. We will
    coordinate closely to protect jobs in our hemisphere and keep wealth on
    our continent, and to keep everyone safe.''
        Today the economies of the United States and Canada are similarly
    intertwined. We are each other's number one trading partner.
        If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to further enhance our strong
    economic partnership--the most extensive and integrated economic
    relationship of any two nations in the world. The nearly $2 billion in
    goods and services and 400,000 people crossing our border every day are
    testaments to the strength of this relationship.
        I believe we can do even better. If confirmed, I will seek new
    opportunities to foster further growth to create more jobs for both
    countries, while promoting free and fair trade to ensure that American
    businesses and workers can compete on a level playing field.
        A significant part of our economic relationship is our energy
    partnership--the world's largest, in fact. If confirmed, I will advance
    our shared goals of energy security, a robust and secure energy grid,
    and a strong and resilient energy infrastructure. The United States and
    Canada's highly integrated and interdependent energy markets make North
    America a potential global energy powerhouse.
        Recognizing that our cooperation on energy is inextricably linked
    with the environment, I will also work to advance our shared
    environmental goals, stewardship of our common watersheds, landmass,
    wildlife, farm life, and the air we breathe--from coast to coast to
    coast as they say in Canada, meaning not only the Atlantic and Pacific,
    but the Arctic as well.
        At 5,525 miles, the U.S.-Canada border is the longest shared border
    in the world. The two countries are connected by more than 120 land
    ports of entry, more than 200,000 annual flights, and the numerous
    commercial and recreational vessels that cross the maritime border. We
    work closely with our Canadian partners to promote lawful trade and
    travel, while securing our common perimeter. We in Kentucky know a
    thing or two about borders, we have seven states with whom we share a
    border, and the only trouble comes when zealous basketball fans from
    Tennessee and Indiana to find themselves headed back home after,
    oftentimes, losing to our own Kentucky Wildcats.
        The United States is fortunate to have a neighbor that shares our
    strong commitment to democratic values and works tirelessly to promote
    peace, prosperity, and human rights around the world.
        Canada is our partner in NORAD and in NATO, and it is with great
    appreciation that I acknowledge and respect the Canadian troops who
    have served bravely alongside Americans throughout our shared history.
    If confirmed, I will be a respectful steward of this partnership with
    Canada.
        Thank you for this opportunity to be with you today. I would be
    pleased to answer your questions.

        The Chairman.  Thank you for your comments and your
    willingness to serve in this capacity.
        Mr. Johnson?

        STATEMENT OF ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON IV OF NEW YORK, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
     STATES OF AMERICA TO THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND
                            NORTHERN IRELAND

        Mr. Johnson. Yes, I would like to offer my family's prayers
    to the McCain family and wishes for a speedy recovery as well.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished
    Senators, I am deeply honored to appear before you today. I am
    grateful to President Trump for nominating me to be the United
    States Ambassador to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
    Northern Ireland.
        And I am also deeply humbled that I may be permitted to act
    as the Ambassador of the President and the American people.
    Both family history and personal experience confirm to me that
    public service is both a privilege and an obligation, and that
    the ties between the United States and the United Kingdom are
    profoundly important.
        Today, I am joined here by my wife, Suzanne; my children
    Jamie, Daisy, Brick, and Jack; and, most gratifying, my 97-year
    old mother, Betty, who, during World War II, served in the
    Navy, teaching celestial navigation to Navy sailors.
        She inspired in me the importance of service and love of
    country. I can assure you that she expects nothing less of me
    than the best of me right now. And, if confirmed, I will not
    disappoint.
        I am committed to the United States' historic partnership
    with the U.K. Almost 100 years ago, my grandfather opened the
    first Johnson & Johnson facility in the U.K. That company is
    there to this day.
        During World War II, he also served in the military to help
    small- and medium-sized businesses play a direct role in the
    United States' wartime partnership with the United Kingdom.
    This partnership, this special relationship, endures today.
        I first traveled to the United Kingdom more than 50 years
    ago and have been back many times for both business and
    pleasure. I care deeply about the United Kingdom and our
    relationship with it. If confirmed, I will devote all of my
    energy to strengthening and deepening that relationship.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and Senators, as
    the U.K. undergoes a complex transition, politically and
    economically, there are opportunities and challenges for the
    United States. I believe I can make a contribution by drawing
    both on my business and philanthropic experience.
        I have had the privilege of managing many organizations,
    bringing in people from diverse backgrounds and experience and
    perspectives. It is my belief that diversity of experience and
    expertise are strengths in achieving shared goals and
    priorities.
        In my years working with the Robert W. Johnson Foundation
    to improve health and health care for Americans, I learned the
    value of patience and tenacity in meeting challenges. The
    foundation's 40-year, multibillion dollar effort to reduce
    smoking is just one example.
        After my daughter Jamie was diagnosed with lupus, I
    launched the Alliance for Lupus Research in 1999. I did this
    not only for my daughter, but to help the 1.5 million Americans
    that suffer from lupus, 90 percent of whom are women stricken
    with lupus.
        It took years to bring together this organization with the
    best scientists, organizational structure, and figuring out how
    to raise money to become now the world's largest non-government
    funder of lupus research, to treat, cure, and prevent lupus.
        Owning the New York Jets has taught me the importance of
    commitment and perseverance. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Johnson. Right. Exactly.
        One example of that, not a football example, one example of
    that is our 10-year effort to build a stadium. It is very
    difficult to build a stadium, and we accomplished the
    objective. We built a privately funded $1.6 billion stadium in
    the great State of New Jersey.
        If confirmed by the Senate, my mission will be to
    strengthen America's special relationship with the U.K.
        The U.K. has been our most steadfast ally in promoting
    freedom, fairness, and the rule of law. My first task there
    will be to know the talented professionals at the Embassy. I
    have been tremendously impressed by the professionalism and
    dedication of the men and women of the State Department, and
    the Embassy is home to many of our best people. I want to
    inspire and enable our Embassy to provide exemplary service to
    American citizens and businesses.
        If confirmed, my goal would be to provide the strong
    leadership needed to preserve and strengthen, once again, this
    absolutely special and critical relationship.
        Thank you very much.
        [Mr. Johnson's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Woody Johnson

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished Senators,
    I am deeply honored to appear before you today. I am grateful to
    President Trump for nominating me to be the United States Ambassador to
    the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I am also
    humbled that I may be permitted to act as the Ambassador of the
    President and the people of the United States.
        Both family history and personal experience confirm to me that
    public service is both a privilege and an obligation, and that the ties
    between the United States and the United Kingdom are profoundly
    important.
        Today I am joined by my wife Suzanne; my children Jamie, Daisy,
    Robert and Jack; and, most gratifying, my 97-year old mother, Betty.
    During World War II, my mother, Minnesota-born and raised, served in
    the navy, teaching celestial navigation to sailors. She inspired in me
    the importance of service and love of country. I assure you that she
    expects nothing less than the best from me and, if confirmed, I will
    not disappoint.
        I am committed to the United States' historic partnership with the
    UK. Almost 100 years ago, my grandfather opened Johnson & Johnson's
    first overseas operation in the UK, and the company is there to this
    day. During World War II, he too served in the military and helped
    small and medium-sized businesses play a direct role in the United
    States' wartime partnership with the United Kingdom; this partnership,
    this special relationship, still endures.
        I first travelled to the United Kingdom more than 50 years ago, and
    have been back many times for business and pleasure. I care deeply
    about the United Kingdom and our relationship with it. If confirmed, I
    will devote all of my energy to strengthening and deepening that
    relationship.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and Senators, as the UK
    undergoes a complex transition, politically and economically, there are
    opportunities and challenges for the United States. I believe I can
    make a contribution by drawing upon both my business and philanthropic
    experience.
        I have had the privilege of managing many organizations, bringing
    together people from diverse backgrounds and perspectives. It is my
    belief that diversity of experience and expertise are strengths in
    achieving shared goals and priorities. In my years of working with the
    RWJ foundation to improve Americans' health, I learned the value of
    patience and tenacity in meeting challenges. The foundation's forty-
    year multi-billion dollar effort to reduce smoking is just one example.
        After my daughter Jamie was diagnosed with Lupus, I launched the
    alliance for Lupus research in 1999. I did this not only to treat my
    daughter, but to help the 1.5 million people in the U.S.--ninety
    percent of them women--stricken by Lupus. It took years to bring
    together the best scientists, organizational structures and capital
    sources to make it the world's largest non-government funder of
    research to treat and cure Lupus.
        Owning the New York Jets has taught me the importance of commitment
    and perseverance. One example is the ten-year effort we undertook to
    build a new, privately-funded, $1.6 billion stadium in the Meadowlands,
    in the great state of New Jersey.
        If confirmed by the Senate, it will be my mission to protect and
    strengthen America's special relationship with the UK. The United
    Kingdom has been our most steadfast ally in promoting freedom, fairness
    and the rule of law. My first task there would be to know the talented
    professionals at the Embassy. I have been tremendously impressed by the
    professionalism and dedication of the men and women of the State
    Department, and the Embassy is home to many of our best people. I want
    to inspire and enable our Embassy to provide exemplary service to
    American citizens and businesses. If confirmed, my goal would be to
    provide the strong leadership needed to preserve and strengthen our
    special relationship with the United Kingdom.
        Thank you for the opportunity to be considered for the position of
    United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom. I Look forward to your
    questions.

        The Chairman.  Thank you. We very much appreciate your
    comments and your willingness to serve in this capacity.
        Ms. Johnson, based on my experiences over the last few
    weeks, we could use a little help with celestial navigation on
    health care. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Eisenberg?

     STATEMENT OF LEWIS M. EISENBERG OF FLORIDA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
    AMERICA TO THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND
    WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
    PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC
                             OF SAN MARINO

        Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, Mr.
    Ranking Member, members of the committee, thank you--K.T.
    McFarland--Senator Marco Rubio, for your kind introduction and
    full description of my background.
        It is with sincere humility that I appear before you today.
    I am most grateful to President Trump to make me his nominee
    for the position of Ambassador to the Italian Republic and the
    Republic of San Marino, without compensation.
        I would also like to express my thanks to Secretary
    Tillerson for his support and confidence. I am humbled for the
    opportunity to be of service to our country, should my
    nomination be confirmed.
        And since Senator Rubio and Senator Lieberman were so kind
    to say a few words, I would like to depart from what I was
    going to do and read my history and my interest in serving our
    country in Italy, although it is interesting to note that
    Senator Menendez, were he here, would testify that I lived many
    years of my life in the State of New Jersey while I worked in
    New York, and I have learned that there are some 20 million
    Americans of Italian descent. I am confident that the largest
    percentage of them live in New Jersey and New York and, hence,
    they are my neighbors and some of my closest friends.
        I am going to depart and talk, rather, on why I want to do
    this in, as Senator Lieberman pointed out, Alan McFarland's and
    my late stage in our distinguished, so far, careers, if
    confirmed.
        This is hard for me, a little bit, to depart from script,
    but it was a day not too dissimilar from this. It was a sunny
    day, not quite so warm, and I had a meeting that had been
    called suddenly and drew me from my original point of
    departure. That morning, when I left that meeting, I was met by
    two police officers from the Port Authority of New York and New
    Jersey who asked me to get into the car, their car, and
    informed me that the Port Authority, the towers, had been
    struck, not by one airplane but by two.
        It began one of the most difficult periods not only in my
    life and your lives but in the lives of our country and the
    world.
        My wife was picked up and brought from New York to our home
    in New Jersey, and I was brought to a makeshift station in
    Jersey City, where we waited for survivors to come, and we
    learned of the hit on the Pentagon and the crash in
    Pennsylvania.
        I was asked by the police to try to organize what staff we
    had from the police who were always there, always professional
    in response.
        And, you know, it is amazing. There are these plates in
    your life that change. There are births. There are deaths.
    There is marriage. There is graduation. It was one of those
    unique shifts in life that has changed us all forever.
        We put together a makeshift organization around trying to
    identify who was lost. I learned that the person who had taken
    my life at Windows on the World had been lost that morning. The
    head of police who had climbed to the 27th floor and called me
    to say he was coming up to get me, learned that I was not
    there, died that day.
        I learned over the subsequent days that we had lost 84
    people with whom I worked and thousands of Americans. The Port
    Authority is a unique bi-state organization. It was my seventh
    year. It was the day before I was to retire from that office. I
    remained for 90 days.
        After that, I traveled to daily from our Jersey
    headquarters to what was then called Ground Zero. I acted as a
    spectator amongst heroes. I served coffee. I gave hugs. I saw
    the families. It hurt.
        The following few months, as my term there came to an end,
    Governor Pataki of New York asked me to serve in the Lower
    Manhattan Development Corp., which was to rebuild lower
    Manhattan, and asked me to chair the Families of Victims
    Committee and Transportation Committee--clearly, the hardest
    task of my life.
        When I left that, I said to the people in those
    commissions, to the families of the Port Authority, to my
    children and grandchildren, who I neglected to introduce as I
    sat down, but who sit behind me, I pledged that if any
    opportunity ever came up for me to contribute to the welfare of
    our country economically or through security, I would do
    whatever it takes.
        If confirmed, I pledge my faithful service, and I thank you
    for this opportunity.
        [Mr. Eisenberg's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Lewis M. Eisenberg

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee:
        It is with sincere humility that I appear before you today. I am
    most grateful to be President Trump's Nominee for the position of
    Ambassador to the Italian Republic and the Republic of San Marino. I
    would also like to express my thanks to Secretary Tillerson for his
    support and confidence. I am humbled by the opportunity to be of
    service to our country, should my nomination be confirmed.
        I would also like to introduce those most dear to my heart and
    sitting behind me: My wife, Judy, we recently celebrated our 52nd
    anniversary; and two of my daughters, Lisa Goodwyn and Laura Barr; my
    sons-in-law, Rick Goodwyn and Dr. Kyle Barr; and 3 of our 10
    grandchildren, Henry Goodwyn, Chase Goodwyn, and Jack Balestro.
    Unfortunately, my daughter Stacy Lyle, my son-in-law Paul, and their
    three children could not be here. Judy's parents, Lois Lee and Leonard
    Bierman, and my parents, Estelle and Seymour Eisenberg, all have passed
    away, but have given us the gift of enduring love, hard work and
    guidance, for which we will always be grateful.
        Judy and I met in college in 1962 and were married in 1965. Judy
    worked. I studied. I graduated with an MBA in 1966 and joined Goldman
    Sachs in the summer of that year. It was the beginning of a fifty-year
    career in the world of finance; becoming a partner and co-head of the
    equity division at Goldman Sachs, co-founding Granite Capital
    International Group, becoming a senior advisor at KKR and establishing
    Ironhill Investments LLC. In addition to business, I have always had an
    intense interest and involvement in politics, government service, and
    philanthropy.
        There are certain events, that like shifting Tectonic plates,
    significantly alter the course of one's life.
        In 1994 Governor Christine Todd Whitman appointed me to serve as
    commissioner to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and in
    1995 the Board of Commissioners elected me Chairman.
        As Chairman, I led policy decisions that deepened our ports;
    refurbished our bridges and tunnels; initiated trains running to and
    from our airports; and witnessed
        a police force of 1,500 reduce crime in our region and protect our
    transportation assets. The agency ran on budget with excellent bond
    ratings, and included a team of 7,200 professionals. My leadership role
    of this bi-state agency allowed me to regularly negotiate with unions,
    cities, towns and, of course, between the states of New York and New
    Jersey. I have never worked with a more dedicated or professional
    organization.
        In the late summer of 2001, under the direction of Governor George
    Pataki of New York, I led the agency's successful negotiations for the
    sale of the World Trade Center. At the time, the $3 billion plus real
    estate transaction was the largest in New York history. I was due to
    leave that position on September 12, 2001. On September 10th, my office
    on the 67th floor of Tower One was arranged for a goodbye celebration
    the following morning.
        On the morning of September 11, 2001, I made an unexpected stop to
    meet someone for a quick cup of coffee in midtown Manhattan. As I left
    my meeting, I was greeted by Port Authority police officers who
    informed me that the World Trade Center Towers had been struck by not
    one, but two commercial airliners. I immediately knew we had ``been
    attacked.'' The buildings would come down and, of course, I learned the
    Pentagon had been hit and of the crash of United #93 in Shanksville,
    Pennsylvania.
        The shock of the loss of thousands of lives and the nature and
    extent of these tragedies was hard--very hard--to comprehend. More than
    3,000 lost. Our homeland was hit. The world forever changed.
        For the next ninety days, I led an agency so deeply wounded by
    events, attending many funerals, sometimes three a day, and reacting to
    daily crises.
        Many days I commuted from our Jersey City headquarters to Ground
    Zero--referred to by many in those harrowing weeks as ``the pile''--
    where I was but a spectator amidst heroes. We worked and we grieved. We
    lost 84 dedicated colleagues, including our executive director, Neil
    Levin, the secretary of the agency, Danny Bergstein and our
    superintendent of police, Fred Morrone.
        In January of 2002, New York Governor George Pataki appointed me as
    a founding board member of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation
    (LMDC) and Chairman of the 9/11 Families and Transportation Advisory
    Councils--the most demanding and heart-wrenching challenge I ever had.
        In departing the LMDC in 2003, I pledged to the people of the Port
    Authority, the grieving families and to my wife, children and
    grandchildren that I would, at every opportunity, dedicate myself to
    the service of our country.
        Today, as I sit before you, my commitment remains. U.S. cooperation
    with Italy is at an all-time high, as demonstrated in May when
    President Trump made his visit to Rome a centerpiece of his first trip
    abroad. We are also working with Italy as G-7 President and a member of
    the UN Security Council to advance our shared priorities.
        As a top global partner, Italy has been a leader in the NATO-led
    missions in Afghanistan and in the fight against ISIS in Iraq. In both
    countries, Italy has committed the most troops of any U.S. ally. Italy
    also hosts nearly 30,000 U.S. service members, DoD officials, and
    family members at bases that allow us to operate effectively and
    efficiently across the Mediterranean, the Middle East, and Africa.
        If confirmed, I look forward to further strengthening our security
    cooperation, and working with Italy to continue increasing its defense
    spending consistent with NATO leaders' commitment.
        Italy is also a vital economic partner for the United States. U.S.
    exports to Italy and Italian investment in the United States together
    support over a quarter-million American jobs. If confirmed, I will work
    to increase opportunities for U.S. businesses in Italy.
        Of course, it is the lasting bonds between our peoples that form
    the bedrock of the U.S.-Italy friendship. In addition to the 20 million
    Americans who trace their ancestry to Italy, over a million Italians
    continue to visit the United States each year, and more than four
    million Americans travel to Italy--including over 35,000 U.S. students.
        If confirmed, I will work to sustain our countries' historic ties
    and expand these meaningful connections. I will also dedicate myself to
    continue our cooperation with the Republic of San Marino, whose
    friendship with the United States dates back to 1861, when San Marino's
    heads of state bestowed honorary citizenship on President Abraham
    Lincoln. Today, our two countries are working together on critical
    challenges like combatting money laundering and terrorist financing.
        The staff of the U.S. Mission to Italy--across our embassy and
    three consulates general--works tirelessly to serve American citizens,
    promote
        American business, and advance our cooperation on the full range of
    top global challenges. If confirmed, I look forward to leading this
    extraordinary team.
        I have had the opportunity to visit Italy over the years on
    business and pleasure, with my wife, enjoying the beauty of the
    country. Italy has always occupied a place in our hearts and memories.
    The warmth and spirit of the Italian people, as in America, is founded
    on faith in God, love of country, and an abiding love in family. If
    confirmed, I will strive to continue our cooperative relationships with
    Italy and San Marino, strengthen our economic, security, history, and
    friendship. It would be one of the greatest honors of my life. Thank
    you for your consideration.

        The Chairman.  Thank you for those touching comments and
    your desire to serve in this capacity.
        Ms. McFarland?

       STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN TROIA McFARLAND OF NEW YORK, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
             STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

        Ms. McFarland. Thank you so much.
        And, Lew, thank you so much for sharing all of that with
    all of us. We were all someplace September 11th, and the fact
    that you were where you were has made our lives a lot better,
    so thank you.
        And thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and
    members of the committee for the honor of addressing you and
    testifying before you for the nomination to be the Ambassador
    to Singapore.
        I would like to thank my friend Joe Lieberman for his very
    kind introduction, and for the family friendship that spans
    over half a century. Senator Lieberman is a man of integrity,
    enormous ability, and true patriotism. He is also a man that
    encourages us all to be better people, and we are all the
    better for having him in our lives.
        I am also deeply humbled by Dr. Henry Kissinger's letter,
    which Senator Lieberman referred to, Dr. Kissinger endorsing my
    nomination to serve in this position. He has been a boss, a
    mentor, and a friend for decades, beginning with my first job
    as a freshman at George Washington University in 1970 and
    continuing through my years at Oxford and MIT, the Reagan
    administration, while I was in cable news, and then coming full
    circle when I joined the Trump administration in the very same
    West Wing office that I had started working in 45 years before.
        I am also thankful for that very strong endorsement from
    the President's current National Security Adviser, General H.R.
    McMaster, who sent a letter to all of you. He is a man of great
    intellect and strategic vision.
        I would also like to thank Secretary Tillerson for the
    opportunity to work with him and the very able people at the
    State Department and at Embassy Singapore.
        But most importantly, I would like to thank President Trump
    for believing in me and selecting me for not just one, but two,
    of the most important positions in his administration.
        But I would not be here today without the encouragement of
    John McCain, because in 2005, the two of us stood in the rain
    outside the Naval Academy football stadium and he encouraged me
    to get back into public life and to run for office. So I think
    all of us wish him and his wonderful family Godspeed, frankly,
    as he slays yet another dragon.
        If I am confirmed, I would not be able to take on this new
    responsibility were it not for the support of my very large
    family, my husband of 33 years, Alan McFarland; our five
    children, Andrew, Gavin, Fiona, Luke, and Camilla; daughter-in-
    law, Gretchen; son-in-law Matt Melton; our five grandchildren,
    Arabel, Alasdair, Lachlan, Louisa, and Gigi, almost all of who
    are sitting right behind me.
        If I am confirmed, I also would not presume to take on the
    responsibility without the support of Embassy Singapore. It is
    home to some 19 government agencies, and especially to the
    extraordinarily talented and dedicated Foreign Service Officers
    who serve there. The men and women of Embassy Singapore are the
    very best of the best. And I would consider it an honor if you
    allow me to serve with them.
        So, why Singapore? Three reasons.
        First, our economic relationship is robust. We have had a
    bilateral trade agreement since 2004, and it is the first such
    agreement we have had in Asia. The U.S. has a healthy trade
    surplus of nearly $20 billion in goods and services. U.S.
    businesses invest over $180 billion in Singapore, twice as much
    as we invest in China, five times as much as we invest in
    India. And 4,200 American businesses have headquarters in
    Singapore. More than 30,000 Americans live there.
        Second, we have a close security relationship. When America
    closed our bases in the Philippines in 1990, Singapore stepped
    up to make its facilities available to us. In 1990, we signed
    the U.S.-Singapore Memorandum of Understanding, which was
    expanded by two follow-on agreements since then. Today, our
    Poseidon P-8 aircraft operating out of Singapore. Our littoral
    combat ships rotate out of Changi Naval Base.
        And in fact, the USS Coronado, one of the Navy's newest
    littoral combat ships, is currently in Singapore Harbor, and my
    daughter, sitting right behind me, Lieutenant Fiona McFarland,
    was one of the sailors that took the Coronado from its
    construction in the shipyard through its sea trials and its
    commissioning into the fleet.
        And third, we have a lot in common. We are both melting pot
    nations where people of different races and cultures and
    religions have come together to create a meritocracy and a
    democracy. Our free-market economies are innovative, dynamic,
    entrepreneurial.
        But even so, we urge them to go further in their human
    rights agenda. We urge them to continue their efforts to curb
    human trafficking, building on their adoption in 2015 of the
    Prevention of Human Trafficking Act. And we urge them to expand
    their political freedoms, freedom of speech, assembly, and a
    free press.
        And, Senator Cardin, I listened to your remarks, and I
    agree with them, and I know the power of the bully pulpit.
        And on March 30, 1981, Ronald Reagan spoke to the AFL-CIO
    here in Washington. And in that speech, he added a couple
    sentences, talking to the people in Poland. There were Polish
    dockworkers who were trying to organize, trying to strike,
    under their leader, Lech Walesa.
        President Reagan made a few comments, made a few sentences,
    and nobody remembered them, because within a few minutes, he
    was shot and narrowly survived an assassination attempt.
        But the Polish people heard him. And years later, when the
    Iron Curtain came down and the Polish people were free, Lech
    Walesa, the first President of Poland, said that what kept him
    going and what kept them going in their darkest moments of
    taking on the communist empire were the words of President
    Reagan and others, the encouragement he gave them to keep going
    to demand their rights.
        And so I understand the power of what you are saying, and I
    would hope that, were I confirmed, I would be able to speak out
    and use the bully pulpit in the same kind of way. Thank you.
        So if the Senate does confirm my nomination, I see my job
    as the steward of all aspects of that close relationship with
    Singapore. It is a security relationship, because they stand at
    the entrance to the South China Sea. It is an economic
    relationship, because it is the gateway between East and West.
    And I would do so as the chief proponent of American values.
        I look forward to answering your questions today. And if I
    am confirmed as Ambassador to Singapore, I will look forward to
    working with all the members of this committee, as well as
    within the administration, to advance our interests. Thank you.
        [Ms. McFarland's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of K.T. McFarland

        Thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of
    the committee for the honor of allowing me to testify before you here
    today as the nominee to become the United States Ambassador to
    Singapore.
        I'd like to first thank Senator Lieberman for that very kind
    introduction, and for our family friendship that spans over half a
    century. Senator Lieberman is a man of integrity, enormous ability and
    true patriotism. He is also a man that encourages us all to be better
    people, and we are all the better for having him in our lives.
        I am also deeply humbled by Dr. Henry Kissinger's letter of
    endorsement for my nomination to serve in this position--he has been a
    boss, mentor and friend for decades, beginning with my first job in
    Washington, when I was a freshman at George Washington University in
    1970. It continued through my years at Oxford and MIT, during the
    Reagan administration, while I was in cable news and coming full circle
    when I joined the Trump administration--in the same West Wing office
    that I had started working in 45 years before.
        I am also thankful for the strong endorsement from the President's
    National Security Adviser, General H.R. McMaster, most my recent boss.
    He is a man of great intellect and strategic vision. I would also like
    to thank Secretary Tillerson for the opportunity to work with him and
    the very able people at the State Department and at Embassy Singapore.
        But most importantly, I would like to thank President Trump for
    believing in me, and for selecting me for not just one, but two, of the
    most important positions in his administration, first as Deputy
    National Security Adviser, and now as nominee for Ambassador to
    Singapore.
        If I am confirmed, I would not be able to take on this new
    responsibility of moving halfway around the world to promote America's
    interests, were it not for the support of my very large family,
    including my husband, our five children, their spouses and our five
    grandchildren. My husband Alan, and our five children Andrew Gavin,
    Fiona, Luke and Camilla. Daughter in law Gretchen and son-in-law Matt
    Melton our five grandchildren Arabel, Alasdair, Lachlan, Louisa and
    Gigi.
        And if confirmed, I would not dare take on this heavy
    responsibility without the support of Embassy Singapore, home to some
    19 government agencies, and especially to the extraordinarily talented
    and dedicated Foreign Service Officers who serve there. The men and
    women of this Mission are the very best of the best. I would consider
    it an honor to serve with them.
        So, why Singapore? Three reasons:
        First, our economic relationship is robust. We have had a bilateral
    Free Trade Agreement since 2004, our first such agreement with an Asian
    country. The US has a healthy trade surplus of nearly $20 billion in
    goods and services with Singapore. 215,000 American jobs are supported
    by our trade with Singapore. US businesses invest over 180 billion
    dollars in Singapore, twice as much as we invest in China and five
    times our investment in India. 4,200 US business are headquartered in
    Singapore, and more than 30,000 Americans live there.
        Second, we have close security relationship. When America closed
    our bases in the Philippines in the 1990s, Singapore stepped up to make
    its facilities available to the US Navy. In 1990 we signed the U.S.-
    Singapore Memorandum of Understanding, which was expanded by follow-on
    agreements in the years since. Today our Poseidon P-8 aircraft operate
    out of Singapore. Our Littoral Combat ships rotate out of Changi Naval
    base. In fact, the USS Coronado, one of the Navy's newest Littoral
    Combat ships, is currently in Singapore--my daughter Navy Lt Fiona
    McFarland was one of the sailors that took the Coronado from its
    construction in the shipyard, through its sea trials, and its
    commissioning into the Fleet.
        Singaporean pilots train with American pilots, Singaporean sailors
    join programs with our sailors, our militaries train together, our
    intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement communities share
    information and best practices.
        Singapore was the first Asian nation to join the Global Coalition
    Against ISIS. When Secretary Tillerson asked me to chair the 68-nation
    ministerial earlier this year, I met with Singapore's foreign minister.
    We discussed our common threats: the spread of radical Islam, North
    Korean nuclear proliferation and competing territorial claims on the
    South China Sea.
        Third, we have a lot in common. We're both melting pot societies
    where people of different races, cultures and religions have come
    together to create a meritocracy, and democracy. Our free market
    economies are innovative, dynamic and entrepreneurial. We're at the
    cutting edge of technology and the digital age. Our nations have been
    beacons of stability and prosperity--and an important example of what
    can be accomplished through hard work, the rule of law and economic
    freedom.
        Even so, we urge them to go further with human rights agenda. We
    urge them to continue their efforts to curb human trafficking, building
    on their adoption in 2015 of the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act.
    We also urge them to expand their political freedoms, freedom of
    speech, assembly and a free press.
        But the Singapore's value to the United States is more than just
    our bilateral relationship, strong as it may be. I'm a New Yorker where
    one of the first rules is location, location, location. Despite its
    small size--Singapore is about four times the size of Washington, DC,
    or about the size of NYC without Staten Island--Singapore sits astride
    one of the most important geostrategically important locations in the
    world. It is the economic gateway between East and West as one of the
    world's most important trade routes--on the Malacca straits. It is the
    world's largest transshipment port.
        Singapore is also the security gateway between East and West as the
    entrance to the South China Sea.
        The world's diplomatic chessboard is being rearranged. Economic
    growth will increasingly come from Asia, especially Southeast Asia.
    North Korea is on the verge of becoming a nuclear weapons state that
    will threaten not just Northeast Asia but South Asia as well, and even
    the US. China is building a blue water navy and flexing its military
    muscles up and down the Asia Pacific. It seeks to disrupt our
    relationships with many Asian nations as it lures them into China's
    orbit. Radical Islamic elements--including terrorists fleeing the
    crumbling Islamic State--are moving to other parts of the world,
    including the Asia Pacific region. With each of these security issues,
    the strength of the U.S.-Singapore relationship will be instrumental to
    our success.
        If the Senate does confirm my nomination, I see my job as the
    steward of all aspects of our close relationship with Singapore: as the
    chief commercial officer in promotion of U.S.-Singapore trade; as the
    chief security officer in maintaining the close U.S.-Singapore security
    and law enforcement relationship; as the chief proponent of American
    values; and as the President's personal representative to one of
    America's most important partners in the region if not the world.
        I look forward to answering your questions today, and if confirmed
    as Ambassador to Singapore, I will work with the members of this
    committee to advance America's interests. Thank you for taking the time
    to consider my nomination. I look forward to answering any questions
    you may have.

        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Without objection, the two letters you referred to will be
    entered into the record.

        [The information referred to is located at the end of this
    hearing transcript on pages 488-90.]

        The Chairman.  I am personally struck by the deep sense of
    duty that all of you have, your desire to serve our country,
    and look forward to your confirmation.
        I am going to defer my questions and save that time for
    interjections down the road and, with that, turn to Senator
    Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to join
    you. Each of you have an impressive background, and your
    testimonies here today have been very much in keeping with the
    impressive backgrounds that you have.
        Mr. Eisenberg, I want to first thank you for your
    testimony. When we think we have tough days here, I am going to
    recall your eyewitness testimony about 9/11 and recognize
    exactly why we are fighting so hard for the security of our
    country. So thank you for sharing that. That was inspirational
    to all of us.
        Mr. Eisenberg. Thank you, Senator Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Ms. McFarland, I thank you for your
    response in regard to American values and reminding us of some
    of the great moments in American history where our leaders have
    stood up to oppression and stood up to countries that have
    proposed policies that are contrary to universal values.
        And you are right. Singapore is a small country. It is an
    important country. It is one of the economic powers. It is the
    gateway to the China Seas, which is very important for national
    security. It is a democratic country. But it is a country that
    does not protect the human rights of its citizens against
    discrimination. It is a country that does not do well with
    freedom of the press. And it is a country where America's
    spokesperson, our Ambassador, can further the hopes of people
    of Singapore who want to see their country protect these
    rights.
        So I thank you for the statement you made. I am satisfied
    by your response and just want to let you know that you have
    support on both sides of the aisle to reinforce American values
    in Singapore and elsewhere. Of course, the region in which you
    are going to be operating, there are countries that are
    problematic when it comes to basic values. So you are going to
    be operating in an area that your mission there, working with
    other U.S. missions, can very much further U.S. values.
        I will be checking in with you and all of the Ambassadors
    about how we are proceeding on American values, what
    specifically you have done in regard to your speeches, in
    regard to people you meet with, in regard to the priorities
    that you supervise with the people that are there to advance
    American values. So I look forward to that.
        You have a very impressive background. I am going to be
    asking some questions for the record, but I am going to give
    you a chance here to respond to one of the statements you made,
    and it was made in 2013. This is before Russia invaded Ukraine,
    certainly before they interfered in our elections.
        And you said that Mr. Putin is one who really deserves the
    Nobel Peace Prize. I hope your views are not the same today,
    but I wanted to give you a chance to respond to that.
        Ms. McFarland. Senator, thank you, first of all, for the
    very kind words, and thank you also for the chance to set this
    record straight and to put that into context.
        Now I regret that it was a little tongue-in-cheek, but at
    the time, President Obama had laid a redline down on Syria's
    use of chemical weapons against its civilian population and was
    either unable or unwilling to carry out that redline. When
    Secretary Kerry said that perhaps if Syria were to give up its
    chemical weapons, we would think differently, the Russians
    stepped forward and said they would like to help broker that
    deal.
        Secretary Kerry, the Russian Foreign Minister, and the
    Syrians got together. They agreed that Russian would take the
    lead to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons program.
        We now flash forward to today. They were either unable to
    do it or they were unwilling to do it, and Putin deserves no
    prize for that. In fact, when I entered the Trump
    administration, one of the first crises we faced was there were
    the Syrians again, using chemical weapons against women and
    children.
        So I, certainly, feel that, as you pointed out, the
    invasion of Ukraine and the other things that the Russians have
    done, perhaps with President Putin's personal direction, I have
    a very different opinion today.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you for clarifying that.
        Senator Hutchison, I want to pivot to Russian and the
    problems that we are going to have. Clearly, Ukraine is
    continuously under attack by Russia. We know that there is a
    continuing presence in Georgia and Moldova.
        What can NATO do, working with those countries, in order to
    shore up their capacity to deal with the aggression of Russia?
        Senator Hutchison. Well, it is one of NATO's prime focuses,
    the aggression of Russia in Ukraine, of course, Georgia as
    well.
        And I would say, first of all, the European Reassurance
    Initiative is an effort to strengthen the areas that are most
    vulnerable, where we have four battle groups now, one in each
    of the Baltic states plus Poland, and the United States is
    leading in the one in Poland. And Canada is leading as well.
    U.K. is leading as well. And Romania in the other three. So I
    think we are beefing up defenses for an aggressive Russia.
        And secondly, I am pleased that the administration has sent
    to Kurt Volker over to Ukraine now as a special envoy, because
    I think that attention to the whole Russian aggression in
    Ukraine is so important.
        And as NATO has said, there is not going to be business as
    usual with Russia as long as they violate the agreement they
    made in Minsk, which is regarding Ukraine.
        Senator Cardin. I just want to point out that we hope that,
    within a matter of days, we are going to pass legislation
    through both the House and Senate in regard to Russia that
    includes a NATO-like commitment to unify on the misinformation
    attacks that Russia is doing in Europe and their use of the
    Internet. So we are trying to give you additional tools,
    working with our NATO partners, to share best information and
    practices against the aggression of Russia.
        Ms. McFarland. And I think that Congress is doing the right
    thing to put those sanctions in place. I know there are some
    disagreements on some of the language, and everyone is working
    to make sure that it does not have unintended consequences. I
    think it is very important.
        And that is also an initiative that was made in the May
    25th meeting of the heads of state of NATO, that there would be
    more of a focus on this hybrid warfare, the use of Russian
    cyberwarfare to interfere with several democracies within our
    alliance. And that is a focus of NATO, and I think your bill
    and the inclusion of that language will give us more strength.
        Senator Cardin. We will use your endorsement in the House
    to try to get it passed.
        Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman.  I think it will happen very soon.
        Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
        I want to thank all our nominees. We have, from my
    perspective, a very competent, qualified panel of distinguished
    individuals, who I think will serve this country well.
        Ms. Hutchison, I enjoyed our visit and would like to
    continue our conversation we began in the office about the INF
    Treaty.
        In July 2014, 3 years ago, our Department of State issued a
    report that said the following: The United States has
    determined that the Russian Federation is in violation of its
    obligations under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty
    not to possess, produce, or flight test a ground-launched
    cruise missile with a range capability of 500 to 5,550
    kilometers, or to possess or produce launchers of such
    missiles.
        Now State has issued its latest report in April of this
    year against certifying that Russia ``continued to be in
    violation of its obligations under the treaty.''
        While Russia has been developing and testing the missile in
    question for years, on March 8 of this year, General Selva, who
    is the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you know,
    testified that Russia deliberately deployed it in order to pose
    a threat to NATO and to facilities within the NATO area of
    responsibility.
        So my question to you is this. Given this threat to our
    troops in Europe and our NATO allies, as the nominee to serve
    as our Ambassador to NATO, do you believe we should take
    tangible and urgent steps to ensure Russia does not gain
    military advantage based on this treaty? Should we compel
    Russia to comply with the treaty?
        Senator Hutchison. Absolutely. We should reinforce our
    efforts to get Russia to comply with the treaty, and it is the
    position of the American Defense Department, State Department,
    that Russia is in violation.
        We are consulting with our allies. There are many views
    about what should be done to continue to encourage and push the
    Russians to meet this agreement.
        But I will say, Senator Young, that we are also beefing up
    defenses, and we have ballistic missile defense capabilities
    that are within the treaty that we have signed, INF. Well, we
    did not, but the treaty. We are complying with it.
        And our efforts to build up our missile defense in several
    countries in the alliance also are a signal to Russia that we
    are serious about this treaty.
        Senator Young. I am encouraged to hear that the pressure
    campaign will ratchet up and will continue and, no doubt,
    evolve. I will look forward to continuing to work with you,
    assuming you are confirmed, which I believe you will be.
        This is a good segue, the latter part of your response to
    my question.
        The INF is it two-part treaty. It is United States. It is
    Russia. But Russia is not complying. So it has become a one-
    sided treaty, which defeats the whole idea of a treaty, in a
    sense.
        So meanwhile, according to the Commander of the Pacific
    Command in April, over 90 percent of land-based missile forces
    in China's arsenal fall within this range that is prohibited
    under the INF Treaty. Now, China is not a party to this treaty,
    but the point here is that the world has changed since the INF
    Treaty was signed in 1987.
        It begs the question, if Russia fails to return to
    compliance with the treaty, without delay, do you believe that
    we should withdraw from the treaty?
        Senator Hutchison. That is something that has to be, from
    the NATO standpoint, a consensus. Some of our allies are
    concerned that a withdrawal would make Russia more aggressive.
        I think we have to consult. I know the State Department and
    the Defense Department are looking at what are our best efforts
    to apply what leverage we have for Russia to comply, and I
    think we have to look at all the factors before that decision
    is made.
        Senator Young. That is a fair answer. It is a complicated
    question.
        Senator Hutchison. It is hard.
        Senator Young. We will have to continue to work through
    this, and I hope you will keep the committee informed as these
    assessments continue.
        Senator Hutchison. Of course. They will be, I am sure, on
    everyone's mind. Thank you.
        Senator Young. I would just like to end here.
        Ms. Craft, congratulations to you. I have little doubt that
    you will serve with distinction in this new role.
        I am going to perform a task, since you did invoke the
    Kentucky-Indiana rivalry. I see Coach Calipari behind you, for
    whom I have great respect. But consider this a diplomatic test.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Young. I am going to play a very brief audio clip,
    and this audio clip is from December 10, 2011. And I would just
    like to get a response. [Audio presentation.]
        Senator Young. You can respond in writing, if you prefer.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Young. I suspect I will be hearing from thousands
    of Kentucky residents as well.
        I have nothing else, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for indulging
    me.
        Ms. Craft. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Thank you. I believe that is a first.
        Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Chairman, I have a procedural
    comment, and that is that the breadth and scope of the nominees
    and the countries and institutions for which they have been
    nominated makes it impossible in 5 minutes to pursue the issues
    I certainly want to. I do not know how others feel.
        So to the extent that there is the opportunity for second
    round, I would urge you. And if not, I am going to be looking
    for very substantive answers to questions for the record, in
    order to be able to determine to move forward with the
    nominees.
        The Chairman.  I would be glad to accommodate both.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you.
        Congratulations to all of you.
        Senator Hutchison, it is good to see you again.
        Two quick questions. Do you believe NATO is obsolete? And
    secondly, do we have an unequivocal commitment to Article 5, in
    your view?
        Senator Hutchison. Absolutely. The President has come to
    see that NATO is important.
        Senator Menendez. Which one is absolute? Which one is
    absolute, my first question?
        Senator Hutchison. The commitment to Article 5.
        Well, first of all, NATO is not obsolete, and I think the
    President has acknowledged that he, after meeting with many of
    the Defense--including General Mattis' appointment to the
    Department of Defense, with Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of
    State, and with Secretary General Stoltenberg, I think the
    President realized immediately that it is an important and
    successful alliance.
        He has made the commitment, of course, to America's support
    of Article 5, and so has the Vice President, the Secretary of
    Defense, and the Secretary of State.
        Senator Menendez. Your role in asserting that will be very
    important, and I appreciate your service.
        Senator Hutchison. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. Ms. McFarland, judgment in a United
    States Ambassador is incredibly important, so I know that
    Senator Cardin lightly talked with you about your suggestion at
    one point that Putin is the one who really deserves a Nobel
    Peace Prize.
        But I look at a regime that actually bombs indiscriminately
    citizens in Syria, that obviously either did not have the
    ability or actually, I believe, had the complicity to allow the
    Syrians to go ahead and continue with their chemical weapons.
        I look at some of your other comments that have been made
    in the past.
        On Islam, terrorism, the people of the Middle East: ``Look,
    they're Arabs. They're not going to say to your face something
    they know is going to upset you.''
        On waterboarding: ``Even if it's torture, it's probably
    worth doing.''
        On President Obama: ``To me, it's a dereliction of duty.
    What was this president doing? Well, he was playing a lot of
    golf this summer''--that sounds very familiar to what is going
    on this summer--``but he clearly was not attending to the
    defense of the United States.''
        And I could go on and on.
        When you are, if confirmed, going to a country that is
    critically important in the South China Sea, how we deal with
    that issue, who has questions on human trafficking, who also
    has a significant population that is part of our challenge in
    the world, can you tell me that your judgment is better than
    the comments that you have made in the past?
        Ms. McFarland. Thank you very much for that question,
    Senator Menendez.
        I think it is important, for me, anyway, to think of this
    as a different kind of position. In the past, when I have been
    a media commentator, it was to draw certain points and perhaps
    points drawn very sharply. As an ambassador, if I am confirmed,
    it is a diplomatic mission. It is to take direction from the
    Secretary of State and the President, and what their positions
    are, the United States Government positions.
        I would feel that that is the image I want to project.
        As far as representing American values and judgment and the
    whole world of an ambassador in promoting American interests
    and the American way of life and America's core values, those I
    would promote absolutely.
        You know, America is a big tent. We have a big roof. And I
    would welcome all under my roof.
        Senator Menendez. A United States Ambassador must represent
    that entirety.
        Ms. McFarland. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. Let me ask you, if you were to be
    confirmed, how would you work to ensure that Singapore and the
    United States work productively to address tensions and seek
    common interests in the South China Sea, particularly at a time
    that Singapore continues to think about its balance of its
    interests between China and the United States?
        Ms. McFarland. It is a topic that I have actually discussed
    with the Singapore Foreign Minister when he was in Washington,
    the greater topic of not only the U.S.-Singapore security
    relationship but the South China Sea, and what does that
    represent?
        Singapore has said that on any of these contested islands,
    these militarized, contested islands, that international law
    should prevail. It has also said that it is in a neighborhood
    where they have to recognize the interests of all of the
    countries.
        The fact that they have allowed us and, in fact, embraced
    us, to have rotational deployment of our aircraft, our military
    vessels, in the various Singapore naval bases I think is an
    indication that they want to work with us.
        Our sailors train together. They buy their military
    equipment from the United States. And so it is a security
    relationship that I would, if I am confirmed, would want to not
    only endorse as it is now but strengthen it.
        Senator Menendez. My question, maybe unartfully phrased, is
    that, how will you help tilt that balancing that they are doing
    between China and the United States in our favor?
        Ms. McFarland. The Singaporean Government, because we have
    a lot of the shared values, not all share values, but the
    shared values of a democracy and the rule of law, they have
    indicated, in many ways, that they value our relationship and
    do not want us to leave.
        One of the things that I think is so important, and why I
    was interested in Singapore for myself, as somebody who has
    spent a lot of time studying Asia, is because I look at not
    just Singapore but that entire region as critical to American
    national security. They are the swing states.
        And if Singapore and the others, if they conclude that we
    are not interested in being an Indo-Asia-Pacific power, if
    America is a Nation in decline--as often the Chinese are
    encouraging them to say, we are the rising power, America is a
    declining power. And so a lot of the importance of the mission
    that I would have, it is not just the normal bilateral
    relationship, but also encouraging them to believe that we are
    there. We take this region seriously.
        The fact that Singapore is going to be the chairman in 2018
    of ASEAN, that they want to take ASEAN the direction of cyber
    technology, cybertheft, cyber defense. That is something that
    we could encourage with them. They have said that, as they are
    looking for a cyber partner, they look to the United States,
    not others.
        So I think that there are opportunities there to increase
    that security relationship with them, and I would hope that
    that would be one of my primary missions, is not only the
    economic interests that we have not Singapore but the strategic
    interests.
        It is the gateway to the South China Sea, which is a
    military trade route as well as an economic trade route, but it
    is also a security route.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Chairman, I do not want my fellow New
    Jerseyans to think I am ignoring them, but since my time has
    expired, if you do have a second round, I have a series of
    questions for the other candidates.
        The Chairman.  Absolutely. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Rubio?
        Senator Rubio. Thank you all for being here.
        Ms. Craft, let me begin, as you know, President Trump
    intends to conduct negotiations to modernize NAFTA. What do you
    see as your role in that modernization negotiation?
        Ms. Craft. Thank you for your question, Senator Rubio.
    Twenty-three years ago, when NAFTA was signed, there were so
    many aspects of the economy that were not yet conceptualized.
    And not being confirmed, I have not had a role in writing any
    of the policies.
        However, if confirmed, I am looking forward to working
    closely with Ambassador Lighthizer and Secretary of Commerce
    Ross to promote the priorities for the NAFTA negotiations.
        Senator Rubio. Mr. Johnson, as you know, as I shared with
    you yesterday, because of my lifelong being a fan of the Miami
    Dolphins, support for your nomination due to your relationship
    with the New York Jets is painful and difficult, but I am
    willing to do it for the good of the country.
        I will, however, say that I think you and I agree that the
    country would be well-served if a certain Thomas Brady of
    Massachusetts were nominated Ambassador of Brazil. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. Perhaps that could be arranged before
    September of this year. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Johnson. I am glad we got that out.
        Senator Rubio. I do not know why people are laughing. I am
    very serious about that. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. I see that Senator Markey is not here to
    object, and Senator Shaheen, so I think we can get this done.
        Now, the U.S.-U.K. relationship, what do you feel--
    obviously, is it very closely link, historic. Our security, I
    do not know that there is a rival to it, in terms of
    relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.
        What do you see as the most important issue today in our
    bilateral relationship?
        Mr. Johnson. Well, if I look at that relationship from a
    macro standpoint, it is preserving and protecting and enhancing
    that relationship, which has been very valuable to the U.S. for
    a long time, going back to World War II. But actually, going
    back--it was coined World War II by Winston Churchill. But it
    was a relationship that is really going back even further than
    that.
        It is one based on trust and working together through thick
    and thin for many, many decades. The security relationship is
    fundamental to that, and that is based on trust and confidence,
    and sharing information and gathering information, being very
    innovative to the task at hand, which keeps changing. The world
    is getting more complicated with cyber and various types of
    terrorism that are occurring now. So it is challenging us to be
    innovative and creative and working together even stronger.
        So this will continue to be an important relationship, very
    important.
        Senator Rubio. Mr. Eisenberg, as I said, I am proud to have
    introduced you today. We have known each other for a while. I
    think above all else, you can confirm that, unlike New York and
    New Jersey, it does not snow in Florida in December and
    January. Just a plug.
        But I will say this. I want to ask you this, because this
    is often not pointed out. Italy has the eighth largest economy
    in the world, in essence, a $2 trillion GDP. It is basically
    the equivalent of the Russian economy, which receives an
    extraordinary amount of attention. But also, I think, it is a
    testament to their capabilities.
        So I would ask if you are prepared to commit to press our
    Italian partners to increase their defense spending as part of
    their obligations to our treaty alliance through NATO. They
    certainly have the capability to do it. I think among friends
    and allies, that is a point that has been stressed by multiple
    administrations. There has been a lot made of this
    administration's insistence on that. But you go back in the
    record, you will see multiple Presidents have made the same
    request.
        We do not mean this in an adversarial way, obviously,
    toward our partners in Italy, but at $2 trillion, that is a
    significant economy with the capability to contribute to our
    mutual defense.
        And so I would just ask for your commitment that we would
    continue to further what has been not just this
    administration's position, but what they agreed to do and what
    multiple administrations before us have asked of our partners
    as well.
        Mr. Eisenberg. Of course, my answer to that is I will
    continue to strive to have Italy take up a greater portion of
    the expense for defense.
        But I would like to note that, as we speak, Italy is
    defending the Mediterranean that is now experiencing probably
    the most dramatic immigration and refugee problem in Europe.
    They had 180,000 depart from Libya last year with a significant
    amount of casualties, and are incurring great and unusual
    expense.
        That number is being exceeded this year. They will probably
    take in over 200,000. And they are retaining, within Italy, in
    a very humane way, monitoring trafficking, with our help and
    support, almost 90 percent of that immigration and refugee
    problem, while at the same time, they maintain 30,000 U.S.
    troops on five distinct military bases. They have the second
    largest commitment in both Iraq and Afghanistan of troops on
    the ground.
        So in many ways, their efforts and what they have achieved
    is quite meaningful. They have committed as recently as the G-
    7, and I think afterward at a meeting between the Prime
    Minister and the President here, that they would continue to
    honor their agreement to move to the NATO requirement of 2
    percent by 2024. And they have moved in that direction
    meaningfully in the last year.
        The Chairman.  Thank you, sir.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Congratulations to each of the witnesses. These are very
    important relationships.
        I want to start with Ms. Craft, just quickly. I am going to
    be with some great Kentuckians tomorrow. My wife is from Wise
    County, she and her family on her dad's side, which is right
    across the border, I think, from Harlan, Letcher County, and
    Pike County.
        And tomorrow and over the weekend, there is an amazing
    event that is called the Remote Access Medical Clinic, where
    people who do not have health insurance gather from all over
    the Southeast of the United States to get free treatment from
    volunteer doctors and nurses. It is an amazingly uplifting
    event because of the hundreds of volunteers, many from Kentucky
    and Virginia and elsewhere. And it is an amazingly
    heartbreaking event.
        Every time I go, and I have been going since 2002 to work
    the registration table, it reminds me of when I was a
    missionary in Honduras, and that was the way that health care
    was done in that country, which is the second poorest country
    in the Americas. And to see it right in my own Commonwealth, it
    is heartbreaking.
        But the valor of the Kentuckians who participate will be a
    really impressive thing, and I am looking forward to being with
    them tomorrow.
        Kay Bailey, congratulations. I am so excited you are the
    nominee. I will be real blunt. My oldest was deployed with the
    European Reassurance Initiative on the border with Russia last
    year, and when he was there doing an exercise with Lithuania
    and others, Russia was engaged in cyberattacking our election,
    Russia was engaged in an amazing effort to cyberattack an
    election in Montenegro, and their Plan B was to assassinate the
    Prime Minister, assassinate opposition leaders, all to try to
    keep Montenegro out of NATO.
        Russia is engaged now in activities in Lithuania to
    destabilize NATO exercises that are happening there.
        Watching that going on, and, frankly, I was very, very
    worried in the early days of this administration to hear the
    President basically suggest that Russia was not doing anything
    wrong, but also to say that NATO was obsolete when the entire
    1,200 members of my son's battalion were deployed there in
    harm's way doing work that I thought was important.
        Your nomination sends a signal that the NATO relationship
    is an important one. I do not think the administration would
    have asked somebody of your qualification if they did not mean
    to send a signal that, whatever the earlier statements or
    thoughts about NATO, there is now a commitment.
        And as you shared with me yesterday, if you wondered
    whether there was a commitment to the seriousness of the
    relationship, you would not have accepted the nomination.
        So I am very, very happy to see you before this committee,
    and I am very anxious to get you confirmed as quickly as we
    can, because I think this is incredibly important.
        To Ms. McFarland, Senator Menendez asked you some questions
    about statements. It is a little bit of a burden being a
    commenter. You comment sharply, and your statements are mostly
    self-explanatory. But there was one that I was curious about.
        When there was press around your earlier position on the
    National Security Council, one of the things that was often
    mentioned in accounts that I was curious about, because it was
    never a quote from you, so I do not even know if it was
    accurate, is that you were in favor of the Brexit vote. You
    approved and were happy about the outcome of the Brexit vote.
        I was just curious if that was accurate reporting. And
    given that we have a U.K. Ambassador nominee and will have an
    EU nominee before us soon, I was curious, if that is true, what
    did you think was positive about that vote?
        Ms. McFarland. I do not specifically remember saying it in
    those terms, but at the time, I said that--the important thing
    is for the British people to decide what they want to do. I do
    not think it is for anybody to tell them what to do, and was
    encouraged by the fact that the British people, in a very large
    percentage and large numbers, were taking it on their own
    authority to make a decision.
        Senator Kaine. So you did not have a personal opinion
    yourself about whether the removal of the U.K. from the
    European Union was a good thing or a bad thing?
        Ms. McFarland. I do remember making the statement that--
    and, again, I do not want to--I know this is an important
    issue. I do not want to speak off the top of my head. But I did
    say something along the lines that, if the British do choose to
    do that on their own, that that might present opportunities for
    them in bilateral trade agreements with the United States or
    other relationships.
        Senator Kaine. I do not want to catch you flatfooted on
    this, either, so I may ask that in writing----
        Ms. McFarland. Sure.
        Senator Kaine [continuing]. With a reference, and have you
    follow up on that.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        The Chairman.  Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Paul?
        Senator Paul. Congratulations to all of you for your
    nominations. As a proud father of two Kentucky Wildcats,
    particular congratulations to my fellow Kentuckian, Kelly
    Knight.
        And sometimes when we put things forward, we do not get the
    whole truth. And so we heard a little bit from the Senator from
    Indiana about a particular game in 2011. [Laughter.]
        Senator Paul. But I think there was a rematch later in the
    NCAA finals. Do you remember who won the rematch?
        Ms. Knight. Of course. The Kentucky Wildcats.
        Senator Paul. And then do you remember who were the
    national champions that year?
        Ms. Knight. The Kentucky Wildcats.
        Senator Paul. The Kentucky Wildcats. Absolutely. But I
    think we have set the record straight there.
        I have a little bit more of a serious sort of point, and
    then maybe we will see if we get a response.
        I think it is important that we remember that the State
    Department is not the Pentagon. We have a Pentagon. We have the
    mightiest military in the world. And for most of you, and we
    may exclude NATO to a certain extent, but for most of you, your
    job is with the State Department, not the Pentagon, and there
    is a different role.
        I mean, the Pentagon is to have the mightiest defense and
    to be able to wipe out any enemy that should strike us, to be
    prepared, to try to deter attack, et cetera.
        But the job of the State Department is different. Your job
    is one of friendship and trade. And you are going to be going
    to friendly countries. Obviously, I jokingly say I do not want
    war with Canada or Italy or England.
        But it is important that your role in the world, as you are
    out there mixing with other Ambassadors in your region of the
    world, your role is to foster peace. I think that is important.
        Ms. McFarland I think was involved with Secretary
    Weinberger and the Weinberger Doctrine, which she knows that I
    am aware of.
        Part of that was that we only go to war under certain
    circumstances. It was not that we are ever gleeful for war. It
    was that we restrict and restrain ourselves to only go into
    war. One of the points of the Weinberger Doctrine is we go to
    war as last resort. One was that we go for vital national
    interests.
        I think sometimes we get sloppy with that, and we just say
    everything is in our vital national interests. And that is
    really a conclusion that requires debate and the facts on both
    sides before we go.
        But my hope is always that there is a sufficient voice for
    war being the last resort. I am not saying we never go, but the
    State Department is supposed to be part of that, to a certain
    extent at NATO also. It is about preparedness, but still the
    goal of NATO is defense, not offense.
        I just hope all of you will remember that and realize that
    really part of your role is to try to preserve peace and keep
    peace.
        And if you would like to, since I named you, Ms. McFarland,
    you are welcome to respond about the Weinberger Doctrine, your
    role, or what your thoughts are about your role in the world or
    our role in the world.
        Ms. McFarland. Thank you very much, Senator Paul. You and I
    have had this conversation a number of times about the
    Weinberger Doctrine.
        I was privileged enough to be at the Pentagon in the Reagan
    administration and work for Secretary Weinberger and help craft
    the speech that he delivered that was the Weinberger Doctrine.
        There were several points do it. These were guidelines of
    when the United States should consider going to war or using
    combat forces overseas.
        One of the considerations was that we would do so to
    protect our vital national interests, that we would do so with
    a clear idea of what was required, and that we would also have
    the full support of the American people, and, finally, that our
    objective would be to win and to prevail.
        So I know that is something that has guided your own
    thinking on national security issues, and I thank you for the
    opportunity to discuss it, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Thank you, sir.
        Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to all the nominees for your willingness to
    serve, and for the opportunity to be with you here today.
        Senator Hutchison, thanks for the opportunity for a great
    conversation yesterday about the importance of NATO and the
    role to which you have been nominated.
        Let me just ask again here in this setting, how do you
    intend to convince our NATO allies to stay the course with us
    in Afghanistan, given how much they have already sacrificed,
    given how uncertain the path is ahead? I would be interested in
    how you think, together, we will make that argument to our
    vital NATO allies.
        Senator Hutchison. Yes, thank you very much. Thank you for
    meeting with me.
        Senator Coons, Afghanistan is hard. It is hard for America,
    and it is very hard for all of our allies. But we know that Al
    Qaeda is rising up in Afghanistan. We know that that is a
    common thread. It is a common threat to all of us.
        And our allies have never flagged. When we have asked for
    certain numbers of increased help or capacity, they have
    stepped up. They have stepped up for 15 years in Afghanistan.
    Our allies have been with us side-by-side.
        They are stepping up now in Iraq, because we are regrouping
    and doing more in Iraq. These are very tough duties, but they
    are there.
        And to say, what are you going to do to keep them? I think
    they have been there. I think that they have been with us. And
    it is our common threat.
        Senator Coons. I agree.
        Senator Hutchison. Al Qaeda is our common threat. ISIS is
    our common threat.
        So I will appreciate them and continue to encourage all of
    us to stay firm.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. I have two more questions, if I
    might. First to you, Senator.
        How would you also help shape NATO's cyber strategy? We
    have seen cyberattacks in the past on our now-NATO ally,
    Estonia. Many of us are concerned about the cyber actions by
    Russia in American domestic matters, as well as the matters
    involving our key allies.
        Does a cyberattack on a NATO ally trigger Article 5? And if
    so, how should the alliance respond? And how do we strengthen
    cyber?
        And I have one more question I would like to get to, if I
    might.
        Senator Hutchison. I think we have to see what kind of
    attack we would be addressing before we talk about whether it
    would invoke Article 5. However, the Leaders' Meeting in May,
    as well as the previous defense meetings of NATO, have made it
    more of a focus and more of an awareness of the cyberattacks of
    Russia and the interference with many processes and many of our
    allied countries.
        And I think cyber is going to continue to be more of an
    emphasis of NATO as we go forward, but I think the leaders have
    already staked out that as a new focus.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
        If I might, Ms. McFarland, thank you for your service and
    your willingness to step up to this role. I had the chance, the
    honor, to travel with Senator McCain to Singapore, along with
    Senator Barrasso, to the regional security conference, and was
    struck at how broadly our regional allies and partners
    expressed concern at withdrawal from TPP.
        How will the Trump administration, how would you, if
    confirmed as Ambassador, undertake economic statecraft? And
    given some grave concerns, I think, about security issues in
    the Philippines, and elsewhere in the region where ISIS is
    making some advances, how will you work with your counterparts
    to confront the growing threat of terrorism in the region?
        Ms. McFarland. Thank you very much for that question, and
    particularly for your interest in Asia, Southeast Asia.
        The President, first of all, we have a bilateral trade
    agreement with Singapore, as you know. It is the first one we
    have had with any Asian nation, and it has been very successful
    for the two of us.
        When the administration pulled out of the TPP, I had the
    opportunity to meet with the Singapore Foreign Minister, not
    knowing that I was eventually going to be sitting before you,
    hoping to be confirmed to be the Ambassador to Singapore.
        And he said, you know, we understand. We have a strong and
    robust economic relationship. We want to continue it.
        What the administration has said is that the U.S.-Singapore
    Free Trade Agreement is one that would be a foundation. It
    would be something that they would use as a template to have
    bilateral economic relations with other countries.
        And when President Trump withdrew from TPP, he said that he
    felt that the best interests of the United States would be
    served by bilateral trade agreements. I have been out of the
    administration for 2 months, so I am not sure where the issues
    go, but that would be the first.
        And the second one is the security relationship. One of the
    reasons that I was interested in this position, and when it was
    offered to me, was excited about it, is because I, too, had
    heard in my position as the Deputy National Security Adviser, I
    had heard from a number of counterparts from other countries,
    and they all made the same point that you are making, that
    there was concern that the United States was lessening its
    commitment to the region, was not as concerned about what was
    happening in the South China Sea, that they saw an increasingly
    aggressive China building a blue water navy and kind of
    muscling its way across the whole Asia-Pacific region.
        So one of the things that I would hope to do with
    Singapore, and then work with the other Ambassadors, if they
    are confirmed, if we are all confirmed, the other Ambassadors
    in the Southeast Asia region, would be to put this at the
    forefront.
        The Vice President went to Indonesia, met with the ASEAN.
    President Trump will make a trip to the Far East in a similar
    capacity.
        So I think part of it is just to show our interests, our
    commitment, and then to keep--let them know that we are not a
    waning power, that the United States is not a declining power,
    that this is not an inevitable thing that is going to happen.
    We are just as committed to the region as we have ever been,
    and we continue to be even more committed to the region. And
    also that we are a power that is not in decline. America's
    greatest days are ahead of it, and we hope that they will be
    with us.
        Senator Coons. Well, I hope to have the opportunity to work
    with each of you and the countries to which you have been
    nominated, to advance that I think shared and important goal,
    which is to continue to strengthen our alliances, to strengthen
    our role in the world, and to work in a bipartisan way in that.
        And, Mr. Chairman, you have played a critical role in this
    committee in advancing that vision, so thank you.
        And to your families, thank you for supporting your public
    service.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you.
        The Chairman.  Thank you, sir.
        Senator Barrasso?
        Senator Barrasso. Very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Craft, thank you very much for being here.
    Congratulations on your nomination.
        Ms. Craft. Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso. The thing about Canada, it is the second
    largest trading partner of the United States. It is Wyoming's
    second largest export market. In 2016, two-way, cross-border
    goods and services traded between the United States and Canada
    was $1.7 billion.
        So the two nations have a highly integrated energy market.
    We work closely together. Canada is the largest supplier of
    U.S. energy and the largest recipient of U.S. energy exports.
        Can you talk just a little bit, as the Ambassador, about
    how you will promote American exports and work to further
    expand the trade relationship between our two countries?
        Ms. Craft. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        If confirmed, I am going to work very closely with
    Ambassador Lighthizer and Secretary of Commerce Ross to promote
    the priorities of the Trump administration's agenda with NAFTA
    and also with the different areas of softwood timber, the dairy
    industry, the poultry industry, and the other industries that
    would be a benefit to the American prosperity and the American
    people, both small businesses and large businesses.
        Senator Barrasso. The same follow up with you, Mr. Johnson.
    The United States and United Kingdom, an incredibly significant
    trade and investment relationship. U.S. imports from the United
    Kingdom were worth--as well as the other way around.
        Can you talk a little bit about, as the United Kingdom is
    leaving European Union, what opportunities exist? What
    challenges exist for great trade and investment between the two
    countries?
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you very much for that question,
    Senator.
        If confirmed, I will be working on Brexit and trying to
    help the Congress, the President, and Secretary Tillerson,
    figure out what opportunities and challenges that we can have
    access to.
        You are right, exactly, the relationship has been robust.
    It is not as big as Canada. I think it is about $200 million in
    trades and services. There are a million jobs on either side of
    the Atlantic that rely on that relationship. And our job is to
    encourage, as I said in my opening testimony. The overall
    relationship with the U.K. has to be enhanced. We want to
    enhance it and leave it better than we found it. A big part of
    that is trade. I do not know if that is a direct answer.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso. Ms. McFarland, I just want to talk about
    kind of the area of the world that you have been nominated to
    serve. I was in Singapore last month with John McCain, who you
    mentioned how he had encouraged you, for your service.
        And we went to Singapore for an international defense
    conference, security conference, following the time that we
    went to Vietnam. So we had just been to Singapore, meeting with
    the leaders there.
        But Singapore really has been, one, a strong partner of the
    United States in trade as well as in security. It is also a
    major focal point in that whole part of the world.
        So can you talk a little bit about how important the U.S.
    presence is in that region, specifically in Singapore? And as
    Ambassador, how do you plan to further strengthen the
    cooperation between the United States and Singapore?
        Ms. McFarland. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. And thank you,
    too, for your interest in that part of the world. I think you
    and I both agree that it is going to be an extremely important
    part of America's future as well.
        A lot of economic estimates are that 60 percent, even as
    much as 80 percent of the world's economic growth in the next
    decade are going to come from Southeast Asia and that region.
        The United States has 4,200 American companies that are
    headquartered in Singapore. That is up from about 3,700 about 2
    years ago. And Singapore acts as the hub of a lot of the
    economic interests throughout the region.
        So in other words, if there is an American company
    headquartered in Singapore, it will do business in Singapore,
    but it also may do business in other nations in Southeast Asia,
    Malaysia, Indonesia, et cetera.
        So given that trend, I think it is an important place for
    the United States to be to advance those commercial interests.
    As good as they are now, they could be a lot better. And it is
    an area of the world that we do not want to forsake, or that we
    do not want to be edged out of as that area of the world
    increases in its economic relationship.
        As far as all the other parts, it also remains a hub for
    security relations. If you look at a map, the Strait of Malacca
    is the gateway. All trade that is going from Europe, from the
    Middle East, energy trade, has to go past Singapore on its way
    to all of Asia. American trade going from the West Coast goes
    in the opposite direction through Singapore.
        So it is important for us to have an economic presence
    there, but also have a security presence there.
        Singapore understands its responsibilities. As a small
    nation-state, it is only 5.5 million people. Its landmass is
    about four times the size of Washington, or for a New Yorker
    like me, it is like New York City without Staten Island. So it
    is a small place, but it plays big. And it plays particularly
    big in the security relationship.
        Singapore spends close to 4 percent of its GNP on defense.
    And out of every--its entire national budget is spent on a
    number of things, but $1 out of every $3 or $4 is spent on
    defense. A lot of that military equipment that they buy is
    American military equipment, which, as you know, Singapore buys
    planes from your part of the world and trains in Wyoming.
        The Singapore military, because it is a small area, they
    have bases elsewhere. They have training facilities in the
    United States and in other parts of the world that they then
    use that equipment as they come home to Singapore.
        So I think it is those things. It is the fact that it may
    be small, it may have a small population, but it is a hub for
    so many things.
        And it is an important part of the world that we need to be
    in, and particularly, as you mentioned, as other countries look
    and wonder about our commitment, because those are the swing
    states. If we are somehow not present economically, are not
    present in a security sense, that is a part of the world that
    make its own separate deal, and it is a part of the world that
    we may not be heavily involved in for hundreds of years.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much.
    Congratulations to each and every one of you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        I have been informed of Senator Rubio's earlier comments,
    and I just want to say that I do not think that is going to be
    possible because co-owner Robert Kraft is a very close friend
    of Donald Trump's, so I do not think there is any chance of Tom
    Brady leaving the country until he has won at least two or
    three more Super Bowl championships. And at that point, it is
    whatever he wants, okay? So that is our approach.
        You understand that, Mr. Johnson, very much,
    notwithstanding the competitive advantage the Jets would
    receive.
        Mr. Johnson. I am open to it.
        Senator Markey. Let me ask you, Ms. McFarland, the rigorous
    enforcement of sanctions on North Korea is essential to get
    North Korea to the table for serious negotiations of our
    denuclearization of the peninsula. Singapore has an important
    role in the effort.
        The United Nations panel of experts set up to monitor North
    Korean compliance with international sanctions has assessed
    that North Korea continues to evade sanctions through the use
    of front companies, including in Singapore.
        That panel's report linked a Singaporean company to a North
    Korean firm that is involved in the sale of conventional arms.
    The company, Glocom, was identified as a front run by North
    Korean intelligence agencies that sell equipment in violation
    of U.N. sanctions.
        More recently, the research organization NK News published
    a comprehensive report indicating that a Singapore-based
    company named OCN Singapore is involved in importing luxury
    goods into North Korea in defiance of U.N. Security Council
    sanctions.
        Singapore needs to fully investigate those allegations and
    ensure that North Korea is not using its open financial and
    trading environment to evade sanctions.
        If you are confirmed, Ms. McFarland, would you ensure that
    the strongest possible message is sent from the United States
    to the Singapore Government that we expect full compliance with
    the North Korean sanctions?
        Ms. McFarland. Absolutely. As President Trump has said,
    North Korea's nuclear proliferation program is one of the most
    serious and immediate crises we face. And whether it is the
    financial technology issues, the fintech, or whether it is the
    counterproliferation transshipment points that Singapore is for
    goods that might be going to North Korea of any type, it is
    important not only that we have these international agreements,
    but that we enforce them.
        So you can have complete confidence that, if I am
    confirmed, I will pursue that. Thank you.
        Senator Markey. It is hard to get the attention of North
    Korea, if China is not imposing tough sanctions. There has been
    a 37 percent increase in trade between China and North Korea
    over last year. The same thing is true for some of these other
    countries.
        We just have to make sure that the pressure is intensified,
    so that North Korea does come to the bargaining table.
        Mr. Johnson, the issue of Northern Ireland is very
    important to tens of millions of Irish in the United States.
    Following his nomination by President Clinton, Senator George
    Mitchell chaired the all-party negotiations that ultimately
    produced the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. It ended years of
    bloodshed.
        But a crisis in Northern Ireland has prevented the
    formation of a government there since January when Martin
    McGuinness resigned as Deputy First Minister 2 months before he
    died.
        Since January, Sinn Fein and the Democratic Unionist Party
    have been in difficult talks to form a new government.
        The June election in the U.K. has resulted in Prime
    Minister May's Conservative Party forming a coalition with the
    Democratic Unionist Party. The DUP was the only party in
    Northern Ireland that opposed the Good Friday Agreement,
    although its founder, Ian Paisley, ultimately agreed to a
    government in which he served as First Minister and McGuinness
    served as Deputy First Minister.
        Prime Minister May's coalition was formed with the DUP, and
    it is particularly troubling because the British Government is
    the guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement and is responsible
    for mediating the political crisis in Belfast.
        So all of these factors raise serious concerns, especially
    since the Northern Irish voted overwhelmingly against Brexit,
    even as there is a goal set by Prime Minister May that she
    wants a hard Brexit, which causes real problems, potentially,
    in Northern Ireland.
        Could you talk a little bit about that issue and how you
    would represent the United States?
        Mr. Johnson. Senator, I thank you for that very complicated
    question, because it reflects the complications of what is
    happening in Northern Ireland and its relation to both the U.S.
    and the U.K.
        The Good Friday agreements, as you pointed out, that were
    shepherded by the U.S., by the U.K., and by the Irish
    themselves led to roughly 19 years, so far, of peace, relative
    peace and tranquility from a period that was very turbulent.
        These are complicated issues, particularly now, if you
    inject Brexit into the equation as a factor, as a major factor.
    You have issues, border issues, trade issues, immigration
    issues. A lot have been done, as you commented on, with
    supporting jobs along the border to harmonize the relationship
    and to try to have a better understanding between secular
    beliefs that were the cause of some of the unrest.
        I pledge to you, because I know this is an important issue,
    that, if confirmed, I will spend a lot of time trying to do
    anything I can do to facilitate the establishment of an
    understanding and try to pick up on what you did in 1998 to
    establish this. Because it is in the U.S.'s best interests to
    have a stable U.K., including Northern Ireland.
        Senator Markey. So I thank you for that. The more attention
    you pay to it, I think, the greater the likelihood that the
    peace will hold. It is the economic integration largely, the
    customs integration issues, the security issues, that have
    really helped to integrate Northern Ireland into Europe, and
    with Ireland itself.
        So the more that Brexit kind of starts to fool with that
    formula is the more it could lead to a delay in the full
    integration, which I think ultimately is what the people of
    Northern Ireland need to finally bring permanent peace and
    tranquility to their country.
        So thank you, sir.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Gardner?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to all the nominees for your willingness to serve
    our country. Welcome to your families who are in attendance to
    today. And I just appreciate the fact that you are willing to
    serve our country. I truly do appreciate it.
        I have had the chance to visit with all of you about the
    work that you will be pursuing in the various countries that
    you will be representing, and the alliance, of course, that is
    so important and critical to the safety and security of Europe
    and the United States. I look forward to working with you in
    years to come, upon confirmation.
        I do serve as chairman of the East Asia Subcommittee, so,
    Ms. McFarland, I am sorry, I am going to spend most of my time
    sending questions your way.
        We have had a lot of conversations already that even
    Senator Markey most recently brought up about North Korea and
    actually covered one of the companies that I was going to talk
    about. Recent reports are OCN, as Senator Markey mentioned, was
    found to have been doing business with Pyongyang, doing
    business in Pyongyang and North Korea, a luxury goods store.
        As Ambassador, how do you approach that situation? How will
    you approach that situation where you see a report and find out
    some information about a company that is doing business in
    violation of either a U.N. resolution or a U.S. law like we
    passed last Congress dealing with North Korean sanctions? How
    do you approach this? How do you work with the Government of
    Singapore or any Nation, for that matter? How do you work
    within ASEAN to spread greater awareness of the need to address
    these sanctions and fully enforce them? And how do you deal
    with that, within the Trump administration?
        Ms. McFarland. Thank you, Senator Gardner. And I do, if
    confirmed, look forward to a long and fruitful conversation
    with you as the chairman of the East Asia Subcommittee.
        I think I would start with Embassy Singapore. It has not
    only Foreign Service Officers who are economic officers as
    well, but there are members of the Commerce Department, special
    trade rep, intelligence community and others.
        The first step would be to find out, okay, what is going
    on? What are these companies? What is their economic tie? And
    what is, potentially, their military tie to North Korea? And
    working through the State Department, as well as those people
    at Embassy Singapore who would be working with their home
    agencies, some 19, including even the Agriculture Department
    has representation in Singapore.
        And then it would be to present that issue to the
    appropriate place in the Singapore Government. Singapore wants
    good relations with us. They have said that time and again.
    Whether it is economic relations, whether it is military
    relations, whether it is political relations, security
    relations, they value our support at the United Nations and
    others. So that is worth something.
        And I think that the ability to go to a friendly country
    and say this is what we have determined, this is what the
    United Nations has determined, with regard to a company of
    yours. How are we going to work together to stop this?
        Singapore has said, Singaporean leaders, the Prime
    Minister, and others have said that they, too, are concerned
    about the threat of North Korea. And as Senator Markey pointed
    out, the only way that North Korea is ever going to get to the
    point of potentially giving up its nuclear weapons or changing
    its attitudes is if they feel the pressure.
        And where are they getting the pressure? We have had a
    number of sanctions that are against North Korea through the
    United Nations and other international organizations, but there
    has to be secondary pressure that is brought to bear. And as
    Secretary Tillerson has said, with regard to North Korea
    specifically, China looks at North Korea as a strategic asset.
    How are we going to change their minds to view it as a
    strategic liability? One of these would be the kind of economic
    pressure.
        But as we are bringing economic pressure to other countries
    not to do business with North Korea, Singapore we hope would
    work with us in that same goal.
        Senator Gardner. You mentioned talking about presence and
    you talked about the fact that, if we are not present within
    the region either economically or from a security standpoint,
    that creates a challenge for U.S. leadership.
        We have been working on legislation to try to create a
    long-term Asia strategy. What do you think some of the key
    points and framework should be of a long-term U.S. strategy to
    build that presence in Singapore and Southeast Asia overall?
        Ms. McFarland. Yes, and I think that in the conversations I
    have had with you, the direction you are going I think is very
    much in concert with what the administration, what Secretary
    Tillerson and others have said is their goal in the Asian
    region.
        One place that I think offers an enormous amount of future
    opportunity is cyber. Singapore and the United States have both
    been named as the two countries which are the best at and take
    most seriously the whole cyber issue, whether it is
    intellectual property theft, whether it is cyber defense,
    whether it is cyber hacking.
        And since Singapore is going to be chairman of ASEAN, the
    Association of Southeast Asian Nations, in 2018, they have
    already said that they want the cyber issue to be first and
    foremost, not only for Singapore but for the other countries in
    the region.
        Singapore's goal is to be the first smart nation where they
    use digital technology, where they use logarithms to help
    various aspects of their society, civil society.
        So I think that represents the future. And the world is
    going in the cyber direction, the Internet of Things. And if
    Singapore said that they are interested in doing that, we know
    we have had an interest in doing it.
        We know that we are both very vulnerable. We are the most
    connected countries in the world, but that leaves us with great
    vulnerabilities as well.
        So I would think that is a place to look, not only that I
    would be interested in looking at with Singapore but any work
    that you are doing as I proceed with this legislation that you
    are proposing.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        Thanks to all of you for your service.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to you all for your willingness to serve the
    country.
        Senator Hutchison, I am sorry that we did not get to serve
    together here in the Senate, but I am glad that the siren of
    public service has called you once again. I wanted to ask you a
    question about the role of counterterrorism within the NATO
    alliance.
        I think there are still some pretty glaring vulnerabilities
    in Europe, with respect to their ability to share information
    about terrorism threats, both to Europe and to the United
    States. It is as if the United States were trying to thwart
    terrorist attempts without the FBI, with 50 different State law
    enforcement jurisdictions voluntarily cooperating with each
    other.
        Is this an issue that should be left to the EU to figure
    out and to the EU Ambassador? Or is this a proper subject for
    our NATO Ambassador to engage with countries through that
    forum, to try to improve the ability of European countries to
    share information, perhaps through new mandatory procedures
    regarding counterterrorism threats?
        Senator Hutchison. Thank you. I think that is a very good
    question.
        I definitely think it is in NATO's purview. And I think the
    President, President Trump, brought that up. And NATO has now
    affirmed that cyberterrorism is a threat, in many instances. It
    could be in a communications system. It could be in any kind of
    business disruption. And it could be in our military
    communications or military activity.
        So I think it is in NATO's interests. They have already
    agreed that it will be one of the focuses and one of the main
    focuses.
        NATO is somewhat like the United States Senate, or any
    group that has different threats and different constituencies.
    Some members of NATO are more concerned about Russian
    aggression. Others are more concerned about terrorism and
    counterterrorism, depending on where they fall geographically.
        So I think it is very much a common threat, and it should
    be in the purview of NATO.
        Senator Murphy. I think it is probably in the purview of
    NATO. It is also in the purview of the EU. I think we need to
    apply as much pressure as possible to clean up these
    vulnerabilities, in part because there are vulnerabilities.
    These are visa waiver countries in which these threats can land
    on our shores without any security screens, so I thank you for
    that.
        Senator Hutchison. Your point, also, is very important,
    that NATO and the EU are also beginning to do more sharing than
    they have ever done before.
        Senator Murphy. Mr. Johnson, I know you got a question when
    I was not here earlier on Brexit and the future of Britain's
    relationship with the EU. But I wanted to talk to you about the
    conversation around a free trade agreement with Britain.
        There has been some talk within this administration of
    engaging in talks with Britain, with respect to a free trade
    agreement. There is great worry. I am in the category of those
    who worry that, if this is placed before a bilateral
    negotiation with the EU on what we call T-TIP, that it is going
    to provide an incentive for other countries to exit Europe,
    because they can get first in line for a trade agreement with
    the United States.
        Do you think that it is appropriate to negotiate a free
    trade agreement with England, with Britain, before we have
    engaged in a trade agreement negotiation with Europe, as a
    whole?
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you for that question. Thank you for
    that question, Senator.
        Yes, Brexit is going to be complicated. It is going to be a
    complicated series of agenda items going forward. And one of
    them is free trade and how that is played, I mean the bilateral
    trade between the U.S. and that country, and what impact that
    has, positive or negative. So I think that has to be factored
    in.
        I suspect that we are going to have to wait until this
    process unfolds a little more, so we figure out what the pieces
    are.
        And as Ambassador, if confirmed, I would be talking to the
    political and business leaders, and opinion leaders, in the
    country to figure out what vulnerabilities and what
    opportunities there are for American businesses and Americans.
        And you point out, there is every one of these factors,
    whether it is negotiating a bilateral agreement or even looking
    at cybersecurity, like you were just talking about. Everything
    is impacted by Brexit and our ability to kind of predict and
    project what is in our best interests as this unfolds.
        Senator Murphy. I do not expect you to be able to answer
    the precise question, but I would just caution you on this
    issue. It is one thing for our President to cheerlead Brexit.
    It is quite another to reward with them with a free trade
    agreement that will be fodder for many of the groups that are
    pushing for other countries to leave the EU as well. So I
    appreciate you giving more thought to that issue.
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        I see the making of a diplomat there.
        Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I have been asking this question of all of our nominees
    when they go to a specific country, so it is not personal, but
    it is just a continuing effort.
        Ms. McFarland, do you speak Mandarin, Tamil, or Malay?
        Ms. McFarland. No. My undergraduate degree was in Chinese
    studies, and I did study Chinese intensively for those years.
    My graduate work at MIT was on the Sino-Soviet military balance
    and the Sino-Soviet military conflict of 1969. The
    dissertation, sadly, I did not have an opportunity to finish.
        My Mandarin is very, very, very rusty. And one of the first
    things I would do is look forward to trying to see if I could
    remember back 40 years and try to refresh that. Thank you.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Eisenberg, you speak Italian?
        Mr. Eisenberg. [Speaking in Italian.]
        If you will allow me, Senator, since you have asked the
    question, I was remiss in the opening, gratified by the
    introduction of Senator Rubio, since my wife and I have now
    been residents of Florida for almost a decade, but very remiss,
    I might say, in not addressing the fact that nine of my 16
    immediate family are sitting directly behind me, who are
    residents of the Garden State.
        Senator Menendez. Oh, I am familiar with that. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Eisenberg. I know that you are, but if you would just
    allow me, my wife, Judy, we just celebrated our 52nd
    anniversary, so for personal reasons, I would like to introduce
    my wife. My oldest daughter, Lisa Goodwyn, and my daughter,
    Laura Balestro, are here. Their husbands, Rick Goodwin, it is
    actually Laura Barr and Dr. Kyle Barr. And unfortunately, my
    daughter, Stacy Lyle and Paul Lyle, could not be here, but have
    three children who also will be voters in the State of New
    Jersey. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Eisenberg. So I would just be remiss if I did
    recategorize a little bit my origin, so thank you for that
    extra moment.
        We will continue to take Italian lessons, so that I can
    speak more than that opening phrase.
        Senator Menendez. Well, we should have made you the nominee
    to the Holy See, based upon that large, expansive family.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. But I do not believe that not having a
    language ability is disqualifying. And I did not ask you my
    second question, because you all said it in your testimony,
    about whether or not you visited the country.
        Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the past have held
    against Democratic nominees whether they did not speak the
    language or did not visit the country.
        So I am going to create a continuing record, so that we
    hopefully have equity at the end of the day, regardless of who
    the nominee is.
        Senator Cardin. Aren't you going to ask Mr. Johnson if you
    can speak the British English? [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. We have been working with each other on
    our Gaelic.
        So let me ask you all, with just a simple yes or no answer,
    do you believe that Russia sought to interfere in our
    presidential elections last year?
        Ms. McFarland. Yes.
        Mr. Eisenberg. I do not know the answer to that, but I
    think there is enough investigation and discussion going on, so
    I would like to reserve judgment for the moment.
        Senator Menendez. With 17 intelligence agencies, you still
    do not have a view.
        Mr. Eisenberg. I think it is likely, but I do believe there
    are investigations that are going on to corroborate it as fact.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Johnson?
        Mr. Johnson. I have not studied the evidence on the inside,
    so I can just go by what I read, and it looks like, you know,
    it could have happened, maybe it did happen. But until I,
    really, if I went--if I did a complete analysis with all the
    information, I would be able to give you a much better
    judgment.
        Senator Menendez. Ms. Craft?
        Ms. Craft. Thank you. I believe, just from reading the
    material that everyone has had the opportunity to read, that it
    looks as if, yes. I would have to investigate this further and
    learn more points, but I do believe, yes.
        Senator Menendez. Senator Hutchison?
        Senator Hutchison. I think, from what our intelligence
    community has said and what has been in the newspapers and
    other media, that there is a good likelihood yes. I also think
    it is important that we know the extent and how it was done,
    and that is what the investigations are meant to do.
        Senator Menendez. And the reason I asked the question, it
    may seem unrelated to your nominations, but the fact is that
    the Senate passed 98-2 sanctions--it is very rare these days we
    get 98-2 votes--on Russia for, among other things, interfering
    in our elections.
        And when I heard your answer, Senator Hutchison, to Senator
    Murphy about cyberattacks and NATO, and how you described the
    different elements of what a cyberattack would be, we need to
    have our Ambassadors abroad making clear, unequivocal advocacy
    in the countries in which they are assigned join us in our
    multilateral sanctions effort, whether it be Iran, which is
    also part of that legislation, or whether it be Russia.
        So I am a little worried that, with all of the public
    knowledge--I am not saying that they affected the election. The
    mere fact that they tried to affect the election should be of
    great concern from the average citizen to the President of the
    United States. We need our Ambassadors to be advocating that
    point of view as it relates to sanctions when this finally
    passes the House and is signed by the President, and I hope we
    can count on you to do that.
        In that regard, Mr. Eisenberg, in reference to that
    legislation, one of the concerns that I have is to Italy. While
    Italy has complied with sanctions, it has relatively close
    relations with Russia and has indicated interest in doing more
    business with Iran.
        As my colleagues have noted, we expect this legislation
    soon to pass the House.
        How will you engage with the Italians on maintaining
    economic pressure, both on Russia and Iran?
        Mr. Eisenberg. If confirmed, Senator, I would intend to
    become more decisively involved in that discussion.
        But I would note that Italy is 80 percent reliant on its
    energy resources from Russia and Libya, but they have continued
    to maintain their substantial support on the sanctions. And I
    have no reason to expect that I would not continue to encourage
    and try to help them to live up to that.
        Senator Menendez. I appreciate their energy challenges, and
    you are right. But as a NATO ally, and dependent upon the
    United States as a major element of that, we need them, as well
    as other European countries that some of you will be nominated
    to--I do not have any doubt about Great Britain--but
    nonetheless, to be engaged in making sure that--because the
    European Union is by unanimity, one country breaking away
    breaks the sanctions regime. And if our multilateral sanctions
    regime is broken, then we have a real challenge in returning to
    the international order.
        So I commend that to part of your commitment to your work.
        And if I may take one last moment, Mr. Chairman, to Mr.
    Johnson, I appreciate the answer you gave on peace and justice
    in Northern Ireland, something that we spoke about when you
    came to visit me, and I am glad you came to visit me.
        Let me ask you this. The other problem with Great Britain
    right now is it is a critical security ally of ours. Sharing
    intelligence is critical to the national interests and security
    of the United States. We had some irritants between what
    happened at the Ariana Grande concert with leaks. We had
    comments made about the mayor of London.
        Will you work as our Ambassador to assure the United
    Kingdom that our commitment to security and our confidentiality
    in terms of the sharing of intelligence is going to be
    preserved?
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Senator. I certainly will.
        Senator Menendez. I have questions about Canada that I will
    submit to the record and look for a response.
        The Chairman.  Thank you so much.
        Senator Cardin?
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Eisenberg, I want to follow up on
    Senator Menendez's point, because your response in regard to
    Russia's interference in our elections, I fully appreciate the
    fact that you have not studied the issue, but there has been
    widespread reporting on it, and this Congress feels very
    strongly that Russia represents an extreme danger against
    America.
        That is the reason we are going to pass and enact the
    stronger sanctions taking away some of the discretion of the
    President as it relates to imposition of sanctions against
    Russia.
        Italy is a country that does business with Russia. Of the
    countries that we have Ambassadors, that is the only one of the
    four that currently does business with Russia. It is very
    possible they are going to be impacted by the sanctions.
        We have to work very closely with our European partners for
    sanctions to work against Russia. Europe is more vulnerable
    than we are to the activities that Russia is doing, so it is in
    their interests that we have strong unity between the United
    States and Europe in enforcing sanctions against Russia.
        But there will be business interests, and perhaps some
    governmental interests, in Italy that will resist some aspects
    of this, saying, ``Gee, can't we at least get a pass, so that
    we can continue to do this?'' And that weakens the whole fiber,
    the whole fabric of our sanctions regime. And we are going to
    need a very strong voice in Italy working with the EU and the
    United States to have a very united, strong position against
    Russia that, if they continue to interfere in our countries,
    they are going to pay a heavy economic price.
        Are you prepared to be that person?
        Mr. Eisenberg. If confirmed, I think I can deliver that
    message and execute on that message.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you. I want to thank you all for,
    again, your willingness to serve.
        I do want to reiterate, especially in Italy, U.K., and at
    NATO, Russia will do everything it can to destabilize and to
    pose a threat to democracy. And I think it is rare that the
    United States Senate has acted in the way that it has,
    regardless of what people may or may not think happened during
    the election, and I do think they did attempt to interfere,
    there is no question their goal is to destabilize democracies.
    I know that each of you will be strong advocates for that not
    occurring.
        I want to say, in particular, to Italy, I know that you
    will not be the Ambassador to the Vatican, but on my recent
    visit there, I was struck by the public relations campaign
    Russia had done to hold itself up as the protector of
    Christians, and the fact that the Pope and others seemed to be
    open to that.
        So I think there is a lot of work that we have to do there,
    and that mostly is in relation to what is happening in Syria.
        Then finally, I would just say that, in addition to passing
    a bill 98-2, this committee unanimously reported, and the
    Senate has adopted a major effort to end modern slavery around
    the world. In all the countries that you are going to, slavery
    exists. It exists in our own country. I know that each of you
    will have questions about trafficking, and that kind of thing.
    But we do hope that you will be advocates on that human value.
        The record will remain open until the close of business on
    Friday.
        I know a number of you have family issues, and you need to
    get to countries before school starts and that kind of thing.
    It is an usual time here in the Senate, but one of the things
    that can speed it along is, when you do get the questions, to
    the extent you can, pay personal attention and answer them
    fully.
        The Chairman.  Thank you all for your desire to serve.
        The meeting is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:54 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

                                  ----------

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
              to Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchinson by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. NATO estimates that only four other countries last year
    met the NATO guideline of spending 2 percent of GDP on defense. I know
    that some countries have now reached that mark or are on pace to do so
    in the near future, like Lithuania and Latvia. Still, there are too
    many in the Alliance that aren't reacting quickly enough to the new
    reality of consistent and destabilizing Russian aggression. Do you
    intend to press our NATO allies to hit NATO's 2 percent guideline? As
    defense spending increases in NATO countries, where should NATO look to
    add capability?

        Answer. As President Trump has made clear, it is no longer
    politically sustainable for the United States to maintain a
    disproportionate share of NATO's defense expenditures. If confirmed, I
    will continue to press Allies to increase their defense spending to
    meet the Wales pledge, in which Allies agreed to aim to move toward two
    percent of GDP on defense spending by 2024, with twenty percent of
    total defense expenditures on defense modernization. This issue goes
    beyond equitable burden sharing; it reflects what Allies need to do for
    themselves to meet the changed security environment.
        Five Allies--Estonia, Greece, Poland, the United Kingdom and the
    United States--already meet the two percent goal. We expect Romania to
    reach two percent this year, and Latvia and Lithuania should reach that
    goal in 2018. Thirteen Allies spend at least 20 percent of their
    defense budgets on major equipment. Three Allies--Poland, the United
    Kingdom, and the United States--currently meet both the two percent and
    the twenty percent goals, and Romania should reach both targets this
    year.
        At the May NATO Leaders Meeting, Allies agreed to develop national
    plans to put them on a path towards achieving these goals. I will
    continue to work with Allies through NATO structures and bilaterally to
    ensure that they meet their commitments.
        As the President has said, NATO must adapt to the challenges of the
    future. This includes acquiring the capabilities necessary to focus on
    today's most pressing security challenges, including the fight against
    terrorism.
        In June, Allies agreed to new capability targets--specific areas
    where the Alliance plans to improve in order to meet collective defense
    requirements in the face of existing and evolving threats. It is
    important for Allies to invest more on defense, with an eye towards
    meeting capability targets and modernizing in a way that avoids
    duplication, in order to fulfill capability shortfalls.
        NATO's Secretary General announced prior to the June 2017 Defense
    Ministerial that defense spending increases will be spent in such areas
    as heavy equipment, air-to-air refueling, more exercises, salaries, and
    missions in Afghanistan and Kosovo.

        Question 2. NATO added its 29th member this year, Montenegro, which
    was the first expansion since 2009. As Russian aggression continues,
    particularly in Eastern Europe, do you believe we should continue
    expanding NATO in the region? Should NATO invite Moldova to the
    Alliance? Georgia? Ukraine?

        Answer. Montenegro's accession demonstrates to NATO's other
    aspirants and the broader international community that NATO's
    commitment to its Open Door Policy is enduring and that no third
    country has a veto on NATO membership.
        The Open Door Policy is a Founding Principle of the Washington
    Treaty and one of the Alliance's great successes. NATO's door is open
    to all European democracies which share the values of our Alliance,
    which are willing and able to assume the responsibilities and
    obligations of membership, which are in a position to further the
    principles of the Treaty, and whose inclusion can contribute to the
    security of the North Atlantic Area. Decisions on enlargement are for
    NATO and the nation in question; no other outside country, such as
    Russia, has a voice in the process. At the Warsaw Summit NATO Allies
    said that they remain fully committed to the integration of those
    countries that aspire to join the Alliance, judging each on its own
    merits. The current aspirants are Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and
    Macedonia. That continues to be the right approach, and if confirmed, I
    will work to assist these countries in making progress. The enlargement
    process has and will continue to serve as a particularly effective
    vehicle for promoting democratic values, reform, and respect for the
    rule of law within the Euro-Atlantic region.
        The Membership Action Plan (MAP) is a NATO program of advice,
    assistance and practical support tailored to the individual needs of
    countries wishing to join the Alliance. Participation in the MAP
    program does not prejudge any decision by the Alliance on future
    membership. The MAP process provides a focused and candid feedback
    mechanism on aspirant countries' progress on their programs. This
    includes both political and technical advice, as well as annual
    meetings between all NATO members and individual aspirants at the level
    of the North Atlantic Council to assess progress, on the basis of an
    annual progress report. Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine do not
    participate in the MAP program.

                                   __________

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
           to Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I believe the pillars of freedom, human rights and
    democracy, are the crucial values on which America stands and our
    global leadership must project.
        As a founding honorary co-chair of Vital Voices, an organization
    that promotes women's equality, I have championed the women who have
    stood up for human rights and dignity throughout the world.
        I serve on the board of the International Republican Institute
    (IRI), part of the National Endowment for Democracy, that with its
    democratic counterpart promotes democratic institutions in emerging
    democracies.
    Mission Statement
            A nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, the International
            Republican Institute advances freedom and democracy worldwide
            by helping political parties to become more issue-based and
            responsive, assisting citizens to participate in government
            planning, and working to increase the role of marginalized
            groups in the political process--including women and youth.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns facing
    NATO today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy at NATO and with its
    member countries? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. NATO's Open Door and its enlargement process encourage and
    support democratic reforms and the establishment of civilian and
    democratic control over military forces. Countries seeking NATO
    membership must, among other things, demonstrate that they have a
    functioning democratic political system. Critical elements of a
    functioning democratic system include free and fair elections, rule of
    law and an independent judiciary, and respect for human rights. These
    requirements provide aspiring countries a blueprint to set up
    democracies that protect human rights. I will promote these principles
    for our present and future allies. These are principles we also promote
    with our over 40 partners, even those not seeking to join the alliance.
        With regard to NATO-led operations, NATO remains vigilant about
    maintaining the highest standards of human rights in its military
    operations and activities.
        Over the past several years, NATO has worked closely with the UN to
    develop a policy on Women, Peace and Security (WPS), Children and Armed
    Conflict (CAAC) and Protection of Civilians (PoC). I will work with
    Allies to ensure the continued implementation of these policies not
    only in NATO-led operations and activities in the field, but also
    throughout the NATO Command Structure and NATO Headquarters.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face at NATO in advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Within NATO, the biggest challenge is the lack of resources
    for these initiatives. Most of the resources for these projects are
    provided by nations through trust funds and voluntary contributions of
    personnel. Another challenge is to continue to encourage aspirants to
    meet NATO standards for democratic governance. Each aspirant is unique
    and judged individually on its merits. We are unwavering in our
    commitment that any Euro-Atlantic country that wishes to join the
    Alliance must meet the requirements to do so. If confirmed, I will
    continue the work that we do bilaterally and through NATO structures,
    to assist them in their reform efforts to meet NATO standards.
        Like aspirants, all NATO partners are unique. The challenge will be
    ensuring that partners maintain the same high democratic standards,
    especially when participating in NATO-led operations. I will continue
    to work through NATO structures and bilaterally to ensure that in
    executing operations and designing partnership agreements we continue
    to encourage partners to maintain NATO standards and values.

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

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

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

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

        Question 6. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups?

        Answer. If confirmed, my primary job as Ambassador is to lead the
    men and women at USNATO. My success rests on all of them. As their
    leader, I will strive to make sure they are empowered to advance U.S.
    national interests at NATO, and that they have the political and other
    support they require to effectively and efficiently do their jobs. I am
    conscious that my leadership legacy at USNATO is about more than
    securing policy successes. It is also about building the mission as an
    institution and developing the people who work there. I take this very
    seriously. If confirmed, I will fully support the Department's
    mentoring programs, and along with my Deputy Chief of Mission, ensure
    staff are provided with the professional development opportunities they
    require to build their capacity to serve at USNATO and at higher levels
    in other assignments. I am also cognizant of the importance of ensuring
    my team contains a diverse group of individuals from different
    backgrounds. I will expect my Department of State and Department of
    Defense employees, especially my senior managers, to demonstrate the
    same cognizance as we recruit employees, build internal teams or
    working groups, and set mission strategy. Finally, I understand the
    importance of mentoring, especially mentoring new employees or
    employees early in their careers, from all backgrounds.

        Question 7. What more is needed to build defense capacities within
    Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia?

        Answer. Russian aggression along portions of its periphery has
    affected or has the potential to directly affect these states. We
    recognize the need to increase these states' capacity to provide for
    their own defense, improve interoperability with NATO and other Western
    forces, and implement deep and sustainable defense reforms, which will
    contribute to collective security and stability along NATO's eastern
    flank.
        In response to Russian aggression, the United States has committed
    more than $600 million in security assistance and has provided training
    and equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and territorial
    integrity, better monitor and secure its borders, and deploy its forces
    more safely and effectively. Working with Ukraine's Armed Forces, we
    have also established a Multinational Joint Commission and training
    group to coordinate international efforts to help build Ukraine's
    defense capacity and deter further Russian aggression. NATO assistance
    to Ukraine was formalized in a Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP)
    adopted at the July 2016 NATO Warsaw Summit. The more than 40 targeted
    support measures in the CAP focus on assisting Ukraine's ongoing
    defense reforms, which aim to bring Ukraine up to NATO standards,
    including civilian control of the military, by 2020.
        Efforts in Georgia seek to strengthen its defense readiness,
    support expeditionary deployments, and support Georgia's sovereignty
    and territorial integrity through the Georgia Defense Readiness
    Program. Georgia received a significant increase in security assistance
    to total more than $30 million in FY 2016. NATO Allies, including the
    United States, also are supporting Georgia's defense institutions
    through the Substantial NATO-Georgia Package, which provides resources
    and advisors help to prepare Georgia for eventual NATO membership.
        NATO Allies support Moldova through a Defense and Related Security
    Capacity Building program aimed at reforming the country's defense and
    security sector. Allies also support the wider democratic,
    institutional and judicial reform process underway in the country. U.S.
    security assistance to Moldova totaled $12.75 million in FY 2016 and
    focused on defense reform, strengthening internal defense capabilities,
    and ensuring interoperability with regional partners, including NATO.

        Question 8. What opportunities do you see to better support
    democratic governance and institutional reforms in countries vulnerable
    to Russian aggression?

        Answer. Transparent and accountable defense institutions under
    democratic control are fundamental to stability in the Euro-Atlantic
    area and beyond, and are essential for international security
    cooperation. Within the framework of its Building Integrity Program,
    NATO works to support Allies and partner countries to promote and
    implement the principles of integrity, transparency and accountability
    in accordance with international norms and practices.
        Because no single model will work for all countries, there is a
    wide range of support NATO and the U.S. Government can bring. NATO
    support to vulnerable countries such as Ukraine and Georgia can help
    bolster democratic governance and further institutional reforms. The
    United States and Allies help train the militaries and advise
    governments on necessary military reforms, such as civilian control of
    the military and in promoting anti-corruption efforts, offering our own
    programs as well as supporting European experts in their work.
    Corruption is a key lever of influence for Russia, and eliminating it
    is essential to building resilience.

                                   __________

          Responses to An Additional Question for the Record Submitted
              to Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. If confirmed as NATO ambassador, you would be entrusted
    with safeguarding relationships with our most trusted allies and
    partners and, if President Trump's latest meeting with NATO is any
    indication, addressing the statements of the President while not
    further fracturing alliances with our allies.
        Nicholas Burns, who served as ambassador to NATO under President
    George W. Bush, stated ``I do think Trump's visit to NATO was the least
    effective of any American president since 1949,'' following President
    Trump's attendance at the NATO summit earlier this summer. The
    President did not reaffirm Article 5 even after NATO states came to
    America's aid after 9/11--the only time in the alliance's history that
    it has invoked Article 5. About a third of the NATO soldiers killed in
    Afghanistan have come from countries other than the United States.

       Do you believe that the United States should abide by our Article 5
            commitment and how will you reassure our allies that we stand
            shoulder to shoulder with them?

        Answer. I fully agree with the public statements made by President
    Trump, Vice President Pence, Secretary Tillerson, and Secretary Mattis,
    that the United States is fully committed to Article 5. Collective
    defense in accordance with Article 5 is a bedrock principle of NATO and
    underpins the transatlantic relationship.
        The United States' commitment to Article 5 is ironclad and the
    United States backs up this commitment with action. The United States
    leads a rotational multinational battle group in Poland as part of
    NATO's enhanced Forward Presence. In addition, the United States
    supports deterrence and defense activities in Europe through the
    European Readiness Initiative (ERI). This administration's Fiscal Year
    2018 Budget request included $4.8 billion--a $1.4 billion increase from
    last year--to fund ERI. I appreciate Congress' steadfast support for
    this initiative.
        I welcome recent resolutions passed by the House and Senate
    reaffirming the U.S. commitment to Article 5.
        We recall with gratitude that the only invocation of Article 5 in
    NATO's 68 years happened in the wake of the September 11, 2001,
    attacks.

                                   __________

               Response to An Additional Question for the Record
                Submitted to Kelly Craft by Senator Marco Rubio

    On NATO and ISIS
        Question 1. While Canada has a contingent of 800 troops to fight
    ISIS, it recently discontinued flying counterterrorism sorties in Syria
    due to security concerns. In 2016, NATO estimates that Canada only
    spent less than 1 percent of its GDP on defense. Are Canada's
    contributions to NATO operations and the coalition against ISIS enough?
    Do you commit to press the Canadian Government to increase its
    contributions to NATO and the anti-ISIS coalition?

        Answer. Canada continues to play a central and critical role in
    U.S. counterterrorism operations worldwide, including in Afghanistan
    and Iraq, where Canada has troops deployed on the ground. In support of
    D-ISIS operations in Iraq, Canadian forces are training, assisting, and
    advising Iraqi forces together with U.S. and Coalition personnel,
    including throughout the recent nine-month operation to liberate Mosul.
        The United States has made clear to NATO allies, including Canada,
    our expectation that they live up to their Wales commitments to allot 2
    percent of GDP to defense. We have raised this repeatedly with Canada
    and I will continue to do so if confirmed. Canada recently released the
    results of a comprehensive defense policy review, which includes many
    welcome elements which will reform and strengthen Canadian military
    capabilities. We will continue to urge fulfillment of these commitments
    and greater burden sharing from NATO allies.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Kelly Craft by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. One of the most important ways to promote democracy is to
    be an active participant in our great American experiment. Throughout
    my life, starting with my father (a life-long Democrat), I have learned
    the importance of participating in elections by supporting candidates
    in whom you believe, volunteering on campaigns in your own community,
    and speaking up against inequities regardless of political
    repercussions. With regard to human rights issues, I previously had the
    privilege to serve our country as an alternate delegate to the United
    Nations, an international organization whose mission, in great part, is
    to advance the rights of all people around the world.
        If confirmed, I look forward to building on these past experiences
    and working with President Trump, Congress and other key stakeholders
    to advance human rights and democracy. In particular, I anticipate
    dedicating my time and energy to the issue of human trafficking--a
    matter on which Chairman Bob Corker, Ranking Member Ben Cardin, Senator
    Robert Menendez and their colleagues have shown greater leadership in
    recent years. As part of this effort, I will work diligently on the
    State Department's recommendation for Canada to: ``increase specialized
    services and shelter available to all trafficking victims. . . . '' as
    well as pay special attention to interagency and bilateral efforts that
    can improve data collection and coordination on anti-trafficking
    efforts here in North America and in multi-lateral fora in which Canada
    and the United States collaborate.

        Question 2. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from Canada?

        Answer. Yes. Canada and the United States have a long and proud
    history of jointly advancing the cause of human rights both at home and
    abroad. I look forward to working with my Canadian counterparts to
    continue to promote our common values.

        Question 3. Will you engage with Canadian Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. I look forward to working with my counterparts to
    promote the cause of human rights, civil rights, and governance
    worldwide.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. To my knowledge, neither I nor any of my immediate family
    members have any direct financial interests in Canada. If confirmed to
    serve as U.S. Ambassador to Canada, I will commit to the highest
    standards of ethical conduct for government officials and honor my
    ethical obligations under applicable federal law, regulations and
    rules. Additionally, if confirmed, I will adhere to all of the
    commitments set forth in my pre-clearance ethics agreement with the
    U.S. Department of State and raise any pertinent conflict of interest
    or ethical concerns that I may have through appropriate channels.

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. Yes. I share the view that a diverse workforce is key to
    ensuring a productive and creative team. I will endeavor to reflect the
    diversity of our great nation by promoting the value of diversity as
    Ambassador to Canada through our Embassy and our activities.

        Question 8. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will lead by example by fostering a culture of acceptance
    and inclusivity throughout Mission Canada. To achieve a diverse
    workforce, I will:

       Work to implement appropriate procedures for support and mentoring
            of staff;
       Fully comply with federal non-discrimination laws and regulations
            in our Embassy and consulates; and
       Clearly communicate the importance of complying with established
            protocols and procedures.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Kelly Craft by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. Until recently, Canadian courts have applied a utility
    requirement--referred to as the ``promise doctrine''--when assessing
    biopharmaceutical patents. Canada has used this policy to invalidate 26
    patents over the last decade. Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada
    invalidated the promise doctrine.

       Will you press for full and immediate implementation of this
            decision?
       How will you work to ensure that our trading partners, including
            Canada, uphold their FTA and WTO commitments on intellectual
            property rights?

        Answer. Yes. I am aware of the Canadian Supreme Court decision,
    which addresses a longstanding concern of the United States. Together
    with my team at Mission Canada, we will work closely with our
    colleagues at the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade
    Representative's office to press the Government of Canada to enforce
    the highest standards on intellectual property rights and to ensure
    that U.S. companies are fairly treated.

        Question 2. More money is spent on biomedical research and
    development in the U.S. than in any other country in the world.
    Proposals under consideration by the Canadian Government to change the
    way medicines are paid for in Canada would adopt pricing setting
    measures that discount this important investment. This could
    significantly harm U.S. biopharmaceutical companies and ultimately
    patient access to medicines.

       How will you work to advance policies for American innovators that
            appropriately recognize and reward the value of medicines and
            ensure patients have access to the medicines they need?

        Answer. Patients in both countries benefit from continued
    innovation in the medical and pharmaceutical industries. If confirmed,
    I will work with U.S. Government agencies to ensure that U.S.
    biopharmaceutical companies are fairly treated in the Canadian market.

        Question 3. Under NAFTA, when a U.S. investor in Canada is denied
    ``fair and equitable treatment'', the recourse for the U.S. investor is
    to file a claim with an arbitration panel. In certain cases, after a
    NAFTA arbitration panel decides in favor of a U.S. investor against
    Canada the Canadian Government has resorted to its own domestic courts
    to strike down the decision. After spending considerable time and
    resources to undertake the dispute panel process, U.S. companies must
    then fight the Canadian Government in the Canadian courts to preserve
    their victory.

       Will you commit to work with me and your Canadian counterparts to
            find a just resolution of these issues?
       How will you seek to impress upon the Canadian Government the
            importance of fulfilling their existing obligations under
            NAFTA, including the decisions of dispute resolution panels?

        Answer. I share your commitment to protect U.S. investors and, if
    confirmed, I will work with the Congress and with the Government of
    Canada to support fair and just treatment of U.S. companies in any
    dispute resolution process with our NAFTA partners.

        Question 4. Following the President's withdrawal from the Paris
    Climate Accord, the United States and Canada, we recently saw Prime
    Minister Trudeau reaching out directly to states to engage on critical
    issues including the environment, clean technology cooperation, and
    other energy priorities.

       What implications do you think this has for traditional bilateral
            engagement and how do you plan to represent the United States
            as a country, when our states are taking the lead with a
            different policy position?
       Do you plan to continue to work with Canada on mutually beneficial
            clean technology development? How?

        Answer. The issues you mention remain priorities for both of our
    countries. The United States supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. We will continue to reduce our greenhouse gas
    emissions through innovation and technology breakthroughs. This
    administration believes in cooperative federalism, and therefore is
    supportive of states and cities making their own choices within their
    respective borders on climate policy.

    Refugees and migrants
        Question 5. Given significant and severe refugee crises around the
    world, Canada has adopted overwhelmingly welcoming policies.
    Additionally, Canada has migration policies in place that open the
    doors for entrepreneurs to come to Canada, welcome increasing numbers
    of students to their universities, and generally promote a positive
    image of migration in Canada.

       How do you plan to engage Canada on the issues of refugees and
            migration?
       Do you believe it puts the United States at a disadvantage to have
            more restrictive immigration policies that those of our
            neighbor?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will engage the Canadian Government at the
    federal and provincial level to share views on immigration and refugee
    issues and ensure continuing cooperation. The United States and Canada
    work together closely on border security and information sharing, and
    we are both proud of our history as countries with diverse populations
    and a strong record of welcoming immigrants and migrants with legal
    status.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to Kelly Craft by Senator Ron Johnson

        Question 1. In 2015, the Canadian Radio-television and
    Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), Canada's broadcasting and
    telecommunication regulatory agency, issued a decision that singled out
    the Super Bowl as it relates to simultaneous substitution. I, along
    with Senator Marco Rubio, first raised this issue in a December 2016
    letter to Canadian ambassador David MacNaughton, urging Canada to
    reverse the CRTC's ruling related to the Super Bowl. I also am aware
    that colleagues in both the House and Senate, from both sides of the
    aisle, also raised this issue over the course of many months with the
    Ambassador and other officials in both Canada and the United States.
    Unfortunately, however, the Canadian Government took no action, and the
    policy went into effect, causing significant harm to the NFL and its
    Canadian partner with the exclusive broadcasting rights there. If
    confirmed, will you commit to examining this issue and working with
    officials and stakeholders on both sides of the border to resolve this
    issue and protect the interests of the NFL as a U.S. copyright owner?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to examine this issue
    and work with the appropriate government officials and stakeholders in
    both countries, and to advocate on behalf of the NFL on the issue of
    broadcasting rights for the Super Bowl.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
              to Robert Wood Johnson by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As a private citizen in the United States, I've taken a
    number of philanthropic steps to improve the lives of those living in
    disadvantaged communities or poor state of health and physical
    condition. Some of the accomplishments of which I'm most proud include
    my philanthropy toward relief from diabetes and lupus as well as
    supporting catastrophically injured veterans.
        As a former Chairman of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
    International, I initiated the campaign ``The Only Remedy Is a Cure,''
    transforming a small, non-profit group into the largest private medical
    entity focused on finding a cure for diabetes. I devoted a good deal of
    time working with the National Institutes for Health to secure
    government funding for diabetes research, and this led to a three-year
    term on the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
    Advisory Council.
        In 1999 my focus expanded to include medical research to better
    treat and cure lupus. As there was no formal organization devoted
    exclusively to researching this debilitating autoimmune disease, I
    established the Alliance for Lupus Research (now known as Lupus
    Research Alliance) to raise funds to prevent, treat and cure lupus.
    ALR-funded research laid the foundation for development of 30 percent
    of all lupus drugs currently in the clinical-trial pipeline.
        As a New Yorker, I feel compelled to recognize the important
    sacrifices made by our service members. Through the Stephen Siller
    Tunnel to Tower Foundation, we support catastrophically wounded
    veterans in the region to fund the construction of smart homes through
    the Foundation's Building for America's Bravest program. This program
    builds specially adapted, custom-designed smart homes to help restore
    independence and improve the quality of life for our nation's most
    seriously injured service members. Each smart home imparts self-
    sufficiency; by means of special technology, a wounded veteran can
    manage day-to-day tasks without depending on others. It's humbling to
    be a part of a program that restores independence to veterans who put
    their lives on the line for their country.
        Lastly, following my grandfather's legacy, I have served as a
    Trustee Emeritus of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the nation's
    largest philanthropic organization devoted exclusively to promoting
    health and advancing healthcare. The Foundation aims to prompt new
    public policy, inspire action from the private sector, and improve the
    delivery of the best health care to the most people. Among its many
    successes, the Foundation has made substantial inroads in its anti-
    smoking campaign as well as reducing the rate of childhood obesity.

        Question 2. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the United Kingdom?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to working with civil society groups
    and NGOs to advance U.S. priorities, including human rights. If
    confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to meet with experts in
    these areas on both sides of the Atlantic.

        Question 3. Will you engage with British Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue the U.S. Mission's
    strong partnership with Her Majesty's Government and British civil
    society to engage on these topics.

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

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

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

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

        Question 6. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the United Kingdom?

        Answer. I have identified all applicable financial interests on my
    public financial disclosure form, including interests that may be
    connected to the UK and have consulted at length with the Office of
    Government Ethics and the Department of State's designated agency
    ethics official to identify any potential conflicts of interest. All
    potential conflicts of interest have been resolved to the satisfaction
    of ethics officials and in accordance with the terms of my ethics
    agreement.

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. My experience in business and philanthropy has given me
    myriad opportunities to build high-functioning teams with diverse
    members. I remain committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a work environment which recognizes the
    contributions of all employees, and will make sure they have
    information available about the Department's Diversity and Inclusion
    Strategic Plan, foreign affairs affinity organizations, and
    opportunities specific to various groups.

        Question 8. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will encourage all supervisors to take
    available courses on EEO principles, diversity, and related issues. I
    will urge them to discuss unconscious bias and similar topics when they
    mentor junior colleagues. I will direct supervisors to transparently
    and fairly provide opportunities to all entry- and mid-level
    professionals. By providing time for professional development
    discussions to address diversity, I will highlight that this is a
    priority for me as the Ambassador.

        Question 9. What is your assessment of the United Kingdom's
    military capabilities and defense spending?

        Answer. The United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (MOD) and Armed
    Forces are our closest partners and one of the top contributors to NATO
    and U.S.-led missions globally. Her Majesty's Government (HMG) remains
    committed to spending at least two percent of GDP on the defense
    budget, and is spurring other NATO Allies to meet that same commitment.
    If confirmed as Ambassador, I will underscore the importance that
    America's allies, including the United Kingdom, share the burden in
    meeting and addressing threats to our peace and security, including by
    continuing to meet its commitment to spend at least 2 percent of GDP on
    its military.
        The MOD in 2015 presented ambitious defense capability upgrades and
    force integration plans. Officials confirmed that the MOD would bring
    two new aircraft carriers into action, continue acquiring the F-35
    Joint Strike Fighter, and improve capabilities by acquiring the P-8
    Maritime Patrol Aircraft, additional AH-64 attack helicopters and CH-
    47G heavy lift helicopters, and the new Ajax armored vehicle. In July
    2016, HMG committed to its continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent with the
    intent to commission four new nuclear ballistic missile submarines.

        Question 10. Do you think recent United Kingdom defense cuts have
    affected transatlantic cooperation and burden-sharing or the United
    Kingdom's military's ability to carry out operations?

        Answer. The United Kingdom maintains a high-tempo of global
    military operations and defense engagement. UK operational priorities
    include support to defeating ISIS and supporting the Iraqi Security
    Forces; countering violent extremism in Libya; supporting the Afghan
    National Defense and Security Forces in NATO's Resolute Support
    Mission; deterring Russia by leading a battle group in Estonia as part
    of NATO's enhanced Forward Presence effort; and building defense
    capacity in Ukraine, Nigeria, Tunisia, Jordan, and east Africa. In
    addition, MOD officials work closely with U.S. counterparts to achieve
    our shared counterterrorism objectives.

        Question 11. Should U.S. policymakers be concerned that the United
    Kingdom could become a less robust and less influential defense partner
    in the coming years?

        Answer. Prime Minister May has made clear that the UK will continue
    to be a global leader, and a key U.S. partner, in tackling global
    security and defense challenges.
        Even before the decision to leave the European Union (EU), HMG made
    international engagement a priority in its 2015 defense strategy
    review. The MOD committed to work with Allies and partners in NATO, the
    Joint Expeditionary Force, the Combined Joint Expeditionary Force, and
    to deepen its interoperability with U.S. forces.
        The MOD also charged its forces to increase international defense
    engagement--to increase British influence globally and build partner
    defense capacity. This defense engagement task coincides with the UK
    national prosperity agenda to market and sell British products,
    primarily defense articles, to partner nations and Allies globally.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Robert Wood Johnson by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1. Mr. Johnson, I noticed that you could not affirmatively
    say that Russia was behind the cyber intrusion into 2016 U.S.
    elections. While I understand that you have not reviewed the classified
    intelligence, do you trust the judgment of our intelligence community
    and will you be able to affirm their judgment in your bilateral
    discussions with the UK and other foreign representatives on this and
    other matters?

        Answer. I have the utmost respect for the women and men of the U.S.
    intelligence community. While planning Super Bowl XLVIII, I saw first-
    hand their professionalism, judgment, and patriotism as they worked to
    keep Americans safe during the week-long activities. I trust our
    intelligence community's judgment and devotion to our nation.
        If confirmed, I will carefully review available intelligence and
    analysis to ensure that I am most effective in advancing U.S. foreign
    policy objectives in the United Kingdom. And I will certainly affirm my
    confidence in the judgment of the U.S. intelligence community during
    bilateral discussions with British and other foreign representatives
    where appropriate.

        Question 2. One other issue that I'd like to raise is something
    that's been brought to my attention by someone who has testified before
    the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the challenge of dealing with
    Vladimir Putin and his associates in the Kremlin. Vladimir Kara-Murza,
    a prominent Russian dissident who has suffered multiple assassination
    attempts, has emphasized the need for the U.S. and the UK to prevent
    Russian oligarchs who wish to hide stolen assets in the West. This
    practice is well-documented by investigative journalists and the UK
    documentary ``From Russia with Cash'' revealed how real estate agents
    in Great Britain, in particular, can be key enablers for laundering
    dirty money. Are you familiar with this issue? How best can the United
    States close such loopholes in this country and encourage Allies like
    the UK to do the same? Can you commit to raising it with your British
    counterparts, if confirmed?

        Answer. While not familiar with this specific issue or documentary,
    I recognize the importance of preventing money launderers from hiding
    stolen assets in the United States or anywhere else. If confirmed, I
    will raise this issue and commit to working closely with Her Majesty's
    Government to explore joint strategies for improving anti-money
    laundering efforts.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Lewis Eisenberg by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The importance of American democracy and our basic
    liberties, values, and way of life was never clearer to me than in the
    days after September 11, 2001. As the Chairman of the Port Authority of
    New York and New Jersey, and later as a board member of the Lower
    Manhattan Development Corporation, I was intimately involved in the
    immediate rescue, recovery, and rebuilding efforts following the attack
    on the World Trade Center--efforts that helped send a message that
    Americans would defend and protect our way of life, even at great cost.
        Before and since that terrible day, human rights and democracy have
    been important values in my career. For the past 15 years, I have
    worked in electoral politics, including efforts to promote political
    participation and get young people involved in the democratic process.
    I served for over 15 years as a board member and volunteer for New York
    Service for the Handicapped, and in that position I worked to advance
    the rights and opportunities of persons with disabilities. In my
    philanthropic activities, I have supported efforts to end
    discrimination against LGBT persons. And throughout my career, I have
    worked to promote equal treatment and professional opportunities for
    women in the financial industry.
        Serving with my wife as a national Board Member of the American
    Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), I had the opportunity to
    advocate for democratic values in an international context, working to
    strengthen U.S. support for Israel as a critical democratic ally in the
    Middle East.

        Question 2.  What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    the Republic of San Marino today? What are the most important steps you
    expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in
    Italy and the Republic of San Marino? What do you hope to accomplish
    through these actions?

        Answer. Italy and the Republic of San Marino are strong partners in
    advancing human rights around the world. Nevertheless, some important
    challenges remain. In San Marino, official corruption and transparency
    issues are important challenges, given the Republic's historic role as
    an international financial hub. Access for persons with disabilities is
    another area where more can be done.
        Italy's place on the frontline of Europe's ongoing refugee and
    migration crisis has brought into sharp relief challenges of human
    trafficking, including labor and sex trafficking, particularly for
    unaccompanied minors and other vulnerable populations, as well as
    challenges regarding capacity and adequacy of housing. Other issues in
    Italy include corruption and incidents of mistreatment and social
    exclusion of members of minority groups, including Roma.
        If confirmed, I am committed to continuing Mission Italy's active
    engagement with Italian and Sammarinese officials on these important
    issues. In particular, in the context of the ongoing refugee and
    migration crisis, I would seek to redouble our efforts to partner with
    Italy and San Marino in combating human trafficking and addressing
    human rights abuses against refugees and migrants. I would also look
    forward to strengthening Mission Italy's programs to combat corruption
    and promote good governance and transparency.

        Question 3.  If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Italy and the
    Republic of San Marino in advancing human rights, civil society and
    democracy in general?

        Answer. The people and governments of Italy and the Republic of San
    Marino are strong, willing partners in addressing human rights issues
    at home and around the world. However, the refugee and migrant crisis
    has strained Italy's capacity to screen and identify victims of
    trafficking, provide adequate shelter to newly arrived refugees and
    migrants, and protect refugees and migrants from exploitation and
    abuse. If confirmed, I look forward to doing everything possible to
    support Italy's efforts--together with its European Union neighbors and
    the international community--to meet this historic challenge and
    protect the human rights of all who arrive on Italy's shores.

        Question 4.  Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Italy and the Republic of San Marino?

        Answer. These are very important issues, and if confirmed, I am
    absolutely committed to meeting with human rights, civil society, and
    other non-governmental organizations in the United States and with
    local human rights NGOs in Italy and the Republic of San Marino.

        Question 5.  Will you engage with Italians and Sammarinese on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. These are very important issues, and if confirmed, I am
    absolutely committed to engaging with the Italians and Sammarinese on
    matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of the
    bilateral mission.

        Question 6.  Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 7.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 8.  Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Italy or the Republic of San Marino?

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

        Question 9.  Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and
    support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am fully committed to equal employment opportunity
    principles. I firmly believe that those who represent the United States
    abroad must fully reflect America's diversity. As the State
    Department's Statement on Diversity and Equal Employment Opportunity
    notes, ``Our commitment to inclusion must be evident in the face we
    present to the world and in the decision-making processes that
    represent our diplomatic goals.'' Throughout my career, I have worked
    to ensure the organizations I helped lead had no barriers to
    opportunity based on race, religion, gender, or other protected
    categories. If confirmed, I would uphold the same principles of
    equality and equal opportunity throughout Mission Italy.
        I have worked to promote the success of the diverse teams I have
    led. If confirmed, I will take the same approach to managing the
    Mission Italy team, ensuring each member of the mission community is
    able to draw upon his or her unique background and experience to
    contribute to our shared goals.

        Question 10.  What steps will you take to ensure that each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I take seriously not only my own duty, if confirmed, to
    lead a diverse and inclusive mission, but also my responsibility to
    ensure managers and supervisors across Mission Italy fully uphold equal
    employment opportunity principles and promote the success of each
    member of our embassy community. If confirmed, I will clearly and
    consistently articulate these principles as Chief of Mission, and I
    will work with my Deputy Chief of Mission and Country Team to ensure
    our mission supervisors consistently prioritize them in their
    interactions.

        Question 11.  Over many years, the Russian Government has
    developed, refined, and deployed its toolkit for malign influence in
    Europe and elsewhere. I believe that these efforts, which seek to erode
    citizens' confidence in the credibility of democratic institutions,
    pose a grave threat to the national security interests of the United
    States and our allies and partners around the world. There are reports
    that the Russian Government has sought to exert undue influence in
    Italian politics, media and civil society. How will you work to counter
    nefarious Russian influence in Italy?

        Answer. Italy shares our concerns about Russian aggression in
    Europe, including Russian disinformation campaigns and malign influence
    activities. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen our coordination
    with Italian partners, across relevant agencies, to detect and counter
    these activities that seek to undermine democratic institutions and
    principles. If confirmed, I will make U.S.-Italian cooperation on this
    issue a priority, particularly in advance of Italian national elections
    that are likely to take place in 2018.

        Question 12.  Will you commit to engaging with the Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee on this issue?

        Answer. Yes.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                  to Lewis Eisenberg by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1. Mr. Eisenberg, I noticed that you could not
    affirmatively say that Russia was behind the cyber intrusion into 2016
    U.S. elections. While I understand that you have not reviewed the
    classified intelligence, do you trust the judgment of our intelligence
    community and will you be able to affirm their judgment in your
    bilateral discussions with Italy and other foreign representatives on
    this and other matters?

        Answer. The weight of publicly available evidence clearly indicates
    Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections. I take this
    very seriously. As Secretary Tillerson has said, Russian attempts to
    influence democratic political systems have been well documented in the
    United States and elsewhere. I have tremendous respect for the United
    States Intelligence Community, and I look forward, if confirmed, to
    reviewing the more detailed intelligence and analysis that will be
    available to me upon confirmation.
        If confirmed, I will have no hesitation in presenting U.S.
    Government views and assessments to my Italian counterparts and will
    strongly advocate for shared action to address common concerns. I will
    work to strengthen our coordination with Italian partners, across
    relevant agencies, to detect and counter activities of Russia and other
    countries that seek to undermine democratic institutions and
    principles. If confirmed, I will make U.S.-Italian cooperation on this
    issue a priority, particularly in advance of Italian national elections
    that are likely to take place in 2018?

        Question 2. If confirmed, will you continue to stress to the
    Italian Government the importance of their support for U.S.-EU economic
    sanctions on Russia? What are the biggest challenges do you feel you
    will encounter in this regard and how will you address them?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will strongly advocate for continued U.S.-
    EU unity in maintaining pressure on Russia through sanctions. Our
    administration and the Government of Prime Minister Gentiloni have made
    clear that sanctions must remain in place until Russia fully implements
    the Minsk agreements, including ceasing aggression in eastern Ukraine
    and respecting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
        Maintaining Italian popular support for EU sanctions can be a
    challenge, particularly amid flawed perceptions that Italian businesses
    have suffered uniquely from reduced trade with Russia. If confirmed, I
    will work to dispel these misperceptions, make sure Italians understand
    the stakes of Russia's aggression--including the suffering of the
    Ukrainian people--and I will stress the vital importance of continued
    unity in our response.

                                   __________

         Responses to An Additional Question for the Record Submitted
                   to Lewis Eisenberg by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1.  Italy has called for increased U.S. engagement in
    addressing the ongoing conflict in Libya. There was also some press
    reporting that a Trump aide, Sebastian Gorka talked to the Europeans
    about partitioning Libya into three. This idea has been widely
    discredited.

       What do you think about a possible effort to divide Libya into
            three?
       What steps is the United States taking to support international
            efforts to bring stability to Libya and what role do you think
            we should play in working with European partners in this
            effort?
       Do you have concerns about militarized responses to areas we are
            countering extremist networks without a comprehensive
            diplomatic strategy in place?

        Answer. The United States and Italy have been strong partners in
    support of Libyan efforts to improve security and foster the political
    stability necessary to defeat ISIS and other terrorists, restore the
    economy, and address transnational flows of migrants and weapons. Both
    the United States and Italy have engaged a wide range of Libyan
    political and security figures, pressing all parties to de-escalate
    tensions and negotiate a political compromise within the framework of
    the Libyan Political Agreement (LPA), which provides a roadmap for a
    transitional government and national elections. The United States
    supports a united Libya, with a capable, unified government and unified
    national security forces.
        The United States believes that political stability and peace in
    Libya depends on national reconciliation. We will work closely with the
    UN and European and regional partners such as Italy to foster political
    dialogue among Libyans. Libya's neighbors, states in the region, and
    European partners such as Italy all have an important role in
    supporting Libyan-led efforts to reach a political solution. There is
    no military solution to Libya's conflict. The parties must reach a
    political compromise to stabilize the country, avoid civil conflict,
    and unify all Libyan forces against the real enemy: ISIS and other
    terrorists.
        If confirmed, I look forward to strengthening our diplomatic
    engagement with Italy to help stabilize Libya so it cannot be a
    platform for terrorists, or for criminal gangs that traffic and exploit
    migrants.

                                   __________

              Responses to An Additional Question for the Record
               Submitted to K.T. McFarland by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. The State Department's Trafficking in Persons Report
    2017 places Singapore on Tier 2, stating that ``The Government of
    Singapore does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination
    of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so''
    and indicates that Singapore still has a ways to go on reducing labor
    trafficking. Do you believe that trafficking in persons is a problem in
    Southeast Asia? In Singapore? Do you commit to working with our
    partners in the Singaporean Government to support their efforts to
    reduce the scourge of trafficking in persons?

        Answer. Yes, I do believe trafficking in persons is a problem in
    Singapore and Southeast Asia. While Singapore has implemented measures
    to curb human trafficking, including through the adoption of the 2015
    Prevention of Human Trafficking Act, Singapore can take additional
    steps to improve its anti-trafficking efforts within the country. If
    confirmed, I commit to work closely with the Government of Singapore,
    the Singapore Interagency Task Force on Trafficking in Persons, and
    Singaporean civil society to address this issue.

                                   __________

              Responses to An Additional Question for the Record
           Submitted to K.T. McFarland by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. One of the greatest advances in human rights and democracy
    in modern times was the collapse of the Soviet Empire and discrediting
    of communism in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It was brought about in
    large part by President Reagan's policies of no longer accepting mere
    coexistence with the Soviet Union but to push toward ending and winning
    the Cold War on our terms without firing a shot. President Reagan and
    his administration pressured the Soviet Union on many fronts: by
    building up America's armed forces, revitalizing our alliances,
    pressuring the Soviet economy, and using the bully pulpit to call out
    the evils of communism and oppression.
        As President Reagan's Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
    Public Affairs and the Senior Speechwriter to the Secretary and Deputy
    Secretary of Defense, I had, on many occasions, the privilege of
    crafting the words and articulating the public positions for the senior
    members of the Reagan administration, including the President.
        There are hundreds of millions of people today who are free because
    of Reagan's words.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Singapore? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in the Republic of
    Singapore? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. As stated in the State Department's annual Human Rights
    Report on Singapore, the Government has broad powers to limit citizens'
    rights on freedoms of speech, assembly association and press,
    effectively silencing political dissent and allowing the controlling
    party to overwhelmingly dominate the political scene. Corporal
    punishment such as caning is used as punishment for some crimes, both
    violent and non-violent. Human trafficking is also a concern in
    Singapore, and the Department of State's 2017 Trafficking in Person's
    Report lists Singapore as a Tier 2 country. Singapore has taken steps
    to curb trafficking through the adoption of the 2015 Prevention of
    Human Trafficking Act, which prohibits all forms of human trafficking
    and sets stringent penalties that meet international standards for
    those found guilty. If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with
    the Government of Singapore and civil society to promote basic freedoms
    in support of their democratic system and to address trafficking in
    persons.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face by the Republic of
    Singapore in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. While Singapore has free and fair elections, restrictions
    on media and free speech exist as outlined in our annual Human Rights
    Report, and further progress is needed in stemming human trafficking.
    We regularly discuss our concerns with Singapore, and the country has
    made significant efforts to address human trafficking. We will,
    however, continue to urge the Government of Singapore to take
    additional steps to increase investigations, prosecute trafficking
    cases, and improve victim identification methods. Singapore takes the
    issue of trafficking in persons seriously, and I look forward to
    working with Singapore to find better ways to address this problem and
    other concerns.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the Republic of Singapore?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society, and non-governmental organizations in Singapore.

        Question 5. Will you engage with Singapore on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of
    Singapore to engage on matters of human rights, civil rights, and
    governance. I will also seek to exchange best practices between our
    governments.

        Question 6. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 7. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Singapore?

        Answer. No.

        Question 9. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I value the diversity of our Foreign Service Officer corps,
    and other sources of employees who comprise the staff of Embassy
    Singapore, which reflects all of America. A strong, diverse workforce
    ensures we craft the best possible solutions for the foreign policy
    challenges facing the United States. I will make it a high priority to
    support my staff at the Embassy, particularly those from diverse
    backgrounds or underrepresented groups. I will also actively engage the
    other leaders at the Mission to prioritize mentoring and ensure that we
    are developing a new generation of diplomats to represent our country
    effectively.

        Question 10. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will make it clear to the supervisors and all employees
    at our Mission that I value a respectful and inclusive work environment
    and will hold supervisors accountable for abiding by the leadership and
    management principles established by the Department of State, such as
    valuing and developing our people. As I have done throughout my career,
    I will seek to model this behavior through my own leadership of the
    Mission.

        Question 11. Do you believe the United States should lift sanctions
    on Russia?

        Answer. No, not until Moscow reverses the actions on Ukraine and
    Crimea that triggered sanctions in the first place.

        Question 12. Can you share with the committee during your time as a
    national security advisor to candidate and then-President elect Trump
    any meetings, contacts or conversations you had with the Russian
    Government or any Russian-connected individuals?

        Answer. To the best of my recollection, there are only two
    occasions when I encountered any Russian officials during my time as a
    national security advisor to candidate and then-President-Elect Trump.
        The first was at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.
    The Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, was one of two hundred or so
    attendees at the Global Partners in Diplomacy Conference hosted by the
    Republican National Committee, the Heritage Foundation and the State
    Department for members of the diplomatic corps. I understand a similar
    event was held for the Diplomatic Corps at the Democratic National
    Convention.
        I was the moderator of a multi-person panel discussion on then-
    candidate Trump's foreign policy held at Case Western Reserve
    University. When we opened the floor to questions from the audience,
    Ambassador Kislyak asked a question of the panel. I had no personal
    contact with the Ambassador during the conference. In fact, I did not
    know who he was until after he identified himself to the audience
    during his question.
        The second was in a receiving line on January 19, 2017. I gave a
    speech at a luncheon hosted by the Business Council for International
    Understanding for approximately 100 members of the diplomatic corps and
    business community. Ambassador Kislyak attended the luncheon, and we
    exchanged brief pleasantries in the receiving line, as I did with the
    thirty or so ambassadors and businessmen who also participated in the
    receiving line.

        Question 13. At the Global Partners in Diplomacy conference, a RNC
    event hosted in Cleveland, press reports say you and Ambassador Kislyak
    were both in attendance. Did you have any contact or conversations with
    Russian officials or conduits at this event?

        Answer. Please see the answer to Question 12 (above).

        Question 14. On Islam, you have said ``Islam is religion, Islamism
    is death cult.'' You said that the United States ``reluctance to hurt
    their feelings'' and ``political correctness is getting people killed''
    Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who brought you on to the Trump team called
    Islamism a ``vicious cancer inside the body of 1.7 billion people''
    that has to be ``excised''. Singapore has a population that is 15
    percent Muslims. Like in any other country, Muslims in Singapore are
    Members of Parliament, mayors, and crucial members of the Singapore
    society. How can you represent U.S. values abroad, which was founded on
    the principles of religious freedom, diversity and inclusion, while
    also believing that Islam is a death cult?

        Answer. Let me clarify the question. I believe Islam is a religion,
    and not a death cult. I do, however, believe Islamism, is a death cult.
    I have tried to be careful to make the distinction between Islam on the
    one hand, and Islamism as practiced by ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the Islamic
    State on the other. I believe Islamism, which promotes suicide bombers,
    and the killing of innocents, including women and children is a death
    cult.
        In my previous position as Deputy National Security Adviser, I had
    several conversations with Singaporean officials, several of whom are
    Muslim, about the threat posed by the spread of radical Islam. They
    expressed concerns, and I agreed, that it presents a growing security
    issue in Southeast Asia.
        Like the 68 member Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, I believe
    Islamism, Islamists and radical terrorists pose a threat to
    international peace and stability and continue to commit gross abuses
    to human rights and violations of international law.

        Question 15. In 2012, when asked about waterboarding you said
    ``Even if it's torture, it's probably worth doing.'' I believe
    waterboarding, which is classified by the United Nations as torture, is
    not only morally objectionable but has proven repeatedly to not work.
    Can you share with the committee your current views on torture?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify my position. As I
    said during my nomination hearing, I have come full circle in my
    thinking on this issue in the last five years. I have listened to the
    arguments of Senator McCain, Senator Graham, General (now Defense
    Secretary) Mattis and others that torture is ineffective, violates
    international and U.S. law, and leaves our own military open to torture
    by others. Finally, I have come to agree with them that there is
    nothing more important in this regard than living our values.

        Question 16. Are there instances in which torture are justifiable
    to you?

        Answer. No.

        Question 17. Singapore is a regional hub for American business, and
    much of the U.S. Ambassador's job inevitably touches on American
    business interests. Singapore's penal code criminalizes homosexuality,
    and the country offers no protections against discrimination on the
    basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. This poses a negative
    impact not only on U.S. companies' gay and lesbian employees and
    families, but on talent assignment by American companies. What would
    you do as ambassador, in partnership with U.S. companies, to encourage
    Singapore to rescind its anti-LGBT laws and offer employment and other
    protections for LGBT people?

        Answer. LGBT rights are a topic of discussion in our conversations
    with the Singaporean Government. We continue to urge equal treatment
    for all and to underscore our commitment to diversity and inclusion. If
    confirmed, I will engage not only with the Singaporean Government, but
    also with civil society organizations, the private sector, and like-
    minded missions to further these discussions.

        Question 18. Singapore-based businesses have been accused in recent
    years of helping North Korea evade sanctions. In 2014, the Singapore-
    registered Chinpo Shipping company was criminally charged in Singapore
    for doing business with North Korea's Ocean Maritime Management
    company, which had been the target of international sanctions. If
    confirmed, how do you see your role as making sure that Singapore fully
    implements and enforces its international commitments made to
    Singapore?

        Answer. North Korea's provocations threaten international peace and
    security. Singapore has reiterated its commitment to fully implement
    all UN Security Council resolutions on North Korea, including
    establishing new visa requirements for all DPRK passport holders. If
    confirmed, I will continue to work closely with Singapore to coordinate
    our diplomatic, military, and economic response to North Korea's
    nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation programs.

        Question 19. What role do you think Singapore should play in
    addressing maritime tensions in the South China Sea?

        Answer. Singapore is a critical partner in promoting a regional
    architecture that maintains security and promotes economic prosperity
    across the Asia-Pacific. Singapore is one of the founding members of
    ASEAN, and views ASEAN as a forum to manage maritime disputes in the
    South China Sea. We believe that Singapore has an important role to
    play in helping bring forward a unified ASEAN position that bolsters
    international law and calls for peaceful settlement of disputes. As
    China's country coordinator in ASEAN for the next few years, Singapore
    will also play a significant role in shaping the substance of Code of
    Conduct negotiations between ASEAN and China.

        Question 20. If confirmed, how will you ensure that Singapore and
    the United States work productively to address tensions and seek common
    interests in the South China Sea?

        Answer. Singapore has a national interest in ensuring freedoms of
    navigation and overflight, respect for international law, unimpeded
    lawful commerce, and the peaceful resolution of disputes in the South
    China Sea. If confirmed, I will continue to discuss with Singapore how
    we can uphold rights and freedoms in the South China Sea that are
    reflected in international law.

        Question 21. Singapore was one of 11 nations that negotiated the
    proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement with the
    United States. In an October 2016 interview, Singapore Prime Minister
    Lee Hsien Loong said failure to ratify the proposed TPP would be ``a
    very big setback for America,'' and that the result would be ``your
    standing goes down with many countries around the world.'' If
    confirmed, how will you address concerns about U.S. credibility and
    leadership in regional and global trade policy voiced by Singapore, a
    nation heavily dependent on trade?

        Answer. Our economic engagement in the Asia-Pacific does not depend
    on a single agreement or initiative. The United States remains fully
    committed to strengthening its economic relationships across the
    region, including in Singapore. The Asia-Pacific remains a top priority
    for this administration because it is hugely consequential to the
    future security and economic prosperity of the United States. The high
    tempo of engagement by senior officials in Asia reflects the
    administration's focus on the region. The United States and Singapore
    have enjoyed a free trade agreement (FTA) since 2004, and we continue
    to work together with Singapore through our membership in APEC and
    engagement through ASEAN to promote free and fair trade in the region.
    If confirmed, I will continue to work with Singapore to promote
    economic growth and high standards for trade and investment throughout
    the region.

        Question 22. What role does Singapore play in the Trump
    administration 's strategy in Asia?

        Answer. Singapore's strategic location in Southeast Asia makes it a
    hub for people and goods transiting through the region. It is a key
    partner for the United States on counter-proliferation,
    counterterrorism, and cybersecurity--priority issues for both of our
    countries. Our cooperation on both the military and law-enforcement
    fronts is substantial, and based on 50 years of partnership. If
    confirmed, I will engage immediately and effectively with the highest
    levels of Singaporean Government to determine how to strengthen our
    partnership in these areas, and to empower my staff to grow the working
    level relationships that are key to day-to-day cooperation.

        Question 23. Do you see Singapore's role as different compared to
    its role during the Obama administration ?

        Answer. Singapore's role under the current administration is deeply
    important and bilateral relations remain strong. The U.S.-Singapore
    relationship is anchored by enduring economic and political ties, and
    for over 50 years we have enjoyed a close partnership based on our
    shared vision for peace and prosperity.

        Question 24. How do you assess U.S.-Singapore security relations
    following the 2015 signing of an ``enhanced'' Strategic Framework
    Agreement?

        Answer. Singapore is one of our strongest defense partners in
    Southeast Asia, and is committed to regional stability and security.
    Singapore provides the U.S. military access to bases, ports, and
    runways and has over 1,000 military personnel and four permanent air
    force detachments training in the United States.

        Question 25. Where do you see opportunities for closer cooperation
    in areas where the United States and Singapore could benefit from doing
    more?

        Answer. As technological advancement continues to create a more
    inter-connected world that is increasingly vulnerable to cyber threats,
    greater cyber security cooperation would benefit both Singapore and the
    United States. Singapore leads the region on cyber security. In 2016,
    it launched the ASEAN Ministerial Conference on Cybersecurity and a
    $7.5 million regional capacity building program. Through the U.S.-
    Singapore Third Country Training Program, the United States and
    Singapore are working closely together to conduct joint capacity
    building courses and trainings for countries across Southeast Asia in
    areas such as cyber security and cyber-crime. If confirmed, I will
    continue to support efforts to deepen our cybersecurity cooperation,
    and work closely with our Singapore partners to identify all areas of
    potential collaboration in our mutual interests.

        Question 26. How do you assess the utility of the Littoral Combat
    Ship (LCS) rotations that began in 2013?

        Answer. The Littoral Combat Ship rotations underscore strong U.S.-
    Singapore defense ties. The strategic benefits of our cooperation with
    Singapore are considerable. In addition to supporting rotational
    deployments of U.S. P-8 aircraft and U.S. Littoral Combat Ships,
    Singapore allows U.S. Navy helicopters to use its airfields.

                                   __________

              Responses to An Additional Question for the Record
                Submitted to K.T. McFarland by Senator Tim Kaine

    Views on Brexit
        Question . During your hearing, I asked you if press reports about
    your support for the Brexit vote were accurate. You testified that you
    believed that the will of the British people should be respected. When
    I asked you in follow up whether you had ever expressed personal
    support or opposition for Brexit, you could not recall.
        Press accounts reveal that you celebrated Brexit, calling it
    Britain's opportunity to ``leave a sinking ship'' and said that
    ``Europe is collapsing,'' comparing it to the Titanic. In a June 24,
    2016 article titled ``After Brexit: Mr. Trump (or Mrs. Clinton) let's
    resurrect the Anglo-American alliance,'' you wrote: ``The British
    people just voted to take back self-rule from the faceless,
    unaccountable, arrogant, power-grabbing bureaucrats in Brussels.''

       Can you explain why you supported Brexit, if you still hold that it
            was a positive outcome for the UK and Europe, whether you still
            believe that EU officials are ``arrogant, power-grabbing
            bureaucrats,'' and whether you continue to believe that Europe
            is collapsing?

        Answer. I supported the view held by many conservatives, especially
    in the Tory Party, that British sovereignty was being eroded in favor
    of the European Union. One British politician in particular who helped
    shape my views was Steve Hilton, former Senior Adviser to Prime
    Minister David Cameron. According to them, Brexit would allow British
    to reclaim sovereignty over issues like immigration, regulatory reform
    and pursue a pro-growth economic policy, cut taxes and slow the
    expansion of the welfare state.
        Since the Brexit vote, the IMF has predicted that the British
    economy will expand by 2 percent in 2017, making it one of the fastest
    growing economies in Europe, and the second fastest-growing advanced
    economy after the U.S.I believe that the constant expansion of the
    welfare state in many European countries, coupled with slow economic
    growth and high deficits, plus the added financial, social services and
    security burden of large influx of migrants in some of the member
    states will put pressure on these states as well as the European Union.

                                   __________

              Responses to An Additional Question for the Record
               Submitted to K.T. McFarland by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1.  You wrote an op-ed titled ``Putin is the one who
    really deserves that Nobel peace prize.'' In that piece, regarding
    President Obama's Syria policy, you say that ``Putin has saved the
    world from near-certain disaster.''

       Do you agree that Putin regularly has dissidents, opposition
            leaders and journalists jailed or murdered?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2.  Considering your op-ed on Putin was regarding Syria
    policy, do you disagree with the assessment that Russian forces are
    actively supporting the Assad regime through airstrikes that have
    killed thousands of Syrians, particularly in Aleppo?

        Answer. No. I don't disagree.
        To put that opinion piece in context, I wrote it in 2013, after
    Russia offered to take the lead in brokering a U.S.-Russian-Syrian deal
    to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons stockpile. At the time President
    Obama and Secretary Kerry praised the Russians, as did most members of
    Congress from both sides of the political aisle.
        In the four years since, however, Russia has invaded Ukraine,
    murdered opposition leaders, propped up Assad in spite of his vicious
    pursuit of the Syrian civil war, and stood by while the Assad regime
    used chemical weapons against its own civilian population, including
    women and children.
        One of the early issues the Trump administration confronted was
    Assad's renewed use of chemical weapons with attacks against innocent
    civilians, including women and children. I strongly supported the
    President's decision to attack the Syrian airfield involved in those
    attacks.

        Question 3.  According to Politico, while you served as Deputy
    National Security Advisor, you gave President Trump a fake 1970s Time
    magazine cover warning of a coming ice age. The photoshopped magazine
    cover circulated around the internet several years ago, but was
    debunked in 2013.
        You also reportedly gave President Trump another fake 2008 Time
    magazine cover about surviving global warming. President Trump
    reportedly ``got lathered up about the media's hypocrisy'' but ``staff
    chased down the truth and intervened before Trump or tweeted or talked
    publicly about it.''

       Did you provide President Trump ``fake news'' about climate change
            to promote a policy position antagonistic to the Paris climate
            agreement?

        Answer. No.
        Senator Booker, Thank you for the opportunity to set the record
    straight.
        It was an honest mistake on my staff's part, with no intention to
    deceive or to make the case against climate change.
        I do believe the climate is changing, and that humans play a role
    in it. I would also point out that my husband was one of the founding
    directors of the World Resources Institute in the early 1980s, one of
    the early pro-environmental policy groups in the country. He had my
    full support in that endeavor.

        Question 4.  If yes, why did you provide President Trump fake Time
    magazine covers taking contrasting positions on climate change?

        Answer. N/A

        Question 5.  Recent reporting has suggested that Lt. Gen. Flynn was
    warned by senior members of President Trump's transition team about the
    risks of his contacts with Russian ambassador Sergey Kisklak. Flynn was
    reportedly told during a late November meeting that Russian ambassador
    Sergey Kislyak's conversations were almost certainly being monitored by
    U.S. intelligence agencies, officials said, a caution that came a month
    before Flynn was recorded discussing U.S. sanctions against Russia with
    Kislyak.
        Trump transition official Marshall Billinsglea, warned Flynn that
    Kislyak was likely a target of U.S. surveillance and that his
    communications--whether with U.S. persons or superiors in Moscow--were
    undoubtedly being monitored by the FBI and National Security Agency,
    according to officials familiar with the exchange. Billingslea then
    said that he would obtain a copy of the profile of Kislyak, officials
    said, a document that Billingslea urged Flynn to read if he were going
    to communicate with the Russian envoy. Flynn's reaction was
    noncommittal, officials said, neither objecting to the feedback nor
    signaling agreement. Shortly thereafter, during the week of Nov. 28,
    Billingslea and other transition officials met with lower-level Obama
    administration officials in the Situation Room at the White House.
        Furthermore, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government
    Reform Committee Elijah Cummings sent a letter to Vice President-elect
    and Director of the Transition Mike Pence on November 28, 2016,
    outlining Flynn's Russian and Turkish conflicts of interest. In that
    letter, Ranking Member Cummings explicitly laid out how Lt. Gen.
    Flynn's firm was being paid to lobby on behalf of Turkish business
    interests closely connected to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
    The letter also made clear the Flynn was paid to travel to Moscow for a
    speech in December 2015 and join Russian President Vladimir Putin at
    the head table during a dinner honoring the Kremlin-backed media
    network RT.

       Did you ever discuss any of General Flynn's contacts with Russian
            ambassador Sergey Kislyak directly with General Flynn?

        Answer. I am not aware of any of the issues or events as described
    above.

        Question 6.  As a Trump transition official, did you have any
    contacts with Russian officials after your meeting with Ambassador
    Kislyak at the Republican National Convention?

        Answer. As a first matter, I did not meet Ambassador Kislyak at the
    Republican National Convention. He was one of two hundred or so
    attendees at the Global Partners in Diplomacy Conference hosted by the
    Republican National Committee, the Heritage Foundation and the State
    Department for members of the diplomatic corps. I understand a similar
    event was held for the Diplomatic Corps at the Democratic National
    Convention.
        I was the moderator of a multi-person panel discussion on then-
    candidate Trump's foreign policy held at Case Western Reserve
    University. When we opened the floor to questions from the audience,
    Ambassador Kislyak asked a question of the panel. I had no personal
    contact with the Ambassador; in fact, I did not know who he was until
    after he identified himself to the audience during his question.
        To the best of my recollection, the only other occasion when I
    encountered any Russian officials as a national security adviser to
    then-candidate or President-Elect Trump was in a receiving line on
    January 19, 2017. I gave a speech at a luncheon hosted by the Business
    Council for International Understanding for approximately 100 members
    of the diplomatic corps and business community. Ambassador Kislyak
    attended the luncheon, and we exchanged brief pleasantries in the
    receiving line, as I did with the 30 or so diplomats and businessmen
    who participated in the receiving line.
        To the best of my knowledge, I did not encounter any other Russian
    officials during the transition.

        Question 7.  Were you aware of General Flynn's conversation with
    Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak on December 29, 2016 at any point
    before Vice President Pence's interview with CBS's ``Face the nation'
    on January 15, 2017? If you were aware of Flynn's conversation with the
    Russian ambassador prior to Pence's interview, did you discuss Flynn's
    contact with Kislyak with Pence or any other senior transition
    officials?

        Answer. Any conversations I may or may not have had with General
    Flynn would have been confidential. As such, it would be inappropriate
    for me to comment on them.

        Question 8.  If you were aware of Flynn's conversation with the
    Russian ambassador prior to Pence's interview, did you discuss Flynn's
    contact with Kislyak with Pence or any other senior transition
    officials?

        Answer. Any conversations I may or may not have had with the Vice
    President would have been confidential. As such, it would be
    inappropriate for me to comment on them.

        Question 9  Did you participate in any transition team meetings
    with Obama officials regarding General Flynn?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10.  After Vice President Elect Pence received the
    November 18, 2016 from Congressman Cummings regarding General Flynn's
    lobbying for Turkish interests and paid appearance with Russian
    President Vladimir Putin, were you made aware of this letter?

        Answer. No.

        Question 11.  Did you ever discuss Ranking Member Cummings November
    18, 2016 letter to Vice President Pence with Vice President Pence? If
    so, when? Please provide details on the nature of those conversations
    if they took place.

        Answer. Any conversations I may or may not have had with the Vice
    President would have been confidential. As such, it would be
    inappropriate for me to comment on them. However, generally speaking,
    the letter described above would have been outside of my area of
    responsibility.

        Question 12.  Were you ever in contact with Vice President elect
    Pence, transition official Marshall Billingslea or other transition
    officials about General Flynn's work on behalf of Turkey or Russian
    payments?

        Answer. Any conversations I may or may not have had with the Vice
    President would have been ere confidential. As such, it would be
    inappropriate for me to comment on them. However, the topic described
    above would have been outside of my area of responsibility.

        Question 13.  Did you ever speak to transition official Marshall
    Billingslea about his meeting with General Flynn in late November 2016
    where Billingslea expressed concern to Michael Flynn about his contacts
    with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak?

        Answer. Any conversations I may or may not have had with Marshall
    Billingslea would have been confidential. As such, it would be
    inappropriate for me to comment on them. However, the topic described
    above would have been outside of my area of responsibility.

                                   __________

     Letters Submitted in Support of K.T. McFarland's Confirmation As U.S.
                            Ambassador to Singapore

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 26, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Flake [presiding], Gardner, Young,
    Booker, Coons, and Kaine.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

        Senator Flake. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee will come to order.
        Today the committee will consider the nominations of three
    experienced career Foreign Service officers to be the U.S.
    Ambassadors to Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, and Algeria. I was
    pleased to meet each of today's nominees in my office earlier
    and to learn about them and this potential posting.
        Ethiopia is a key regional security partner, helping to
    counter al Shabaab in the region, helping to diffuse a violent
    crisis that we just learned more about in South Sudan.
        Sierra Leone's economy continues to struggle while the
    country is still recovering from the devastation brought by the
    Ebola virus.
        Algeria and the United States work together on important
    counterterrorism issues, but more can be done on the economic
    front to allow for greater opportunity and investment in that
    country.
        Before I recognize Ranking Member Booker, let me take a
    moment to thank the families who are here. We know that the
    work is hard and separation sometimes is difficult when the
    post is in a far-flung place, as all of these are. So we
    appreciate your sacrifice and are glad to have you here today.
    And I am sure you will be introduced later.
        Senator Booker?

                   STATEMENT OF HON. CORY A. BOOKER,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

        Senator Booker. I just want to echo my colleague and friend
    and his comments. It is extraordinary the service you all have
    already rendered to the United States of America. Citizenship
    in the United States has tremendous blessings and privileges,
    and most of us luxuriate in rights that were fought for and
    struggled for by generations before. But you all are not just
    enjoying your privileges, but you are showing that your
    commitment to the obligations of citizenship through service
    under difficult conditions, difficult circumstances, and a
    service that necessitates sacrifice. And for that, I am just
    very, very grateful.
        As Senator Flake said, it is not just you. Obviously, when
    you all are serving, it is your entire families as well. And so
    my gratitude to all of you for stepping forward to these
    difficult challenging positions of leadership in areas of the
    world that desperately need leadership and service and the best
    of America. So thank you for your willingness to represent
    that.
        Senator Flake. Well, thank you.
        Our first nominee is Michael Arthur Raynor, former
    Ambassador, who has served as an American diplomat since 1988.
    He served in eight missions, including Benin, Zimbabwe,
    Namibia, Guinea, Djibouti, and Congo Brazzaville.
        Our second nominee, Maria Brewer, has served one of her
    first postings as a Foreign Service officer in Sierra Leone. So
    this will be a return, if she is successful, to the country for
    which she is now nominated. That is a great thing, I am sure,
    the prospect of returning.
        Lastly, we will hear from John Desrocher currently serving
    as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Egypt and Maghreb Affairs in
    the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the Department of State.
        With that, the committee recognizes Ambassador Raynor
    first. Please feel free to introduce any family that you have
    here as well.

    STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL ARTHUR RAYNOR, OF MARYLAND, A CAREER
        MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-
     COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY
       OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC
                          REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA

        Ambassador Raynor. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman,
    Ranking Member Booker, members of the committee, I am honored
    to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    serve as Ambassador to the Federal Democratic Republic of
    Ethiopia. I am grateful to the President and Secretary
    Tillerson for their trust and confidence in me.
        I am also very proud to have my family with me today: my
    wife Kate, my son Bradley, and my daughter Emma. I could not be
    more grateful for their support.
        During my 29 years as a Foreign Service officer, I have
    developed substantial African policy and managerial experience
    and a record of leadership fostering strong performance from
    interagency teams and challenging environments.
        If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia, my
    top priority will be the security, interests, and welfare of
    American citizens. I will also seek to strengthen our strong
    partnerships with Ethiopia, to support, health, education, food
    security, and economic growth.
        Starting in November 2015, Ethiopia began experiencing
    widespread unrest, resulting in the imposition of a state of
    emergency. If confirmed, I will advocate for full respect of
    the rights guaranteed under Ethiopia's constitution.
        Ethiopia has a deep commitment to promoting regional
    stability and countering terrorism. If confirmed, I intend to
    sustain and strengthen this important security partnership.
        U.S. national interests also lie in supporting Ethiopia's
    economic progress because a sound business environment is a
    strong driver of good governance, development, and long-term
    stability.
        Thank you for this opportunity to address you and for
    considering me for such an important posting. I look forward to
    answering any questions you may have.
        [Ambassador Raynor's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Michael Arthur Raynor

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee,
    I am honored to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    serve as Ambassador to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. I
    am grateful to President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their trust
    and confidence in me. I am also very proud to have my family with me
    today: my wife Kate; my son Bradley, who is serving with Teach for
    America in Buffalo, New York; and my daughter Emma, who is going into
    her senior year at Hamilton College in Clinton, New York.
        During my 29-year career as a Foreign Service Officer, I have
    developed substantial African policy and managerial experience, and a
    record of leadership fostering interagency collaboration, strong
    performance from diverse teams, and high morale in challenging
    environments. As U.S. Ambassador to Benin, I strengthened the country's
    democratic trajectory, elicited strong anti-terrorism cooperation, and
    helped improve the business climate while promoting U.S. commercial
    interests. As Assistant Chief of Mission in Afghanistan, I coordinated
    some of the United States' most complex law enforcement and foreign
    assistance programs as well as the embassy's large security and
    management operations, while also engaging with the Afghan Government
    on security and governance challenges. As Executive Director of the
    Bureau of African Affairs, I led management and crisis support to over
    50 African posts.
        If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia, my top
    priority will be the security, interests, and welfare of American
    citizens. Whether ensuring responsive consular services, advocating for
    U.S. businesses, or strengthening partnerships against terrorism, this
    priority will guide the Embassy's activities and objectives. If
    confirmed, I also commit to doing everything I can to ensure that the
    dedicated women and men working at the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa are
    safe, secure, and have every opportunity for success.
        The United States has strong partnerships with Ethiopia, in
    alignment with the Ethiopian Government's own priorities, to support
    health, education, food security, and economic growth. These programs
    contribute meaningfully to Ethiopia's governance, stability, and
    prosperity. However, starting in November 2015, Ethiopia began
    experiencing widespread unrest, resulting in the imposition of a state
    of emergency that has included arbitrary detention, excessive use of
    force, and restrictions on civil and political freedoms. The unrest
    stems from complex factors including land tenure, ethnic tensions, and
    joblessness, but is rooted in popular desires for greater political
    freedom and civil liberties. If confirmed, I will advocate for full
    respect of the rights guaranteed under Ethiopia's constitution, as well
    as for reforms that strengthen democratic institutions. Such steps will
    not only support Ethiopian's own aspirations for stability and
    development, as well as its efforts against violent extremism in the
    region, but they will also strengthen the foundation for the U.S.-
    Ethiopia partnership in areas of vital interest to both nations.
        Ethiopia is a strong partner to the United States in the Horn of
    Africa, and has a deep commitment to promoting regional stability and
    countering terrorism. This engagement includes Ethiopia's significant
    contributions to the African Union's counterterrorism and peace support
    mission in Somalia and to the United Nations' peacekeeping efforts in
    South Sudan, as well as Ethiopia's leading role in the South Sudanese
    peace process. Ethiopia also contributes to regional stability as the
    second-largest host of refugees in Africa. If confirmed, I intend to
    sustain and strengthen this important security relationship.
        U.S. national interests lie in supporting Ethiopia's economic
    progress as well, because economic freedom and a sound business
    environment are strong drivers of good governance, rule of law, and
    long-term stability. These factors also create opportunities for
    American businesses, and if confirmed, I will work to promote a
    business climate in Ethiopia that encourages U.S. private sector
    activity and ensures a level playing field for U.S. firms.
        Ethiopia is a dynamic nation with an extraordinary history of
    independence and accomplishments as well as a future of enormous
    potential. I am honored by your consideration of me to serve in such an
    important posting. If confirmed, I will welcome input and advice from
    you and your staff on any aspect of the multi-faceted relationship
    between the United States and Ethiopia. I will also be pleased, if
    confirmed, to receive you and your staff in Ethiopia and to keep you
    apprised of the activities of the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa.
        Thank you for this opportunity to address you. I look forward to
    answering any questions you may have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you so much, Ambassador Raynor.
        Ms. Brewer?

     STATEMENT OF MARIA E. BREWER, OF INDIANA, A CAREER MEMBER OF
    THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
           STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE

        Ms. Brewer. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and
    members of the committee, thank you for your consideration of
    my nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of
    Sierra Leone.
        I would like to thank President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for their trust in me to lead the U.S. embassy.
        And I am honored and fortunate to have my husband Mark and
    our 8-year-old daughter Arina here with me today. I thank both
    of them for their constant love and support. Without them, I
    would not be here before you.
        Senator Flake. That is a nice looking young ambassador you
    have there. [Laughter.]
        Ms. Brewer. We have a strong relationship with Sierra
    Leone. If confirmed, I will work to enhance our bilateral
    relationship while maintaining the U.S. principles of promoting
    democracy and the rule of law. If confirmed, I will advocate
    for transparency, accountability, and economic stability.
        But in addition to these policy aims, I hold paramount the
    safety and security of U.S. citizens in Sierra Leone and the
    entire U.S. embassy team.
        My initial introduction to Africa was as a first-tour
    officer assigned to Lagos, Nigeria. I was then posted to
    Freetown, Sierra Leone. At the time, Sierra Leone was suffering
    through the last years of its civil war. But despite their many
    hardships, the positive spirit and the resilience of the people
    of Sierra Leone both moved and impressed me.
        After several tours in South Asia, I returned to the
    African Affairs Bureau in Washington, D.C. from 2010 until 2013
    and then was Deputy Chief of Mission in Abuja, Nigeria, 2013 to
    2016.
        So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear
    before you today. I welcome your questions.
        [Ms. Brewer's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Maria Elena Brewer

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee,
    thank you for this opportunity to appear before you and for your
    consideration of my nomination by President Trump to be the next U.S.
    Ambassador to the Republic of Sierra Leone. I would like to thank
    President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their trust in me to lead
    the U.S. Embassy and to maintain our relationship with Sierra Leone. If
    confirmed by the U.S. Senate, I will uphold that trust. I am honored
    and very fortunate to have my husband, Mark, and our eight-year-old
    daughter, Arina, here with me today. I thank both of them for their
    constant love and support. Without them, I would not be here before you
    today.
        Sierra Leone has shown remarkable progress in maintaining peace,
    strengthening democracy, and working toward an environment suitable for
    economic growth. Its perseverance is especially remarkable considering
    the challenges it has endured. After its devastating decade-long civil
    war, Sierra Leone rebuilt itself and made notable economic progress.
    Sierra Leone saw impressive economic growth in 2012 and 2013. But in
    2014, the Ebola crisis struck. By late 2015, roughly 14,000 individuals
    in Sierra Leone contracted the disease, of whom approximately 3,900
    died.
        In late 2015, Sierra Leone adopted a post-Ebola recovery plan,
    which received indirect and direct U.S. support. While damage from the
    Ebola crisis is still evident, collaborative efforts such as USAID's
    Ebola Transmission Prevention and Survivor Services Project have helped
    Sierra Leone to make great strides in combatting the epidemic and
    advancing in its aftermath. Sierra Leone ranks eighth from the bottom
    among countries on the U.N.'s Human Development Index. One in eight
    Sierra Leonean children will not live to age five. Sierra Leone has one
    of the world's highest rates of maternal mortality. Sierra Leone must
    allocate funds and resources to public health; doing so will be crucial
    to the country's future progress. If confirmed, I will work with Sierra
    Leonean leaders to ensure that public health remains a top national
    priority. Good governance and the rule of law will be key. The United
    States has made great inroads in working with Sierra Leone. Through
    programs funded by the Department of State's Bureau of Immigration,
    Narcotics, and Law Enforcement Affairs, Embassy colleagues have built
    relationships that have resulted in tangible diplomatic and law
    enforcement achievements. These include extraditing a U.S fugitive and
    repatriating Sierra Leonean nationals from the United States. These
    projects have bolstered access to justice, respect for human rights and
    the rule of law, and security for ordinary Sierra Leonean citizens. If
    I am confirmed, I would plan to increase collaborative efforts toward
    mutually beneficial goals for Sierra Leone and for our bilateral
    relationship.
        Also if confirmed, I will continue our focus on strengthening
    democratic institutions and combatting corruption. Since 2002, Sierra
    Leone has held three successful presidential and legislative elections
    that were broadly judged to be free, fair, and transparent. Sierra
    Leone has an important presidential election in March 2018. If
    confirmed, I will make it a priority in my first months to engage with
    candidates and other stakeholders to advocate for another free and fair
    election with a peaceful transfer of power.
        I will also work to continue U.S. support for market-oriented
    endeavors and to boost employment in Sierra Leone. The International
    Monetary Fund predicts growth of 6-7 percent for Sierra Leone in 2017
    and 2018. If confirmed, I will advocate for transparency,
    accountability, and economic sustainability. And at the same time, I
    will work closely with the U.S. business community to encourage greater
    trade and investment between our two countries as a way to spur
    prosperity both for U.S. citizens and Sierra Leoneans.
        I should emphasize that we are starting off on a strong footing
    with our relationship with Sierra Leone. We have many shared goals, as
    evinced by our successful projects in country. If confirmed, I will
    enhance our strong bilateral relationship as we work together to
    achieve new goals in an increasingly globalized world, while
    maintaining our principles of promoting democracy and rule of law.
        In addition to these policy aims, I hold paramount the safety and
    security of hundreds of U.S. citizens resident in Sierra Leone, and the
    entire U.S. Embassy team, including U.S. citizen employees, their
    families, and our Sierra Leonean colleagues. If confirmed, I would do
    all within my power to ensure the security of our Mission and oversee
    its smooth operation.
        My initial introduction to Africa was as a first-tour, entry-level
    officer, when I was in Lagos, Nigeria. I was then posted to Freetown,
    Sierra Leone, for my second tour from 1999 through 2001. At the time,
    Sierra Leone was suffering through the last years of their brutal civil
    war. Despite their many hardships, the positive spirit and resilience
    of the people of Sierra Leone moved and impressed me. After several
    tours in South Asia, including India, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan, I
    returned to the African Affairs Bureau in Washington, DC., serving in
    the Executive Office from 2010 until 2013. I then served as the Deputy
    Chief of Mission in Abuja, Nigeria from 2013 until 2016. If confirmed,
    I would bring a strong understanding of the African continent and its
    people, as well as the knowledge and experience to successfully advance
    our national interests in Freetown.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. I welcome your questions.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Desrocher?

    STATEMENT OF JOHN P. DESROCHER, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER OF
    THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
       STATES OF AMERICA TO THE PEOPLE'S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF
                                ALGERIA

        Mr. Desrocher. Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker,
    members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before you today.
        I am honored that President Trump has nominated me to be
    the U.S. Ambassador to Algeria, and I deeply appreciate the
    confidence he and Secretary Tillerson have shown by making this
    nomination.
        I am also very pleased that my wife Karen could join me
    here today. She has put up with a lot of those separations that
    you mentioned, Mr. Chairman.
        If confirmed by the Senate, my first priority will be to
    keep safe the people who serve in the U.S. embassy in Algiers
    and the American expatriate community in Algeria. I will also
    work to advance three critical U.S. interests: strengthening
    our bilateral security cooperation to fight terrorism and
    promote regional stability; expanding bilateral trade and
    investment; and working with Algerian counterparts as they
    pursue political and economic reforms that will foster
    stability as Algeria navigates new economic realities.
        The U.S.-Algeria relationship has grown broader and deeper
    in recent years. In the last several years, we have consulted
    extensively at high levels and with broad interagency
    participation regarding terrorism in North Africa. Our
    governments also hold bilateral strategic dialogues and joint
    military dialogues on a recurring basis. Our embassy in Algeria
    also facilitates a broad and ever-growing spectrum of bilateral
    cooperative programs that strengthen our security, economic,
    governance, educational, and cultural ties. This speaks to the
    value that both of our countries place on our growing
    partnership.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members
    of the committee, for giving me the opportunity to address you.
    It is a great honor to have been nominated as Ambassador to
    Algeria. If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to
    lead an active, talented mission at U.S. Embassy Algiers, as we
    work with Algeria to advance our shared interests.
        And I would be happy to take any questions you might have.
        [Mr. Desrocher's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of John Desrocher

        Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. I am honored that President Trump has nominated me to be
    the U.S. Ambassador to Algeria, and I deeply appreciate the
    confidence he and Secretary Tillerson have shown by making this
    nomination. I am also very pleased that my wife, Karen, could
    join me here today.
        If confirmed by the Senate, my first priority will be to
    keep safe the people who serve in U.S. Embassy Algiers, and the
    American expatriate community in Algeria. I will also work to
    advance three critical U.S. interests: (1) strengthening our
    bilateral security cooperation to fight terrorism and promote
    regional stability, (2) expanding bilateral trade and
    investment, and (3) working with Algerian counterparts as they
    pursue political and economic reforms that will foster
    stability as Algeria navigates new economic realities.
        The U.S.-Algeria relationship has grown broader and deeper
    in recent years. Algeria's Foreign Minister visited Secretary
    Tillerson in Washington this May. In the last several years we
    have consulted extensively, at high levels and with broad
    interagency participation, regarding terrorism in North Africa.
    Our governments also hold bilateral Strategic Dialogues and
    Joint Military Dialogues on a recurring basis. Our Embassy in
    Algeria also facilitates a broad and ever-growing spectrum of
    bilateral cooperative programs that strengthen our security,
    economic, governance, educational and cultural ties. This
    speaks to the value that both of our countries place on our
    growing partnership.
        From Algeria's fight against terrorism in the 1990s, it has
    achieved a hard-won stability, which it has maintained through
    rigorous counterterrorism efforts, national reconciliation
    programs, and de-radicalization initiatives. Algeria has also
    exported this peace dividend to its neighbors. I am
    consistently impressed by Algeria's efforts to foster political
    reconciliation in Libya and to align neighboring states in
    support of a political agreement. Algeria has also provided
    security assistance and training to other neighbors such as
    Tunisia and Niger.
        As the largest country in Africa and situated in a volatile
    neighborhood, Algeria clearly recognizes the threat that
    regional unrest poses to its domestic security. Fighters from
    Iraq and Syria returning to the region, smuggling networks, and
    organized criminal groups represent significant threats. Left
    unchecked, these threats have the potential to harm vital U.S.
    interests. For this reason, if confirmed by the Senate, I will
    work to expand our important bilateral security and
    counterterrorism relationship.
        The U.S.-Algeria relationship is also growing in the
    economic and commercial spheres. The government has faced
    budgetary difficulties following the decline in global oil
    prices, as hydrocarbons account for most of its revenue. Yet,
    these challenges have given Algeria an opportunity to make
    important structural economic changes, promote private sector
    growth, as well as foreign investment. Last year, Algeria
    launched a new economic model to develop and diversify its
    domestic industries. It has also reevaluated state subsidy
    programs and explored new forms of financing.
        The U.S. Government has supported Algeria's economic
    transition. In January, the Treasury Department sent a
    technical advisor to Algeria to provide advice on efficient
    debt management and domestic debt market development. In April,
    our governments held the latest annual meeting of the Trade and
    Investment Framework Agreement Council, to identify ways to
    strengthen economic ties by reducing barriers to trade and
    investment. Additionally, our Embassy in Algiers supports U.S.
    firms in Algeria through commercial advocacy. In April, GE
    Power signed a services deal with Algerian utility Sonelgaz,
    valued at $3.3 billion, to provide upgrades and long-term
    services for 10 gas plants throughout the country. Many other
    companies have also benefitted from U.S. Government advocacy,
    and, if confirmed, I will continue to prioritize this
    critically important function of our Embassy.
        While new investments are essential, Algeria also remains
    one of the key regional producers of oil and gas, and it
    provides an essential energy lifeline to Europe and the Middle
    East. It ranks 10th in world gas reserves and 16th in oil
    reserves. As the United States has considerable expertise in
    the energy industry, if confirmed, I will promote U.S.
    companies as they seek to partner with Algerian firms to
    develop the energy sector.
        Last year, the Algerian Government adopted a package of
    constitutional reforms to strengthen Algeria's political system
    and enshrine freedom of religion. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Algerian government to solidify these important
    reforms, which will strengthen Algeria's democratic and social
    fabric. I am committed to continuing our outreach to key human
    rights, civil society and other non-governmental organizations
    in Algeria. I will also prioritize expanding social ties
    through new academic and people-to-people exchanges.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members
    of the committee, for giving me the opportunity to address you.
    It is a great honor to have been nominated as Ambassador to
    Algeria. If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to
    lead an active, talented mission at U.S. Embassy Algiers, as we
    work with Algeria to advance our shared interests.
        I will be happy to take any questions you might have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you. Thank you all.
        Ambassador Raynor, opposition activists and journalists
    have been jailed by the Ethiopian Government on charges related
    to national security. How will that affect our relationship
    with Ethiopia, and how do you plan to raise those concerns?
        Ambassador Raynor. Thank you, Senator.
        I do think that these are issues that we must raise and, if
    confirmed, I would raise with Ethiopian leadership. And I would
    seek to do so in a way that is thoughtful but forthright and
    that makes reference to good will, shared interests, and
    objectives, Ethiopia's own statements with regard to its own
    intentions to look at political and governance reforms.
        The state of emergency, the constraint of political space
    and rights does not serve Ethiopia's own long-term
    developmental or security interests. It creates space for
    potential violent extremism and it precludes members of their
    society from contributing to the development of their own
    nation. So I would see every opportunity I could to press that
    case, to use the resources at the embassy, including a resident
    legal advisor and a USAID mission who have strong resources and
    expertise to help facilitate community-based dialogue, other
    means of bridging gaps, and helping to move the country past
    this phase where all of its citizens are not being given the
    political space they need to participate in the governance of
    their own country.
        Senator Flake. How do you understand the investment climate
    in Ethiopia now? There is some controversy with the government
    giving away large swaths of land, agricultural land to foreign
    owners, I guess, for electricity production and some other
    things. How does that affect the investment climate?
        Ambassador Raynor. Well, first, I would note that there are
    extraordinary opportunities in Ethiopia. It has had one of the
    fastest growing economies in the world over the past 10 years,
    and I think that creates opportunities for U.S. businesses. And
    the government's own growth and development strategy calls for
    greater private sector engagement.
        You are right. The land use issues were one of the sources
    of tension underlying the recent unrest. I think there is still
    work to be done to resolve those. But there is also work to be
    done to strengthen the broader business climate in the country
    so that it is more welcoming to private investment, private
    sector engagement like the American private sector can bring.
        So I would work with the Ethiopian Government, if
    confirmed, to promote improvements in their business climate
    and to promote U.S. commercial activity both for the sake of
    our own business community and for the sake of Ethiopia's
    development and stability.
        Senator Flake. Thank you so much.
        Ms. Brewer, Sierra Leone was caught up with the Ebola virus
    and devastating effects there. As bad as it was, it could have
    been worse had it spread to other countries. It was contained
    at least in West Africa. And there is concern of new outbreaks
    at some point. We know it never goes completely away. And
    public health, certainly having an infrastructure there to
    contend with a new epidemic that might come there and in other
    countries is important.
        What is the situation with regard to public health in
    Sierra Leone, and what is the United States doing to improve
    that?
        Ms. Brewer. Yes, thank you, Senator.
        Yes, the Ebola crisis was a terrible loss for the country.
    Some 14,000 Sierra Leoneans were infected and almost 4,000 died
    during the crisis. So we know that the country is very
    cognizant of the dangers, as well as to the international
    community.
        The U.S. Government has done quite a bit through USAID and
    other partners, including DOD. It was truly a whole-of-
    government approach that was used to stem the tide of this
    horrible scourge.
        Since then, we have been working with post-recovery
    efforts, including expanding the global health security agenda.
    We are sampling animals to ensure that we know what kinds of
    diseases can be spread animal to human, both wild and
    domesticated. We have just rehabilitated 300 clinics which will
    serve some 1.7 million Sierra Leoneans to give them some basic
    health treatment as well. So we are working very closely with
    our international partners, as well as with the Sierra Leonean
    Government, and we will continue to encourage them to put more
    of their own national assets and resources towards health care
    as well.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Desrocher, we talked in my office about some of the
    challenges facing Algeria. Low oil prices have, obviously,
    affected their revenues. What efforts are being made to
    diversify that economy? And how is the U.S. helping in that
    regard?
        Mr. Desrocher. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        You are right. Low oil prices have had an impact on
    Algeria's economy. It is traditionally an oil-dependent
    economy, but the government is looking to diversify that
    economy. It is very interested in foreign direct investment.
    That is something we are obviously interested in as well. A
    diverse economy is a more robust economy. That is certainly
    good for Algeria. It is also good for countries like us that
    want to work with Algeria.
        We want to help with those reforms as Algeria moves forward
    with its own reform program. We have a Treasury Department
    technical advisor in Algiers working on issues like private
    debt management, and we are willing to look at how we might
    expand the way we cooperate with the Algerian Government in
    this economic reform area because we really think it would
    benefit both our countries. If confirmed, that is something I
    will certainly strongly encourage.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. If it is all right with you, Mr. Chairman,
    I am going to defer to Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for
    that, Senator Booker.
        And congratulations to each of you. I am not on the Africa
    Subcommittee of FRC, but I am on the subcommittee that overseas
    Arab North Africa. I call it the subcommittee from Marrakech to
    Bangladesh. And so, Mr. Desrocher, my questions are going to be
    for you. But for all of you, congratulations both on your
    lengthy careers of service but also on these important
    nominations.
        You referred in your opening testimony to new economic
    realities from Algeria without description. I assume you were
    referring primarily to low oil prices and how that has affected
    the country. And you responded a bit to the chair on that
    question.
        But what are some other areas that you think the U.S. can
    be particularly helpful? Are there private investment
    opportunities, industries in the United States that might find
    promising opportunities in Algeria? What can we do to help them
    deal with that challenge?
        Mr. Desrocher. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        I think there is a great deal that the United States can do
    to work with Algeria as it seeks to reform and diversify its
    economy. Obviously, American firms bring a great deal of
    expertise and technology across all sectors, and Algeria could
    really benefit from that. Algeria is anxious for foreign direct
    investment, and I think we can work with the Algerians to help
    build an environment that is more welcoming to foreign direct
    investment.
        I mentioned the Treasury technical advisor that is there.
    That is something that we certainly think--he has only been
    there a short time, but it is already showing some fruit. I
    have worked in other countries where we have had programs from
    various parts of the U.S. Government that help countries that
    are looking to examine their domestic investment environment
    and look at ways to make it more attractive for private
    investment. And that is certainly something that I would
    address with my Algerian counterparts, if confirmed, and be
    very ready to look for ways to move forward on.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
        Share a little bit about your thoughts on how Algeria is
    dealing with anti-terrorism efforts. There was a Reuters report
    this morning that they had just broken up an ISIS cell that was
    headed by a former al Qaeda operative. And so there is this
    mixture of al Qaeda and ISIS elements in Algeria. It sounds
    like a good bit of investigative and intel work to break up the
    cell. But talk a little bit about the challenge they face and
    how they are dealing with it.
        Mr. Desrocher. Certainly, Senator. Thank you for the
    question.
        Algeria has a great deal of experience in this area, and it
    has proven itself to be an effective counterterrorism partner
    for the United States. It does have some terrorism presence in
    the country, as you mentioned, but it has been effective at
    constraining that.
        We work closely with the Algerians on counterterrorism and
    security issues. We have a number of assistance programs, not
    very large particularly, but we have a number of assistance
    programs that help with managing terrorist incidents, with
    forensics, with investigations, airport security, and issues
    like that. Certainly, if confirmed, that is something I would
    want to encourage because we have found thus far the Algerians
    to be a very willing and very effective counterterrorism
    partner.
        Senator Kaine. We have a very strong ally next door to
    Algeria in Morocco. The relations between Morocco and Algeria
    have been very, very challenged over many years. There is a
    whole series of issues, including the Western Sahara.
        Do you see any prospects based on your expertise and work
    in the area? Do you see any prospects for change in the
    Algeria-Morocco relationship so that there would be a cessation
    of challenges and stronger bilateral ties?
        Mr. Desrocher. Thank you, Senator.
        You are right. The Algeria-Morocco relationship has
    certainly been a tense one for some time. It is something that
    we think is in the interest of both countries to try to find
    ways to work better together. If confirmed, that is something
    that I would certainly work on. There are definitely areas of
    cooperation in border security and drug smuggling and other
    issues, counterterrorism where the ability for those two
    countries to work together would really benefit them both and
    the wider region. And it is certainly something I would very
    eagerly work on.
        Senator Kaine. Great.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And I appreciate your answers to those questions.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
        Ms. Brewer, I first want to congratulate you so much on
    your nomination to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic
    of Sierra Leone. I am glad that your family, who I met earlier,
    could be here with you. Your husband Mark and your daughter
    Arina, a cute little 8-year-old right there--I am glad they are
    here as well.
        So as many of you know, Ms. Brewer is a career member of
    the senior Foreign Service. She served as Deputy Chief of
    Mission at our embassy in Nigeria. She also served in important
    positions at our embassy in Pakistan and Sri Lanka, as well as
    our consulate in Mumbai, India. You have valuable experience,
    Ms. Brewer, related to the Ebola crisis, as well as the Boko
    Haram and al Qaeda threats.
        But most importantly to me, Ms. Brewer was born in Indiana
    and you earned your degree at Valparaiso University. Based on
    your status as a Hoosier and a tremendously qualified career
    member of the senior Foreign Service, I look forward to
    supporting your nomination and supporting your important work
    in Sierra Leone, once you are confirmed.
        So, Ms. Brewer, I just want to touch on something in your
    prepared statement. You mentioned a number of development-
    related issues that will be important to the future of Sierra
    Leone, including good governance, rule of law, democratic
    institutions, economic sustainability, and anti-corruption
    measures. Which of these do you believe will be particularly
    important to the future of Sierra Leone and U.S. interests
    there?
        Ms. Brewer. Thank you, Senator, for those remarks. And
    thank you for your acknowledgement of my status as a Hoosier.
    My husband and I are both proud Hoosiers. So it is really an
    honor for a girl from Portage, Indiana to eventually go and
    represent our country all over the world. It has been amazing.
    So thank you for that.
        Regarding the various issues that face Sierra Leone, there
    are many and they have many deep challenges. I think one of the
    issues that I would like to focus on during my tenure, if
    confirmed, would be to help them create the economic and
    business climate where they can attract the business that they
    will need to truly advance. That includes issues of corruption.
    It includes issues of rule of law. Businesses need to know that
    when they go to have a contract to have a business, that the
    terms of that contract will be honored, that they will not be
    endlessly asked for a number of fees, other issues like that
    that will make it harder for them to attract the kind of
    business that they need.
        Recently the embassy stood up an American business
    community to help U.S. entities doing business in Sierra Leone
    bring their issues forward to the government and help amplify
    those voices. But I think creating an environment that includes
    the respect for rule of law and respect for contracts and
    strong judicial bodies will help Sierra Leone advance the most
    quickly.
        Senator Young. Well, I am encouraged by that response. And
    increasingly our own country's development assistance programs,
    as you know better than I, are focused on helping countries
    graduate out of receiving development assistance. I know there
    are a number of opportunities in Sierra Leone to grow their
    economy amidst all the challenges that they face in that
    regard.
        One of the things I think is really important from our
    standpoint is to make sure that we optimize our development
    enterprise. This is something I have been involved with with
    Senator Shaheen forming a bipartisan panel with CSIS, the think
    tank, and we have produced a report about how we can reform our
    development enterprise to support efforts like yours in Sierra
    Leone. So I would commend that to you, recommend you take a
    look at the website and download the report. And I think a
    number of those recommendations will be incorporated in the
    forthcoming reforms we will see at USAID.
        So thanks again to all of you for your interest in serving
    and for your service to date.
        I yield back the balance of my time.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        I am told that we have a hard stop at 11:30 for this, but
    we will try to get through as quickly as possible.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. Senator Coons, please go ahead.
        Senator Coons. Thanks, Senator Booker. I will be quite
    brief. Just two quick questions, if I might, to Mr. Raynor for
    your upcoming service, if successful, in Ethiopia.
        Just talk to me briefly, if you would, about how you
    understand China's role in Ethiopia. I have some concerns about
    adoption and ongoing challenges that Delaware families and many
    others have in concluding adoption cases that had been open.
    And I would be interested if you could speak to those two
    topics just briefly.
        Ambassador Raynor. Thank you very much, Senator.
        China is certainly very active in Ethiopia, has identified
    Ethiopia as a preferred partner in Africa. I think that is most
    visible in infrastructure projects, work on the airport, work
    on the railroad connecting Addis to Djibouti, and in many other
    areas as well. It is an interesting dynamic. It is something
    that I think the U.S. Government needs to be cognizant of. And
    yet, I think that there is value in multiple donors and
    multiple points of engagement with a country like Ethiopia that
    has enormous potential. And I think it is incumbent on us to
    look at how we engage in ways that complement with other
    donors, including China. But I think it is clear that there is
    a strong and deep relationship between Ethiopia and China.
        On adoption, that is of paramount concern to me, Senator.
    There are about 300 American families currently in the process
    of trying to adopt and have invested emotionally, time,
    resources, formed real connections with real children who are
    desperate for that connection and for the resources that they
    can gain from being adopted by loving American families.
        The Ethiopian Government did suspend international
    adoptions in late April. The embassy immediately began engaging
    to resume those, receiving quite thoughtful and helpful
    engagement from the Ethiopian authorities to resume
    international adoptions. The 40 or so that had gone through the
    judicial process I understand have all gone through the entire
    process at this point, including the final documentation. About
    250 other families are farther back in the pipeline. The
    government has engaged to continue processing those as well.
        One of the challenges is that some of the early steps in
    the process take place at the regional level, and there is some
    variation in how the various regions are doing that.
        So, if confirmed, I would continue to engage constructively
    with Ethiopia and to welcome their constructive engagement to
    see these cases through, but also to engage on the regional
    level to make sure that we are getting appropriate cooperation.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Raynor. Given the press of
    time, I will defer to the ranking member. Let me just in quick
    closing say McKinsey has recently issued a report about China's
    ascendancy across the continent, a trend that has been underway
    for a decade. I urge all of you to be active in promoting
    American exports and engagement with the continent. Thank you.
        Thank you for the chance to question, Senator.
        Senator Flake. Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. I have got about 3 minutes before they
    actually literally stop the cameras because of some wonderful
    non-bipartisanship in our Senate.
        So, first of all, Ms. Brewer, I am very concerned about
    human trafficking concerns. Is there anything you can enlighten
    me as to how much of a focus that will be for you?
        Ms. Brewer. Certainly. Thank you, sir.
        I know that the U.S. Government has been engaging with the
    Government of Sierra Leone for several years on this issue, and
    in fact, we have been supporting through our Trafficking in
    Persons Office in the State Department--we have been supporting
    a women's shelter there for victims of trafficking. It is also
    heartening. I have learned that the government has laws against
    such acts. However, it has been some years since anyone has
    been prosecuted and jailed under these provisions of the
    criminal code. So that is something that I know that I will
    continue, if confirmed. I would continue to press for actual
    action and convictions against traffickers.
        Senator Booker. I appreciate that, and anything you can
    highlight for us as a legislative body that we could be doing
    more on that issue and especially to help with Sierra Leone.
        There were programs I was reading about in preparation for
    this about the Young Africa Leaders Initiative that Obama
    talked a lot about and funded very well. Do you have concerns
    about that not being funded in this next administration?
        Ms. Brewer. I do not have specific information about what
    would or would not. I understand those conversations are still
    going on in terms of what the funding levels will finally be to
    the Department of State. So, of course, whatever the funding
    levels are, I will seek to be a good steward of U.S. taxpayer
    resources, to maximize them.
        Sierra Leone, while a small country, has been able to
    benefit greatly from these programs, sending about a dozen
    young people to the U.S. for these training programs over the
    last several years every year in each program, both the YALI
    and the Mandela fellowship. So I think we really are maximizing
    our relationship as much as we can.
        Peace Corps also has recently been reestablished. And over
    the years, there have been nearly 4,000 Peace Corps volunteers
    that have deployed to Sierra Leone, many of whom are back here
    in the U.S. and continue to keep Sierra Leone in their hearts.
        So we have many avenues of engagement and YALI is a strong
    one, but I look forward to, if confirmed, continuing to
    maximize all of those.
        Senator Booker. Great.
        Mr. Raynor, really quickly, we just were hearing in our
    previous hearing, as you probably did, about the challenges
    between Ethiopia and Egypt, the conflict over the dam, as well
    as how that is playing out and the conflict that we are having
    in South Sudan. In the 120 seconds I have left, could you take
    up a third of that or two-thirds of that and give me a short
    answer?
        Ambassador Raynor. Sure. Thank you, Senator.
        I think the main issue being about the water rights and the
    dam. At the moment, it is incumbent on all countries to share
    the waters of the Nile, to work collaboratively on how that
    water gets used. I would, if confirmed, encourage Ethiopia to
    continue its consultative process in that regard and the launch
    of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam in a manner that takes
    into account the interests of all those who share the water.
        More generally, I think these are two very powerful and
    influential countries in the region, and everything they can do
    to communicate clearly and collegially with each other is in
    the interest of the regional stability and our own interests as
    well. So I would take every opportunity to encourage them to
    continue to be constructively forthright in their engagement
    with each other.
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much. I am going to cut you
    off before the cameras cut off. I do not have time to ask you
    about Russian influence in Algeria, but maybe we can do that
    offline. And I am going to turn it over to the chairman to
    close us out.
        Senator Flake. Thank you so much for your testimony. Thank
    you for your willingness to serve. We are always well served by
    our career diplomats.
        This hearing is so short that Senator Coons did not even
    have to talk about chicken exports to Africa. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. But anyway, with the thanks of the
    committee, we look forward to the business meeting.
        This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
              to Hon. Michael Raynor by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have sought to contribute meaningfully to the promotion
    of human rights and democracy throughout my career. As Assistant Chief
    of Mission in Afghanistan, I directed U.S. Agency for International
    Development (USAID) and State International Narcotics and Law
    Enforcement (INL) programs that increased girls' enrollment in primary
    and secondary schools, improved access to basic health services, and
    increased women's enrollment in public universities. I worked closely
    with USAID to launch the ``Promote'' program to strengthen Afghan
    women's participation in civil society, the economy, and decision-
    making positions within the Afghan Government. Also in Kabul, I helped
    resolve missteps by Afghan partners that threatened to curtail U.S.
    Government capacity-building in justice and corrections, ensuring
    continued U.S. engagement to improve Afghan rule of law and prison
    conditions. I worked closely with Afghan counterparts to bolster their
    commitment to democracy, chairing the U.S.-Afghanistan Bilateral
    Commission working group on democracy and governance that elicited
    strong Afghan commitments to strengthening democratic institutions and
    practices.
        As Chief of Mission in Benin, my close rapport with the then-
    President enabled me to counter negative tendencies that threatened
    media crackdowns, divisive constitutional amendments, and other
    potentially anti-democratic actions. I helped strengthen Benin's
    respect for human rights, with a particular focus on gender equality. I
    elicited greater Beninese commitments and resources to combat
    trafficking in persons, launched USAID and Peace Corps projects to
    counter violence against women, and supported greater female access to
    education, health care, and business opportunities. I beefed up U.S.
    engagement to improve Beninese labor conditions, to resettle the last
    refugees in Benin, to tackle HIV/AIDS along transportation routes, and
    to support disability rights. I strengthened U.S. interagency
    engagement in Benin to professionalize the country's judiciary by
    enhancing its responsiveness and transparency and countering judicial
    corruption. I provided strong support to Benin's traditions of
    religious tolerance and peaceful co-existence, while developing an
    innovative interagency program to prevent violent extremism in the face
    of extremist threats immediately across Benin's borders.
        As Zimbabwe desk officer during the height of Zimbabwe's economic,
    political, and humanitarian crisis, I helped preserve Economic Support
    Funding for Zimbabwe's civil society and worked to ensure that U.S.
    sanctions focused on the corrupt Zimbabwean elite without worsening the
    hardships of average Zimbabweans. This included fostering a compromise
    to allow a pilot U.S. feeding program for Zimbabweans who had been
    excluded from assistance because they had been resettled onto
    commercial farmland seized by the Zimbabwean Government.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in the
    Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia? What are the most important
    steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and
    democracy in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. In the past year, the most significant challenges to human
    rights and democracy in Ethiopia included excessive use of force by
    state authorities to silence dissent, arbitrary arrests, politically
    motivated prosecutions, and continued restrictions on free speech,
    assembly and other activities of civil society and non-governmental
    organizations. If confirmed, I will work with the Ethiopian people and
    government to open political space, to advocate for full implementation
    of the Ethiopians' constitutionally-guaranteed rights, political
    freedoms, civil liberties and due process, and to promote reforms that
    strengthen democratic institutions. I will make the case that adhering
    to its own constitutionally guaranteed rights and basic freedoms will
    enhance Ethiopia's stability and further support its sustainable
    development goals and ability to act as a bulwark against the spread of
    violent extremism in the region. I will also argue that an empowered
    civil society can and would be an important ally for a government that
    prides itself on good governance. My goal will be to convince the
    Ethiopian Government that forward progress in democratic development
    serves its own interests as well as the interests of the Ethiopian
    people.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Federal
    Democratic Republic of Ethiopia in advancing human rights, civil
    society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The main obstacles to achieving progress on these areas are
    laws and policies that run counter to the Ethiopian Government's stated
    goals of political reform and democratic development, and that in some
    cases violate constitutionally protected rights. In particular, I am
    concerned by the continued use of the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation, and
    more recently the state of emergency, to silence journalists,
    activists, and opposition voices. Also, the 2009 Charities and
    Societies Proclamation ("CSO law") has placed restrictions on funding
    for non-governmental organizations, which makes it extremely difficult
    for well-intentioned Ethiopians to sustainably operate civil society
    organizations, thereby undercutting their ability to channel popular
    grievances into proposals for policy solutions. If confirmed, I plan to
    engage in frank discussions with Ethiopian officials about how long-
    term stability comes through the protection of human rights and
    democratic governance.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia?
    If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively support the
    Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S.
    security assistance and security cooperation activities reinforce human
    rights?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed as Ambassador, I will meet with human
    rights, civil society and other non-governmental organizations. I will
    encourage the Ethiopian Government to seek input from a broad range of
    viewpoints, including civil society. I will also advocate for the
    protection and defense of human rights.
        If confirmed, I will make certain the Embassy continues to
    rigorously implement Leahy vetting to ensure that U.S. security
    assistance and security cooperation activities, including pre-
    deployment training to Ethiopian peacekeepers in Somalia and South
    Sudan under the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance
    program, require specific human rights training to reduce the risk of
    human rights abuses in peacekeeping operations in which Ethiopia
    participates. I will do the same for rule of law programs with the
    police. I will be vigilant to ensure that our security cooperation is
    never misused to restrict the rights of the Ethiopian people.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to address cases of key
    political prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Ethiopia?

        Answer. If confirmed, my team and I will work hard to ensure that
    the rule of law is respected in Ethiopia, including the Ethiopian
    Constitution, which not only guarantees basic human rights but also
    enshrines a wide range of other rights. I have very real concerns
    regarding reports that there are a number of cases where these rights
    are infringed by violations of due process and political interference,
    including with regard to members of the political opposition. It is
    important to urge the government to follow due process for trial
    proceedings, to refrain from appealing acquittals pronounced by
    Ethiopian courts, and to protect the rights of anyone who is accused of
    committing a crime.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to advocate for the
    respect of fundamental human rights to include the freedom of speech
    and peaceful assembly, and advocate for persons unjustly detained by
    the Government.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the Federal Democratic Republic of
    Ethiopia on matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as
    part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider human rights and democracy
    advocacy to be a fundamental part of my job and will engage with the
    Ethiopian Government. I will make support for human rights, civil
    rights, and good governance key elements of my engagement with the
    Ethiopian Government across the full range of issues. Ethiopia stands
    to benefit greatly in all areas when its people are empowered,
    informed, and have trust in the rule of law.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?
        Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws,
    regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through
    appropriate channels.

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As a management-coned Foreign Service officer who has
    managed diverse teams throughout my career, I am a strong believer in
    the value of diversity in the workplace and have sought to create
    supportive and inclusive workplaces in each of my assignments. In my
    current capacity as Director of the State Department's Office of Career
    Development and Counseling, I oversee the Department's Continuity
    Counseling operation, which exists to support and promote the success
    of underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service. If confirmed, I will
    ensure that the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa has active and accessible
    Equal Opportunity (EEO) and Federal Women's Program (FWP) operations,
    programs, and outreach, and I will ensure that EEO and FWPC counselors
    at the Embassy are properly trained and afforded sufficient time in the
    workplace to perform these important functions. I will ensure that the
    Embassy has formal, structured mentorship programs and will be
    attentive to ensuring that each member of the Embassy team has every
    chance for personal growth and professional success. In my own
    behavior, I will model a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion.
    I will ensure that the employee evaluation process is rigorously
    followed, including formal and documented counseling sessions
    throughout each performance period, so that employees receive timely
    and constructive feedback on their performance and have structured
    opportunities to raise with their supervisors any workplace concerns or
    impediments to success.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will speak publicly and regularly, including in Town Hall
    and Country Team meetings, about my own commitment to diversity and
    inclusion and my expectations that all members of the Embassy team will
    experience and sustain an inclusive and supportive workplace. I will
    require all supervisors to promote an inclusive, supportive, and
    ethical workplace. I will encourage that the performance evaluations of
    all supervisors comment on the supervisor's success in valuing
    diversity and promoting inclusion, and will recognize and commend
    efforts among supervisors to value diversity and foster inclusion. I
    will ensure that supervisors are cognizant of EEO principles and rules,
    and held accountable for respecting them. I will ensure prompt
    engagement, and corrective action when warranted, on any expressions of
    concern that the Embassy workplace does not value diversity or promote
    inclusion.

        Question 12. The U.S. and Ethiopia began a human rights working
    group to follow up on the commitments the Ethiopian Government made to
    improve in the areas of democracy and human rights as a result of the
    President's visit to Ethiopia in July 2015. Former Assistant Secretary
    of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Tom Malinowski traveled
    to Ethiopia several during the remainder of the Obama administration to
    participate in the working group, and met with both the Prime Minister
    and other high ranking officials to discuss U.S. concerns, and proposed
    setting up a civil society fund for Ethiopia which is exempt from the
    10 percent cap on foreign funding imposed by the 2009 Charities and
    Societies Proclamation.

       What is the status of the working group? When was the last meeting?
            Who is currently participating on behalf of the United States?
       What is the status of the proposal to set up a civil society fund?
            How much has the United States contributed and what
            organizations are being funded?
       If confirmed, what will you do as Ambassador to secure agreement to
            the advance the aforementioned initiatives?

        Answer. The U.S. Government and the Government of Ethiopia (GOE)
    maintain a bilateral Democracy, Governance, and Human Rights Working
    Group, which most recently met on December 15, 2016. Then-Assistant
    Secretary Malinowski, Charge d'Affaires Peter man, and Ethiopian
    Foreign Minister Workneh Gebeyehu were the co-Chairs of those
    discussions. Typically these working group meetings are held annually.
    If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to hold these meetings as
    they provide a proven platform in which both sides can speak candidly.
        It is my understanding that the Embassy consistently advocates for
    more open and inclusive political and civil space in Ethiopia,
    including a loosening of restrictions on civil society and greater
    tolerance for opposition views. Our Embassy has consistently engaged in
    this space through a variety of mechanisms. My understanding is that
    the Government of Ethiopia has our proposal on the Civil Society Fund
    but has yet to provide an answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will
    make the case that adhering to its own constitutionally guaranteed
    rights and basic freedoms will enhance Ethiopia's stability and further
    support its sustainable development goals. I will assert that this
    adherence will serve to strengthen the Government of Ethiopia's ability
    to act as a bulwark against the spread of violent extremism in the
    region. I will also argue that an empowered civil society can and would
    be an important ally for a government that prides itself on good
    governance. My goal will be to convince the Ethiopian Government that
    forward progress in democratic development serves its own interests as
    well as the interests of the Ethiopian people. To achieve this, I will
    leverage the tools available through USAID and State to continue to
    advocate for space for NGOs to operate freely as a feature of any
    democratic and law-based society.

        Question 13. The United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights, who
    visited in May, was reportedly denied access to the Oromia and Amhara
    regions the locations of widespread popular protests in 2015 and 2016
    that resulted in hundreds dead and tens of thousands detained.

       Has the Government of Ethiopia granted the High Commissioner or
            U.N. Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and of
            association access to Oromia or Amhara? What concrete steps can
            you take, if confirmed, to encourage the Government of Ethiopia
            to provide such access?
       Will you commit to ensuring that you and your embassy staff attempt
            to regularly visit if you are confirmed?

        Answer. The High Commissioner Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein traveled to
    Ethiopia in May but did not get to Oromia or Amhara. During his three
    day visit, by his own account he met with government officials, spoke
    to the press, and advocated for greater and freer civic space. He
    appealed to the Government of Ethiopia to grant U.N. human rights
    officials access to areas that experienced unrest. He also expressed
    interest in returning to Ethiopia in 2018. If confirmed as Ambassador,
    I will speak frankly and openly with the Government of Ethiopia about
    the value of hosting visits by the U.N. bodies. The Embassy staff in
    Addis Ababa maintains a robust and active tradition of traveling
    throughout the country as part of our on-going outreach and engagement
    with the people of Ethiopia. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will
    continue to uphold this tradition including in Oromia and Amhara
    regions.

        Question 14. When is the last time the State Department conducted a
    review of security assistance to Ethiopia? If none has been conducted
    when will one be? If one has been conducted, when will that review be
    shared with Congress?

        Answer. The Departments of State and Defense regularly conduct a
    review of security assistance to all recipient countries. This is also
    the case for Ethiopia. The Departments of State and Defense conducted a
    review of security assistance to Ethiopia in the fall of 2016. The
    review was completed earlier this year. These exercises form the basis
    for future decision-making and provide useful context. It is my
    understanding that the Department can provide a classified briefing
    regarding the current security assistance to Ethiopia. If confirmed as
    Ambassador, I will be a steward of our assistance programs and fully
    comply with our standards and regulations.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Maria E. Brewer by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have sought to support human
    rights, strengthen the rights of women, and reinforce principles of
    democracy. When I served as the Deputy Chief of Mission in Nigeria from
    2013-2016, we pressed for peaceful, transparent, and democratic
    national elections in 2015. We did so in numerous ways, from supporting
    the work of Nigeria's Independent National Election Commission (INEC)
    with technical advice and providing independent election observers, to
    working with the major parties to reinforce the need for the parties to
    cooperate with INEC, to reinforcing on a daily basis the message of
    violence-free elections, including the potential of personal sanctions
    against anyone who would foment violence. In the end, Nigeria
    experienced a peaceful transition of power from the ruling party to the
    former opposition party, a first in its history as a democratic nation.
        At the same time, my staff and I at the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria
    ensured that we scrupulously carried out Leahy vetting to ensure that
    our support to military and law enforcement bodies only reached those
    with a clean human rights record. We pressed the Nigerian Government to
    strengthen its broader human rights record, reinforcing that respect
    for human rights would support its armed forces in its fight against
    Boko Haram. We noted that security is a multidisciplinary endeavor,
    requiring coordinated engagement by all aspects of federal, state, and
    local governments, as well as civil society. We addressed issues of
    accountability, stating that the United States remains ready to support
    Nigeria and its security services as the country fulfills its
    responsibilities with restraint and impartiality.
        When Boko Haram carried out the horrific kidnapping of 276 young
    women from a secondary school in the town of Chibok, the worldwide
    public outcry included a major social media movement,
    #BringBackOurGirls. I coordinated and focused the efforts of multiple
    U.S. agencies addressing the crisis. We brought in an interagency team
    of experts representing a wide variety of skill sets. I ensured that
    U.S. efforts were closely coordinated, internally and with Nigerian and
    international partners. We focused on both the immediate crisis and on
    finding longer-term solutions to the underlying causes. I coordinated
    activities, reviewed policy imperatives, and leveraged resources to
    maximum effect. Working as one team, our military, intelligence,
    humanitarian, strategic communications, and law enforcement
    representatives shared information and created strategies. I was
    honored to lead a complex interagency U.S. Government response to a
    crisis with significant political, security, and public diplomacy
    dimensions. While not all of the girls have been returned to their
    families, our work supported survivors as they were rescued, made their
    way to safety, or were released through negotiation.
        During my tenure, Nigeria passed comprehensive Anti-Trafficking in
    Persons legislation in 2015. In 2014, we successfully nominated
    Beatrice Jedy-Agba, Executive Secretary of the National Agency for the
    Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP), to receive recognition
    as a ``TIP Report Hero Acting to End Modern Slavery,'' thanks to her
    efforts to fight human trafficking. Additionally, I spoke out against
    violence against women and children, including during my annual
    participation in the International Day for the Elimination of Violence
    against Women and the ensuing 16 Days of Activism against Gender
    Violence.
        Throughout my career, as a Management Officer entrusted with the
    responsibility of overseeing our Human Resources operations in both
    domestic and overseas environments, I reinforced the need for
    scrupulous adherence to U.S. and local labor laws, including support
    for Equal Employment Opportunity principles.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Sierra Leone? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Sierra Leone? What
    do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. As a member of the U.N. Human Rights Council, Sierra Leone
    has a strong record of voting with the United States, including on
    contentious country-specific resolutions. Nonetheless, a number of
    human rights challenges remain. Among the most significant are: abusive
    treatment by police, prolonged detention and imprisonment, harsh prison
    conditions, widespread corruption, lack of access to justice, violence
    against women, culturally-entrenched female genital mutilation, child
    abuse, societal discrimination against LGBTI persons, trafficking in
    persons, and child labor. As noted in the 2016 Human Rights Report,
    constraints on freedom of speech and expression remain. Government
    officials have used the criminal libel provision in the Public Order
    Act of 1965 to harass journalists and members of civil society who have
    expressed views critical of the Government, although no one has been
    convicted under the libel provisions for many years.
        If confirmed, I will continue to emphasize to the Sierra Leone
    Government the importance of holding free, fair, and peaceful elections
    in March 2018. I would reinforce the importance of freedom of
    expression as a fundamental freedom for a democratic society in my
    dialogue with the Government, politicians, and press contacts. The
    embassy has strongly advocated for free, fair, timely, and peaceful
    elections. If confirmed, I would do the same.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Sierra Leone in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Extreme poverty in Sierra Leone has impacted all aspects of
    society. Lack of technical capacity and resources have created an
    environment in which corruption has taken root, reducing the Sierra
    Leone Government's ability to address many of the country's problems.
        Nevertheless, the Government of Sierra Leone has made efforts to
    address such issues. President Koroma declared his support for human
    rights. The U.S. Government is supporting the Government of Sierra
    Leone to professionalize security forces, combat human trafficking,
    improve judicial processes, address official impunity and corruption,
    empower women, and protect the human rights of marginalized groups
    including disabled individuals and individuals in the LGBT community.
    Since 2009, the U.S. Government has provided $1.7 million to help
    operationalize Sierra Leone's Transnational Organized Crime Unit
    through specialized training, mentorship, and provision of equipment.
    Additionally, the Embassy has provided oversight to the ``Promoting
    Transparency in Sierra Leone's Judiciary'' project, which has drafted
    modern bail and sentencing guidelines to combat corruption, promote
    transparency, and greater credibility in the judiciary and law
    enforcement, and alleviate prison overcrowding. The Embassy is also
    implementing a $1.1 million ``From Prisons to Corrections'' project to
    help Sierra Leone's Corrections Services antiquated prison system
    become a modern corrections service that conforms to international
    human rights standards.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Sierra Leone? If confirmed, what steps will
    you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will meet with human rights,
    civil society, and other non-governmental organizations. I will
    encourage the Sierra Leonean Government to seek input from a broad
    range of viewpoints, including civil society. I will advocate for the
    protection and defense of human rights.
        If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Embassy continues to
    rigorously implement Leahy vetting regarding U.S. security assistance,
    security cooperation, and law enforcement activities. The U.S. Embassy,
    with Department of State's Bureau of International Narcotics, and Law
    Enforcement Affairs (INL) funding, is implementing a prison reform
    program to improve prison conditions to meet international human rights
    standards. The ``Promoting Transparency in Sierra Leone's Judiciary''
    project has produced modern bail and sentencing guidelines to address
    problems relating to prolonged detention, abuses relating to the
    granting of bail, and alleviate prison overcrowding. This, along with
    other programs, will result in strengthening Sierra Leone's justice
    system and corrections service. If confirmed, I will continue to ensure
    that support for any and all security endeavors is made carefully, and
    under strict adherence to the Leahy Law.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Sierra Leone to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Sierra Leone?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will advocate for fair and equal treatment
    for all under Sierra Leonean law. We are sensitive to concerns from
    opposition political parties and civil society groups that some
    political figures have been unjustly targeted and arrested, but as
    noted in the 2016 Human Rights Report, there are no political prisoners
    in Sierra Leone.
        During the upcoming 2018 Sierra Leonean election season, if
    confirmed, I will reiterate the U.S. Government's support for inclusive
    campaigning, and our expectation that Sierra Leonean authorities will
    allow for the free exchange of diverse opinions.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Sierra Leone on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to engage Sierra Leonean
    leadership on matters of human rights and good governance. I will
    encourage credible, free, timely, and peaceful elections in March 2018.
    I will continue to advocate for adherence to international humanitarian
    law. If confirmed, I will engage with the full range of Sierra Leonean
    society regarding the importance of upholding human rights and
    democratic freedoms, to include the right of all registered candidates
    to campaign freely and safely.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Sierra Leone?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. Throughout my Foreign Service career, I have served as a
    mentor to many of my fellow staff, a role that I hold of the utmost
    importance for the development of the next generation of leaders. Most
    recently, as Deputy Chief of Mission to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, I
    managed a formal mentoring program that included a wide range of events
    intended to assist first and second tour staff with learning about the
    Foreign Service and enhance their future careers. Such programs are
    extremely valuable, and my intention would be to establish a mentoring
    program at all of my future postings. I also believe in making myself
    available to hear the concerns and answer the questions of all my
    staff, both U.S. and local employees, at all levels.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I believe that senior managers must first themselves be
    model actors that foster inclusivity and respect for diverse
    backgrounds. As a Hispanic female Management coned officer from an
    under-represented part of the country myself, I appreciate the need for
    respecting all kinds of diversity in our work force. As the most senior
    U.S. Government official at the U.S. Embassy in Sierra Leone, I would
    require that all who report to me would demonstrate the same kind of
    respect for each other. I would encourage Embassy staff to remain open
    and willing to learn from each other and from our host nation, modeling
    the best aspects of diplomacy to all.

        Question 12. Sierra Leone's general elections are next slated for
    March 2018. The country's constitution provides for two five-year terms
    limit for the president. President Ernest Bai Koroma and his supporters
    have repeatedly denied he intends to run for a third term. However,
    rumors persist that he intends to do so.

       If confirmed as Ambassador, what will you discourage any possible
            attempts by Koroma to run for a third term?
       What will you do, if confirmed, to help promote the transition of
            power through free, fair and on-time elections?

        Answer. While it is the responsibility of the Sierra Leonean
    Government to enforce their laws fairly, Embassy Freetown has advocated
    for free, fair, timely, and peaceful elections every time our diplomats
    have met with the Sierra Leonean leadership, opposition candidates,
    non-governmental actors, journalists, and ordinary citizens. If
    confirmed, I would continue to promote the transition of power through
    free, fair and on-time elections. The embassy has welcomed President
    Koroma's personal assurances that he will not seek a third term and
    that he will not try to change the constitution in order to stay in
    power, and we expect that he will adhere to his promise. If confirmed
    as Ambassador, I will continue to engage, pointing out the importance
    of strengthening respect for the constitution and democracy in
    maintaining peace.

        Question 13. Civil society groups in Sierra Leone are playing
    important roles in promoting good governance and community
    participation in government decision-making. The opposition also plays
    a role in defining the political and social landscape of any country.

       If confirmed, what steps do you intend to take to ensure that there
            is an appropriate understanding of opposition and civil society
            viewpoints in developing U.S. diplomatic strategic goals?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I would make a priority of
    engaging with the Government and civil society to reinforce personal
    responsibility and accountability in the actions of individuals and
    government officials. The U.S. Government is building on efforts of
    civil society engagement and if confirmed as Ambassador, I will support
    several initiatives to promote more female aspirants to run for
    national, district, and local positions; to assist the media in holding
    issue-based public policy debates; and to provide pre-election monitors
    to keep watch over potential flash points where there is a heightened
    potential for conflicts turning violent in the lead-up to and
    immediately following the elections.

        Question 14. Sierra Leone is a source and destination country for
    men, women, and children subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking.
    Sierra Leone has been designated a Tier 2 country since 2013 in the
    Trafficking in Persons Report published by the State Department. (Prior
    to 2012 it was a Tier 2 Watchlist country.)

       If confirmed, how will you work to ensure that the Government of
            Sierra Leone takes concrete steps to implement its 2015-2020
            national action plan to counter trafficking?
       What will you do if confirmed, to direct appropriate USG efforts
            towards helping Sierra Leone address the recommendations
            outlined in the report, including, but not limited to,
            improving prosecutorial and legislative responses to
            trafficking cases? Is the United States currently funding
            specific programs and activities aimed at addressing corruption
            in the Judiciary, or training prosecutors and judges to
            investigate and prosecute trafficking as recommended in the TIP
            report?

        Answer. The Government of Sierra Leone does not fully meet the
    minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is
    making significant efforts to do so. As such, the U.S. has commended
    the Government's efforts in a resource-scarce environment to identify
    trafficking victims, refer them to services, and fund repatriation for
    25 Sierra Leonean trafficking victims exploited abroad. The U.S.
    Government continues to engage with the Government of Sierra Leone on
    trafficking issues. Since 2013, the U.S. Government has invested $1.2
    million to provide shelter and care to victims of trafficking in
    Freetown. The project is currently focused on building capacity within
    the Sierra Leonean Government to budget for trafficking victim services
    and administer the shelter in the capital. If confirmed as Ambassador,
    I will maintain communication with key stakeholders on human
    trafficking in Sierra Leone, including government officials, NGOs, and
    civil society, to make progress combatting human trafficking and to
    ensure that the Government of Sierra Leone takes concrete steps to
    implement its 2015-2020 national action plan to counter trafficking.
        If confirmed, I would also continue to engage with the Government
    of Sierra Leone on strengthening their state institutions and
    implementing legislation to empower existing entities to establish a
    culture where corruption is not tolerated in the judiciary. Starting in
    June 2012, a U.S. attorney began intermittently mentoring officials in
    the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to impart knowledge and skills to
    prosecute public corruption cases. Since then, the ACC has pursued
    several new cases of corruption. The Embassy has also provided
    oversight to the highly successful $1.5 million Bureau of International
    Narcotics and Law Enforcement-funded Promoting Transparency in Sierra
    Leone's Judiciary project, which has drafted modern state-of-the art
    bail and sentencing guidelines, to combat corruption and promote
    transparency in the judiciary and law enforcement.

        Question 15. More than 15 years after the end of the civil war, and
    despite recent efforts to combat corruption, Sierra Leone continues to
    face governance and corruption challenges.

       What programs and activities is the United States currently engaged
            in to combat corruption? What more could the U.S. be doing in
            this area?
       If confirmed, how do you intend to undertake the actions referenced
            in the previous answer?

        Answer. Despite its successful post-conflict reconstruction efforts
    and three consecutive credible national and local elections, Sierra
    Leone must continue to address serious development challenges. This
    includes entrenched corruption and a culture of impunity. The
    prerequisite for improving the country's human rights situation is
    political stability and a shift in the culture of impunity that
    prevails. The United States and other donor nations engage with the
    Government of Sierra Leone to strengthen its state institutions and
    implement legislation to empower existing entities to establish a
    culture where corruption is not tolerated.
        If confirmed, I would leverage our bilateral relationship and
    assistance to press for enhanced transparency in government, increased
    public awareness of reporting mechanisms for corruption, and robust
    efforts to investigate and prosecute corruption.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to John Desrocher by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have endeavored to help counterpart
    governments in the Middle East build effective, responsive institutions
    that value and support the full spectrum of human rights.
        During my work on Iraq in both Baghdad and Washington, I pressed
    the Iraqi Government to adequately protect Mujaheddin e Khalq (MEK)
    members under threat in Iraq. While the MEK did suffer from attacks,
    most MEK members were later safely evacuated from Iraq. While I was
    Deputy Chief of Mission in Baghdad, I had a leading role in the U.S.
    Government response to ISIS attacks on Iraq's Yazidi community after
    the fall of Mosul.
        Supporting Tunisia's democratic transition following its Arab
    Spring revolution was central to my tenure as Deputy Assistant
    Secretary for the Maghreb. U.S. assistance played a critical role in
    helping Tunisia hold its 2014 Presidential and parliamentary elections,
    the first since the revolution. Our support to the elections
    commission, civil society, candidates, and political parties enabled a
    free and fair process. My frequent engagements with civil society
    actors in subsequent visits to Tunisia reinforced U.S. commitment to
    human rights and Tunisia's democratic transition.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the
    People's Democratic Republic of Algeria today? What are the most
    important steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human
    rights and democracy in the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria?
    What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most pressing human rights issues in Algeria include
    restrictions on the freedom of assembly, lack of judicial independence,
    and limitations on civil society, religious freedom, and the media. If
    confirmed, I will prioritize the promotion of human rights in Algeria.
    I will work closely with Algerian leaders to press for progress on this
    important issue. The State Department's annual Human Rights reports
    remain one of our most effective tools in highlighting human rights
    issues around the world. Our report regularly garners press attention
    in Algeria and is studied carefully by NGOs and other groups working on
    human rights issues in Algeria.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the People's
    Democratic Republic of Algeria in advancing human rights, civil society
    and democracy in general?

        Answer. While domestic and foreign NGOs operate openly in Algeria,
    the country's Law on Associations imposes a cumbersome registration
    process and limits on foreign financing. I understand the Government is
    revising the law and, if confirmed, I will encourage the Government to
    take into account the views of civil society as it moves forward with
    the reforms.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs from the People's Democratic Republic of
    Algeria?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to continuing my
    predecessors' tradition of meeting with human rights, civil society and
    other non-governmental organizations in the United States and in
    Algeria. Our embassy in Algiers routinely meets with local NGOs to
    learn about alleged human rights abuses and hear their views on how the
    United States can be even more effective in advancing human rights in
    Algeria.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    People's Democratic Republic of Algeria to address cases of key
    political prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the
    People's Democratic Republic of Algeria?

        Answer. If confirmed, I stand ready to engage with the Algerian
    Government on cases involving political prisoners and other unjustly
    detained people.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue our strong compliance with
    the Leahy Law and maintain robust vetting procedures.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Algerians on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will make promoting human and civil rights
    and governance one of my highest priorities. In addition to promoting
    human rights for its own sake, encouraging Algeria to uphold such
    commitments underpins nearly every pillar of our bilateral
    relationship.

        Question 8. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Algeria?

        Answer. No.

        Question 11. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. My tenure with the Foreign Service has given me the
    opportunity to manage teams of talented individuals from diverse
    backgrounds. If confirmed, I will firmly uphold equal employment
    opportunity laws and will work to ensure that all of my colleagues,
    regardless of background, have the opportunity to grow professionally
    and pursue positions of leadership in the State Department and
    throughout the U.S. Government.

        Question 12. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that all supervisors take
    mandatory EEO training and strictly adhere to related laws and
    policies. I will emphasize the necessity of transparency, fairness, and
    inclusivity when making hiring decisions, my assessment of my
    subordinates' performance will include evaluation of their commitment
    to diversity, and I will take immediate corrective action if I learn of
    any incident that does not reflect the value the United States and the
    State Department place on diversity and respect for all.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                            TUESDAY, AUGUST 1, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:03 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson [presiding], Gardner, Murphy,
    Shaheen, and Kaine.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Johnson. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee will come to order.
        We are holding this hearing today to consider the
    nomination of Stephen B. King of Wisconsin to be the U.S.
    Ambassador to the Czech Republic.
        I certainly want to welcome Steve and his family. I want to
    congratulate you on your selection by the President and thank
    you for your willingness to serve this Nation. I want to thank
    your family for the sacrifice they will be making as well,
    because you will be pretty busy.
        Although I am chairing this hearing because Steve is a
    fellow Wisconsinite who I have come to know over the last 6 or
    7 years, I would like to offer a few words on his behalf.
        Steve is a prominent public servant and businessman, a
    natural leader, and a patriot. Steve was born in Indianapolis
    and raised in Chicago. He eventually settled in Janesville,
    Wisconsin--we have heard of that city before now with Speaker
    Ryan, also his hometown--and his wife, Karen, and their three
    children.
        Early in his career, Steve investigated civil rights
    violations in Jackson, Mississippi, for the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation and then served as an investigator for the U.S.
    Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He later
    became special assistant to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture,
    serving as liaison between the USDA and the Agriculture
    Committees of the House and the Senate.
        Steve left Washington in 1976 to become the director of
    alumni and development at his alma mater, Western Illinois
    University. In 1979, he entered the business world and led a
    management buyout of Tomah Products, and later founded King
    Capital, a successful private investment firm.
        Active in the Boy Scouts of America his entire life, Steve
    is a recipient of the Silver Buffalo award, the organization's
    highest volunteer award for work at the national level.
        Steve's success in public and private sectors is a
    reflection of his strong interpersonal skills, a key
    understanding of governance and leadership, and his personal
    integrity.
        His extensive experience and willingness to serve causes
    greater than himself make him ideally suited to serve as U.S.
    Ambassador to the Czech Republic. I support Steve's nomination
    and urge my colleagues to support him as well.
        With that, I would like to recognize our ranking member,
    Senator Murphy.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS MURPHY,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Murphy. Welcome, Mr. King. I look forward to
    hearing your testimony. Congratulations on your nomination.
        This is an important hearing, given the fact that the Czech
    Republic is a crucial ally, one that has supported U.S. policy
    of making sure that Russia understands the consequences that
    come with invading a neighboring country and trying to
    influence elections in and around the region, but also a
    country that has strong economic ties to Russia, also pulls and
    tugs that come from the business community to find a different
    way.
        We have had a very, very strong bilateral relationship, a
    history of very strong Ambassadors in that post, and I know you
    come with a strong endorsement of the chairman of the
    committee. I look forward to hearing your testimony and
    engaging in some dialogue.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        Now we will turn to the nominee's opening statement.
        Mr. King?

      STATEMENT OF STEPHEN B. KING OF WISCONSIN, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                     AMERICA TO THE CZECH REPUBLIC

        Mr. King. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and
    members of the committee, thank you for taking the time to meet
    with me this morning, and for considering my nomination to
    serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic.
        Let me also thank you, Chairman, for your kind
    introduction, your service to the country, your leadership of
    the European Subcommittee, and your shared devotion to the
    Green Bay Packers.
        I appear before you today humbled by President Trump's
    nomination of me to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Czech
    Republic, an unwavering ally in the heart of the European
    continent.
        Prague may be far from my own upbringing in the heart of
    America's Midwest in Indiana, where I was born on the Fourth of
    July, and in Wisconsin, where I lived and worked for most of
    life. But in many ways, it is that not much different.
        International affairs and government service have been both
    trademarks of my professional life. I began my career as a
    special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and then
    investigated public corruption on behalf of this institution,
    the United States Senate. I eventually used my skills and
    expertise to create innovative businesses that provide many
    good jobs to many people in southern Wisconsin.
        As Karen, my wife of 54 years, and I found success in
    Wisconsin, I now had the opportunity to give back to that
    community. Our shared belief in the American Dream continues to
    grow.
        Our three grown children, Kristen, Steve Jr., and Russ,
    have been our greatest source of pride, along with our seven
    grandchildren.
        It was not that long ago that the Velvet Revolution ended
    the Soviet occupation of then-Czechoslovakia, and the first
    democratic elections in over 40 years were held in 1990. I will
    never forget the awe-inspiring moment when the philosopher poet
    Vaclav Havel was finally elected President after fighting
    against tyranny his entire life.
        If confirmed, I would view my Ambassador role as a
    facilitator of the natural alliance that has grown between our
    citizens and the fiercely independent Czech people. As an
    indispensable NATO partner and ally, the Czechs have gone the
    distance in our strategy to defeat ISIS and have supported
    sanctions against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.
        In line with President Trump's expectation, the Czech
    Republic should endeavor to increase the percent of its GDP
    devoted to defense, strengthening the NATO alliance and our
    bilateral military and intelligence cooperation.
        The Czech Republic is to be commended for its sacrifices
    for the good of the alliance, and I look forward to working
    with them on behalf of Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis.
        However, as I suspect the committee knows, the once-
    resolute and indelible imprint of democracy spreading across
    Central Europe in the 1990s has given way in some quarters to
    current skepticism and self-doubt, where longtime opponents of
    freedom deliberately seek to undermine and devolve democratic
    values and economic freedoms into question marks.
        Today, we need to reaffirm our commitment to allies like
    the Czech Republic and make clear that the United States is
    dedicated to the democratic values we espouse here at home.
        The United States and the Czech Republic share a unique and
    lasting bond of history, from the vision of an independent
    Czechoslovakia spelled out in Pittsburgh in the Pittsburgh
    Agreement almost 100 years ago--their celebration will be in
    the year 2018 of 100 years of independence in Czechoslovakia--
    to the post-communist vision and leadership of Vaclav Havel,
    whose bust now stands in the U.S. Capitol.
        If confirmed, I will work to sustain our countries'
    historic ties and expand the people-to-people connections that
    are crucial to that relationship. Like us, the Czechs have
    proven they know democracy and economic freedom require daily
    attention and renewal. Soon, I hope to meet a Czech deputy or
    even a senior minister who has spent his or her entire life
    free of the bonds of tyranny that still haunt their parents and
    grandparents in the Czech Republic.
        The foundation beneath our bond between our countries is
    cast in steel, this steel of shared values: hard, honest work;
    independent thinking; and fidelity to the commitments that we
    make.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I pledge to this committee and
    the American people that I will work hard, stay honest, speak
    my mind, but always uphold the promises of our Nation.
        At the end of our service, if I am confirmed, when Karen
    and I get ready to fly home, I will measure my performance
    against a few yardsticks. First, did I break anything in the
    residence? Secondly, have we upgraded our partnership across-
    the-board? And, thirdly, did I serve the hardworking, patriotic
    team at Embassy Prague well as a leader, a manager, and a
    supervisor, and did I equip them to better serve our country?
        I pledge to each of you to keep these questions at the
    forefront of my mind, particularly the last two, to strengthen
    our partnership with the Czech people to advance our shared
    values and our strategic interests in Europe and around the
    world.
        Thank you, Senators, for your consideration. I am pleased
    to answer any questions you may have.
        [Mr. King's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Stephen B. King

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy and members of the
    committee--thank you for taking the time to meet with me this morning,
    and for considering my nomination to serve as the next U.S. Ambassador
    to the Czech Republic.
        I appear before you today humbled by President Trump's nomination
    of me to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic, an unwavering
    American ally in the heart of the European continent. Prague may be far
    from my own upbringing in the heart of America's Midwest, in Indiana
    where I was born on the Fourth of July, and Wisconsin, where I lived
    and worked for most of life. But it my mind, and in the hearts of many
    Americans and Czechs, both are part of the same common cultural
    foundation upon which many of our shared values are based.
        International affairs and government service have both been
    trademarks of my professional life. I began my career as a Special
    Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, investigating public
    corruption on behalf of this institution--the United States Senate. I
    eventually used my skills and expertise to create innovative businesses
    that provided good jobs to many of the hardworking people in southern
    Wisconsin. As Karen, my wife of 54 years, and I found success there and
    had the opportunity to give back to that community, our shared belief
    in the American Dream continued to grow.
        Our three grown children, Kristen, Steve Jr. and Russ have been our
    greatest source of pride, along with our seven grandchildren.
        It was not that long ago that the Velvet Revolution ended Soviet
    occupation of then-Czechoslovakia, and the first democratic elections
    in over 40 years were held in 1990. I will never forget the awe-
    inspiring moment when the philosopher-poet Vaclav Havel was finally
    elected President after fighting against tyranny his entire life.
        If confirmed, I would view my role as Ambassador as a facilitator
    of the natural alliance that has grown between our citizens and the
    fiercely independent Czech people.
        As an indispensable NATO partner and ally, the Czechs have gone the
    distance in our strategy to defeat ISIS and have supported sanctions
    against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. In line with President
    Trump's expectation, the Czech Republic should endeavor to increase the
    percent of its GDP devoted to defense, strengthening the NATO alliance
    and our bilateral military and intelligence cooperation. The Czech
    Republic is to be commended for its sacrifices for the good of the
    Alliance, and I look forward to working with them on behalf of the
    President and Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis.
        As the committee knows, the once-resolute and indelible imprint of
    democracy spreading across central Europe in the 1990s has given way in
    some quarters to a current of skepticism and self-doubt, where longtime
    opponents of freedom deliberately seek to undermine and devolve
    democratic values and economic freedoms into question-marks. Today, we
    need to reaffirm our commitment to allies like the Czech Republic, and
    make clear that the United States is dedicated to the democratic values
    we espouse at home.
        Fortunately, our partnership with our Czech allies is a great asset
    in opposing this trend. If there is one thing I instantly understood
    learning from (former) Amb. Richard Graber about America's relationship
    with the Czech Republic, it is that we have both invested our
    reputations and resources in the idea that freedom and free markets
    will create the most just and prosperous societies ever imagined.
        The United States and the Czech Republic share a unique and lasting
    bond of history--from the vision of an independent Czechoslovakia
    spelled out in the Pittsburgh Agreement almost 100 years ago, to the
    post-communist vision and leadership of Vaclav Havel whose bust stands
    in the U.S. Capitol. If confirmed, I will work to sustain our
    countries' historic ties and expand the people-to-people connections
    that are crucial to our relationship.
        Like us, the Czechs have proven they know democracy and economic
    freedom require daily attention and renewal. Soon I expect to meet a
    Czech deputy--or even a senior minister who has spent his or her entire
    life free of the bonds of tyranny that still haunt their parents'
    memories. As a younger cadre of leaders rise in the Czech Republic, we
    will embrace our longstanding responsibility to recognize and assist
    them, whether through sponsored exchanges or merely by making
    introductions to their American counterparts.
        The foundation beneath our bond is cast in the steel of shared
    values: Hard, honest work, independent thinking, and fidelity to the
    commitments we make. If confirmed as Ambassador, I pledge to this
    committee and the American people that I will work hard, stay honest,
    speak my mind, but always uphold our promises as a nation.
        At the end of our service if I am confirmed, when Karen and I get
    ready to fly home, I will measure my performance against a few
    yardsticks. Have we upgraded our partnership across the board? And, did
    I serve the hardworking, patriotic team at Embassy Prague well as a
    leader, manager, and supervisor, and did I equip them to better serve
    our country? I pledge to each of you to keep these questions at the
    forefront of my mind to strengthen our partnership with the Czech
    people, to advance our shared values and our strategic interests in
    Europe and around the world.
        Thank you, Senators, for your consideration. I am pleased to answer
    any questions you may have.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. King. I would remind you
    that being a Green Bay Packer fan will get you a few votes in
    the Senate--more than two. We have quite a few fans. It is
    everybody's second team.
        Mr. King. As long as Aaron Rodgers stays healthy.
        Senator Johnson. Can you just, for me, lay out your top
    priorities. If confirmed and you assume the ambassadorship,
    what are the top two or three things you are really going to be
    focusing on?
        Mr. King. I think the first and foremost thing, Mr.
    Chairman, is obviously the security of any and all American
    personnel in the country, starting, of course, with our Embassy
    staff, any ex-pats residing in the country, and then certainly,
    of course, any citizen of our country that is visiting in the
    country.
        Secondly, I view myself as a business person, and I would
    like to be an ambassador that is somewhat business-centric, if
    you will. So my hope is to build on what is already a pretty
    good economic relationship with the Czech Republic.
        And thirdly would just be to leave the Embassy and leave
    the country in better shape in terms of the relationship
    between the two countries, better than I found it.
        Senator Johnson. You mentioned security. When we met in our
    office, you talked about, within your class of future
    Ambassadors, there is a fair amount of concern that, yes, you
    have security for the Ambassador, but not necessarily for the
    Ambassador's spouse. Can you share those thoughts here? I kind
    of would like my colleagues to hear what was being talked about
    within that class.
        Mr. King. There was some concern on the part of several of
    my classmates, who are very important and good people, that the
    security that the State Department provides only extends to the
    Ambassador, not necessarily to the spouse, in terms of outside
    the Embassy or outside the residence. And a number of those
    classmates decided that they were going to fund some private
    security for their spouse.
        Senator Johnson. I think that is an important issue that
    has been raised. I think it is something that Congress really
    ought to take a look at, based on the very dangerous world we
    are living in today, so I appreciate you raising that.
        We have a fellow Badger, a fellow Wisconsinite that was
    also a former Ambassador, Ambassador Rick Graber. I know you
    have spoken with him. Can you talk about some of the words of
    wisdom he has imparted with you, as you start this next chapter
    in your life?
        Mr. King. Thank you, Senator.
        I am here largely because, without ever having been to the
    Czech Republic, I kind of bonded with them largely because the
    folks old Czechoslovakia, even before Czechoslovakia, began to
    migrate as refugees to this country in the late 1800s, and, for
    whatever reason, decided to settle in the upper Midwest. So the
    bulk of the migrants coming over in the late 1800s and the
    early 1900s settled in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin,
    Minnesota, Iowa. Therefore, I grew up with a lot of their
    descendants. We used to kid each other about our ancestry.
        Then, about 15 or 20 years ago, I befriended a fellow by
    the name of Rick Graber, who was an attorney in Milwaukee who
    subsequently became Ambassador to the Czech Republic under the
    George W. Bush administration, and spent the last 10 years or
    so, when I am with Rick, talking about his experience in the
    Czech Republic, which he said they are a proud people, they are
    an independent people, they are a freedom-loving people. It is
    one of the few countries, especially Prague, that was preserved
    coming out of the war. He said it was an experience of a
    lifetime for me.
        So when the opportunity for me came to serve this
    administration overseas, I told them I would like to go to the
    Czech Republic.
        Senator Johnson. I appreciate that.
        In my last minute, just talk about some of the economic
    ties. What are some of the best opportunities that we have, in
    terms of economic cooperation between the Czech Republic and
    the U.S?
        Mr. King. The T-TIP, obviously, is probably a good start. I
    think we also, as a country, need to work and develop an
    economic relationship with the EU. That will benefit not only
    us and the EU but I think, in particular, the Czech Republic.
        We, the United States, are probably the 13th biggest
    investor, if you will, in the Czech Republic and the third
    outside of the EU. We have wonderful opportunities.
        There are wonderful opportunities for business interests in
    the Czech Republic to invest in the United States. And for that
    reason, I am going to work with the Department of Commerce, the
    Department of State, OPIC, and the Trade Representative to try
    to encourage and enhance and build on the business
    relationship, because, as we all know, a strong economic
    relationship is really kind of a key to any relationship
    between any two countries.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. King.
        I will turn it over to Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I neglected to thank you for your service to the Boy
    Scouts. I know you have been a great regional leader. Speaking
    as a Scout leader myself, I know the organization has been
    getting a little bit of a rough time lately, but I thank you
    for your great service there.
        I think you mentioned this in answer to a previous question
    from Senator Johnson, but as this question was asked of Obama
    nominees for the record, I think it is important just to ask it
    of President Trump's nominees as well. You mentioned you have
    not traveled to Czechoslovakia before. Can I just ask, you do
    not speak the language?
        Mr. King. I do not speak the language. I am looking forward
    to taking some classes, beginning upon my service, should I be
    confirmed. In the morning, I am told, you can have a half-hour
    to 45 minutes of classes every morning. Probably not in my time
    there, assuming I am confirmed, that I become conversational,
    but I take solace in the fact that most every diplomatic
    official discussion usually takes place in English.
        Senator Murphy. Great. So you mentioned your ability to
    have a strong relationship with the business community there.
    Let me ask the question about sanctions through that prism.
        I mentioned in my opening remarks that there are elements
    of the business community in the Czech Republic who are nervous
    about the long-term continuation of sanctions on Russia, given
    the fact that there are historic business ties. And yet, we
    believe that it is in both U.S. national security interests and
    European national security interests to send a strong,
    unequivocal message to Russia that territorial integrity
    matters.
        As the Czechs have seen themselves, Russian interference in
    elections continue. They have set up their own counter-
    propaganda center because of their discovery of dozens of Web
    sites inside the Czech Republic that were potentially
    influenced and funded through Russian propaganda efforts.
        So how are you prepared to talk to the business community
    in the Czech Republic about the importance of sanctions? And
    how do you address their concerns about the potential impact on
    the economy and the way that you weigh that effect on the
    important message that we need to send to the Russians?
        Mr. King. I recognize, Senator, that there are some
    concerns within the business community in the Czech Republic
    over some of the sanctions and the impact it may have on them,
    but I think they also step back and realize that the 40 years
    of Russian and Soviet tyranny ruling their country prohibited
    them from practicing the very things--the private enterprise in
    a free economic society.
        So my job, I think, is to continue to engage the business
    community in the Czech Republic, as well as the leadership.
        The leadership of the Czech Republic, the Government,
    actually, has been very supportive of the actions of the EU and
    the United States with regard to sanctions, not only in Ukraine
    but other parts, and they are very concerned about the upcoming
    Russian military training exercises. So I am confident that the
    opportunity will give me, being Ambassador, to work with the
    business community to recognize that sanctions are what they
    are.
        Senator Murphy. U.S. democracy promotion infrastructure at
    the State Department was an important partner during the Czech
    Republic's transformation process. Indeed, the Czechs have
    helped export the lessons that they went through to other
    neighboring countries. They sent transition teams to Ukraine,
    for instance, to help Ukraine make a transfer to democratic
    norms in the way that they did.
        There is an ongoing review at the State Department now
    about the future core mission, and there is a worry that the
    core mission will become all about economic development and
    security, and that a focus on democracy promotion will be
    scrubbed from the State Department's mission.
        You are going to go to a country that has had a long,
    productive history with the U.S. State Department's democracy
    mission. Do you believe that the pursuit of democracy for
    people around the world should be a priority for the United
    States and for the State Department?
        Mr. King. I know it is important to the Czech Republic.
    They are now going to celebrate, next year, about 25 years as a
    new nation. They held their first democratic direct election of
    a President just 4 or 5 years ago and will hold another one in
    2018.
        So I absolutely agree, Senator, that proposing and
    encouraging democratic values that both countries share is
    probably one of the highest priorities that I have.
        Senator Murphy. I appreciate your answer with respect to
    the specific relationship between the United States and the
    Czech Republic. I will not press you on this, except to say
    that there is going to be a very important internal discussion
    happening at the State Department while you will be there. You
    will be a prominent Ambassador inside that department. You will
    be in a country that can tell a very important story about the
    good that comes from the United States promoting democracy
    abroad. You mentioned in your opening comments, rightly, that
    there is a slide away from participatory democracy happening in
    countries that are very close to the Czech Republic.
        I would hope, upon getting your feet on the ground, that
    you would participate in the internal debate happening within
    the State Department and tell the story of the success of U.S.
    democracy promotion in the Czech Republic.
        You may not want to testify as to the reorganization here
    in front of us, but it is a debate that will be happening.
        Mr. King. I understand.
        Senator Murphy. And we look forward to you participating in
    it.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. King, congratulations on the nomination.
        This is a great committee, because we sort of segregate a
    little bit into regions of the world, and these are three
    Europe experts here. My assignment has been Latin America and
    the Middle East, but that is why I like to come to these
    hearings, because it gives me a chance to learn about areas
    where I am not so fluent.
        Let me just tell you a thing that is puzzling me about the
    Czech Republic right now and just get your thoughts about it.
        In the aftermath of the Brexit vote, the popularly elected
    President of the republic called for a referendum about whether
    the republic should stay in NATO and the EU. The Prime Minister
    and Cabinet sort of scotched that idea, so there was not a
    referendum.
        But when a President who is popularly elected who probably
    has a pretty good sense of the will of the people thinks this
    is a good thing to do, then that tells me something is going
    on. Polling in the Czech Republic has shown pretty low approval
    for the EU, even though the Czech Republic economy is deeply
    integrated in the EU. I think 80 percent of the exports of the
    Czech Republic go into the EU.
        So just talk to me a little bit about that. What is going
    on? Should we read the reticence about the EU or NATO as
    anything with respect to the Czech-U.S. relationship? Or is
    this just an internal European dynamic right now?
        Mr. King. Good question, Senator, and I think you captured
    the mood somewhat correctly.
        I think it is really important for the United States and
    its representation overseas, specifically to the Czech
    Republic, to continue to encourage the Czech Republic
    collaboration and involvement, both economically as well as in
    NATO, with its allies in Western Europe. It is our job, I
    think, to take a lead in that. It is beneficial, despite
    Brexit, enjoying a good economic relationship between the Czech
    Republic and its EU partners, as well as the United States. It
    is critical, I think, to the continued blooming of democracy in
    that country.
        Senator Kaine. I am just curious, do you read that as--
    should we be concerned at all about the Czech-U.S. bilateral
    relationship, when the President calls for a referendum that
    deals not just with EU membership but NATO membership? Or to
    your interpretation, is it really more kind of internal
    European?
        Mr. King. I think it is more internal. The bilateral
    relationship between the Czech Republic and the United States
    is excellent. It is very, very strong.
        Senator Kaine. I think some of attribution that I have seen
    about this suggests that this anti-EU thing is scuffling about
    the migration issue.
        I think the Czech economy is really integrated into the EU
    economy, especially into the German economy. There are great
    economic ties there.
        So do you have a sense--are there upcoming elections in the
    Czech Republic? And as far as you know, is this migration issue
    playing a significant part in the upcoming elections?
        Mr. King. Another good question, Senator.
        I am not sure how important the refugee issue is playing in
    the elections, but they adopted a parliamentary form of
    democracy in 1990, and the parliamentary elections for both the
    upper and lower houses will be in October. It remains to be
    seen what is going to happen there.
        In terms of the migration and refugees, the EU mandated
    that each member country take so many refugees. It was a kind
    of quota. The Czech Republic has not met that quota. For that
    reason, Brussels, I think, is looking at taking some action
    against not only the Czech Republic but the so-called Visegrad
    Four countries--Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech
    Republic--all who have not met their quotas for taking
    refugees.
        The refugee problem is a global problem, and I think that
    is an issue that the Czech Republic needs to work out with its
    leaders in Brussels.
        Senator Kaine. Just to conclude, and then to hand it back
    to the chair, we are always so sensitive. We cannot be involved
    in dictating any decision about internal politics of another
    country. They have to work that out for themselves.
        But we had a hearing last week with the proposed Ambassador
    to the EU. I think one of the things that our Ambassadors can
    often do is not only working within their portfolio but working
    with other U.S. Ambassadors in the region to try to build up
    some of the ties. I think that it sounds like that could be a
    significant portion of what you might do in a productive way,
    should you be confirmed.
        Mr. King. I would agree.
        Senator Kaine. Great. Thank you.
        Thanks, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. King, congratulations on your nomination. You are going
    to be serving Europe at a very critical time, when I think the
    future of the EU, of NATO, and of the transatlantic alliance is
    really at stake.
        So I want to follow up a little bit on Senator Kaine's
    questions about what Czechs are thinking about in terms of the
    EU and their relationship with the EU, because as I am reading
    the upcoming elections and the potential for victory by the ANO
    party, which is center-right, it sounds like their leader has
    suggested that he does not support the Czechs staying in the
    euro zone. He talks about it as one of sovereignty.
        As Ambassador, recognizing what Senator Kaine said and what
    we know about our need to stay out of the internal politics of
    a country, how do you see the ability of an ambassador to try
    to recognize and highlight the importance of the EU to
    stability in Western Europe and the potential for Russia to
    undermine the EU as part of their way of trying to destabilize
    Western Europe?
        Mr. King. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        It is important, obviously, not only for the United States,
    but I think for the Czech Republic to remain a strong partner
    in the EU, as well as NATO, and they have been such.
        I am not going to speculate as to what party is going to
    win. Coalitions have to take place, and I am not that familiar
    with the local politics there.
        But I feel pretty confident that, whatever happens coming
    out of the election, that the freedom-loving people of the
    Czech Republic and the economic-freedom-loving people of the
    Czech Republic want to remain, the bulk of them, want to remain
    part of the EU.
        And I think part of my job will be to encourage not only
    the Czech Republic to continue its engagement with the EU, as
    well as NATO, to, among other things, as you suggest, prevent
    some of the disinformation and other such things that the
    Russian Government is doing not only in Eastern but Central
    Europe, too.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I agree that is a real threat.
        I think I came in on Senator Murphy asking you the question
    about the new center that they are standing up, did I catch
    that, in the Czech Republic? That is going to be focused on I
    guess responding, pushing back against the disinformation from
    the Russian Government.
        Mr. King. Yes. We support that.
        Senator Shaheen. Absolutely. One of the things that I would
    encourage you to do is to visit Radio Free Europe and Radio
    Liberty, which is headquartered in Prague, because they have
    been very successful certainly in the past and are looking at
    how they can ramp up to respond to the Russian disinformation
    that is going on.
        Mr. King. Indeed, they do. I am starting with that right
    here in this city, where BBC and Radio Free Europe have some
    offices, too.
        Senator Shaheen. That is great. They have made a number of
    reforms that I think are very important. One of the jobs that
    we have is to try to figure out how to make them more effective
    and make sure they have the resources that they need.
        Mr. King. Yes.
        Senator Shaheen. Let me ask you, because in your statement,
    you talk about reaffirming our commitment to the Czech Republic
    and to our allies like the Czech Republic, and making it clear
    that we are dedicated to the democratic values that we want
    them to encourage, that we espouse here in America.
        So I want to follow up a little bit on Senator Kaine's
    question about refugees, because, obviously, one of the big
    challenges that Europe has faced over the last 2 years has been
    migration of so many refugees from Syria, from North Africa,
    from Afghanistan, and the challenge of trying to help, in terms
    of the humanitarian crisis but also looking at resettlement
    efforts.
        To what extent do you think that rhetoric here that
    marginalizes refugees, that suggests that America is not
    interested in having immigrants come to this country, to what
    extent does that undermine our conversations with a country
    like the Czech Republic, as we look at the challenges they are
    facing in Europe?
        Mr. King. Thank you, Senator. Good question.
        We are all sensitive to terrorism and the issue that kind
    of open gates with immigration can present. I am just happy
    that the Czech Republic has bought into the visa waiver
    program, which we launched, which minimizes and gives them
    authority, of course, to prevent certain movement of certain
    people. I think that is important, and I note that the republic
    is serious about preventing terrorism not only in their country
    but in the rest of the European Union.
        For that reason, I am confident that, once I get there, I
    can engage the republic to continue to keep a wary eye toward
    that problem, to that issue, but at the same time, open up
    their doors for people that have truly opportunities to live in
    a free--and want an opportunity to live in a free and
    democratic and economically free country.
        The Czech Republic actually has a strong economy and
    actually has a labor problem, so I know that they, too, would
    welcome the opportunity to have people that can work in the
    country.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. King. I look
    forward, and for the committee, to working with you
    individually, because, as you point out, the Czech Republic and
    their continued movement toward democracy and the West is very
    important, as we look at maintaining the partnerships that are
    going to be important to the United States, so thank you.
        Mr. King. Thank you.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
        Before I close out the hearing, I will offer an opportunity
    for any further questions.
        With that, again, Mr. King, you will, if confirmed, assume
    a very serious responsibility of not only representing America
    to the Czech Republic but also representing the viewpoints of
    the Czech Republic back to the Congress.
        Mr. King. Indeed.
        Senator Johnson. Very important. Speaking for myself, I
    will be traveling over to Europe. It is also incredibly
    important for Ambassadors, when Members of Congress come over
    to the nations that you are representing, that you really lay
    out, from my standpoint, a very rigorous schedule, laying it
    out so we really understand the issues.
        Again, I want to congratulate you on your nomination. Thank
    you for taking on this responsibility. Thank your wife, Karen,
    and your son, Steve, and your other children.
        It is a great opportunity. We have serious challenges and
    serious responsibilities. So, again, thank you for providing us
    with your testimony and your responses.
        The record will remain open for further questions until
    close of business on Thursday, August 3rd.
        Senator Johnson. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Stephen B. King by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The most important action I have taken in my career to
    promote human rights and democracy was when I served as a Special Agent
    for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. During my tenure with the
    Bureau, I spent two years in Mississippi during the Civil Rights era
    investigating violations of federal laws pertaining to matters
    including human and civil rights.
        A number of these investigations resulted in enforcement of federal
    law and resulted in criminal prosecutions and cessation of human and
    civil rights violations in the State of Mississippi.

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

        Answer. The Czech Republic is widely respected for maintaining a
    strong human rights record, both domestically and globally. However, as
    is the case in all countries, work remains. As noted in the 2016 State
    Department Human Rights report, the most pressing concern in the Czech
    Republic is the integration of Roma into society. For example, while
    the Czech Government recently passed a law designed to improve Romani
    children's access to quality education, press reports indicate that
    over 25 percent of Romani children attend schools for children with
    disabilities, where they receive low-quality education that does not
    prepare them to enter the workforce.
        If confirmed, I will work with the Czech Government and non-
    governmental organizations, to urge the full implementation of the new
    education law and other measures necessary to facilitate the
    integration of the Roma people into society. Additionally, I would
    build upon the Embassy's strong work on behalf of the Roma community,
    offering U.S. Government support wherever possible.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Czech Republic
    in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The largest obstacle confronting human rights in the Czech
    Republic is societal attitudes. Although Czech society is generally
    quite open and tolerant, discrimination against the Roma community
    remains widespread. While the Czech Government has taken some steps to
    integrate the Roma, such as helping to foster greater understanding and
    appreciation of their culture, it can take many years for public
    opinion to change. If confirmed, I would support an open dialogue
    between the Roma community and the Czech Government to better address
    the concerns of the Roma people. I would also engage in personal
    outreach to the Roma community and continue Embassy Prague's programs
    to encourage mutual understanding and reduce discrimination.

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

        Answer. Yes, I am committed to meeting with all of these
    organizations and continuing Mission Czech Republic's strong
    relationship with these groups.

        Question 5. Will you engage with the Czechs on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes, I will fully engage with Czech officials on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance, building upon Mission Czech
    Republic's strong body of work in this area.

        Question 6. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 7. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Czech Republic?

        Answer. No.

        Question 9. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As a businessman, I have witnessed the positive effects
    that diversity can have on the productivity of a company. Over the
    years, the State Department has taken steps to recruit a more diverse
    diplomatic corps that reflects the various ethnicities and cultures of
    the American people, ensuring America's diplomats truly represent the
    face of our diverse country. I believe this emphasis on diversity is
    critical not only to uphold the values of the American people and the
    State Department, but also to set an example for other nations.
        If confirmed, I will maintain an open dialogue with all members of
    Mission Prague on the importance of diversity, encouraging maximum
    communication to ensure everyone's viewpoint is heard and appreciated,
    and also to make sure that traditionally underrepresented groups feel
    fully valued. I will also do my utmost to make sure employees are
    recognized based on merit, regardless of their gender, religion,
    ethnicity, or sexual orientation. I believe that fostering an inclusive
    environment increases the retention of employees, particularly for
    women and minorities who can sometimes feel marginalized.

        Question 10. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I believe that the Chief of Mission plays a critical role
    in establishing the values and high standards of an embassy. If
    confirmed, I will work with supervisors within Embassy Prague to create
    a collaborative and flexible environment that enables individuals to
    freely contribute their ideas. I will also ensure managers not only
    fully comply with the Department's EEO regulations, but go a step
    further by proactively seeking out ways to help identify and counteract
    any unconscious biases which may exist, particularly with respect to
    the recruitment process. If confirmed, I will also reach out to the
    Office of Civil Rights and discuss which additional training sessions
    may be available for the mission, such as an in-person all-hands EEO
    training program.

        Question 11. How will you specifically work to assist the
    Government and civil society groups of the Czech Republic in countering
    the Russian Government's malign influence?

        Answer. The Czech Republic has a multifaceted relationship with
    Russia, but the Government has taken an increasingly active approach
    toward countering Russian disinformation and malign influence,
    launching its Center for Terrorism and Hybrid Threats in January 2017
    to counter Russian disinformation campaigns. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Czech Government to hold Russia accountable for its ongoing
    aggression in Ukraine, to ensure Moscow meets its international
    obligations, and to deter Russia from actions that undermine
    international peace and security. In addition, I would build on Embassy
    Prague's close cooperation with Czech civil society groups on
    countering the threat of negative Russian influence through public
    engagement and programming.

        Question 12. What specific tools will you use to address this
    threat?

        Answer. Embassy Prague, in collaboration with the Czech Government,
    has put in place several relevant programs, such as support for
    conferences on countering disinformation, media literacy courses for
    Czech university students, training events for Czech and Russian
    speaking journalists, and inclusion of Czech journalists on reporting
    tours to Ukraine and NATO.
        If confirmed, I will encourage even greater cooperation on these
    types of proactive efforts by the Czech Government to prevent Russian
    disinformation and malign influence campaign. I will also seek to
    increase cyber cooperation and help the Czechs move away from their
    reliance on Russia through military modernization, and through
    diversification of energy sources, routes and suppliers, for themselves
    and for the wider European Union.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Johnson, Gardner,
    Young, Barrasso, Portman, Cardin, Shaheen, Coons, Murphy,
    Kaine, Markey, Merkley, and Booker.
        Also Present: Senator Enzi.

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

        The Chairman.  Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        And, in keeping with the great way that Senator Enzi runs
    his committee, we start on time here, too. And, as a matter of
    fact, Senator Cardin and I will defer our opening comments, out
    of respect for you, so that you can make your introduction and
    go on about your business. But, you honor us by being here. We
    thank you for that. And the floor is yours to introduce one of
    our nominees.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL B. ENZI,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

        Senator Enzi. Thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking Member
    Cardin.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
    committee this morning on behalf of Eric Ueland, the
    President's nominee to serve as the Under Secretary of State
    for Management. He has been my budget director. He is an
    excellent manager. He has tremendous historical knowledge, and
    he is able to coordinate many efficiently.
        Eric was born and raised in Portland, Oregon, and attended
    college in San Francisco. He remains loyal to his West Coast
    roots. After graduating college, he had actually considered
    teaching diplomatic history. While he never had a chance to
    pursue that interest, the opportunity to serve at the State
    Department in a role that supports the creation and execution
    of U.S. foreign policy will be a great privilege.
        He began work in the legislative branch in 1989, and served
    in a variety of positions, including running the office of the
    Senate Majority Leader and serving the Senate Assistant
    Majority Leader, as well as now overseeing the Senate Budget
    Committee for the past 4 years. He is careful in that work,
    precise in his analysis, thoughtful with others, and dogged on
    behalf of his bosses and their goals. He has worked for and
    with Republicans and Democrats, Senators and Congressmen, and
    Democratic and Republican administrations. He is comfortable
    working across the partisan divide and building coalitions to
    bring legislation across the finish line.
        As a successful Senate staffer going to a significant
    Department position, he will be an asset not just for the
    Department, but for Congress, as well. His understanding of how
    we work, his appreciation for the challenges we face, and his
    ability to dive in with us as a partnership to find solutions
    for our shared responsibility on behalf of America's foreign
    policy, all that will stand us in good stead.
        A key to Eric's value for me has been his interest in very
    carefully learning how a law or process actually works.
    Examples include his facility with Senate rules and precedents,
    and the Budget Act, our budget enforcement regime, and the
    reconciliation process.
        I have also mentioned his historical knowledge. He is
    always open to new information and new learning, and reflecting
    it accordingly. I know we will have that same ability and
    talent as he enters the executive branch to learn the operation
    of the Department, the rules under which it works, how it
    interacts with Congress and partners across the executive
    branch, and how to best and appropriately carry out his
    responsibilities on behalf of the Secretary and the
    administration.
        We all know that the makeup of the Senate requires that
    Senators cooperate with each other and provides many
    opportunities for Senators and staff to both learn that lesson
    and then put it into action. I believe that experience will
    inform Eric's ability to work with the Department's various
    stakeholders, including diplomats, the Civil Service, and
    partners across the Federal Government and internationally, and
    members and staff here at the committee and in Congress.
        Eric is also a careful manager who has had responsibility
    here in the Senate at several offices, with budget formulation
    and execution, personnel recruitment and retention, and
    supporting professional development of his staff. The scope of
    the Department and the challenges it faces might larger than
    managing a Senate personnel office or leadership office or
    committee office, but I believe Eric's management style will be
    applicable at the State Department, too.
        Eric can successfully handle the new challenges and
    opportunities that he will face, and I am confident he will be
    a strong and capable Under Secretary for Management on behalf
    of the Secretary and his senior team and for our diplomats
    around the world.
        So, I commend Eric's nomination to the committee, and urge
    his favorable consideration.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman.  Well, thank you for being here. And, as you
    know, you are welcome to go and continue your other duties. I
    know you have a important meeting this afternoon at 2:30, but,
    again, thank you so much for being here.
        And I think what the ranking member and I have decided is
    that we will give opening comments for both panels now.
        So, thank you so much for being here. And we will see you
    later today.
        The position that Senator Enzi was just mentioning is
    vitally important to the functioning of the Department.
    Fourteen bureaus and offices report to the Under Secretary for
    Management, including Diplomatic Security, Consular Affairs,
    and Overseas Building Operations. The Under Secretary is
    responsibility for the allocation of State Department
    positions, funds, and any other resources required to implement
    the foreign policies of the United States Senate.
        In addition to making the trains run on time at the
    Department, the Under Secretary has the critical task of
    securing our people and families abroad. This is never an easy
    undertaking, but it is particularly challenging now, given the
    complexity of our current threat environment.
        Department is also in the middle of an extensive
    reorganization process, which will require heavy involvement
    and deft leadership from the Under Secretary. This committee
    has been concerned by some of the Department's recent
    management challenges, has tried to play a constructive role in
    making the Department more efficient and effective through our
    State Department authorization bill. I hope our nominee shares
    our goal of a stronger and more agile State Department. And I
    look forward to your cooperation on the authorization bill,
    should you be confirmed.
        On the next panel of nominees, we have The Honorable John
    Bass to be Ambassador Afghanistan; Mr. Justin Siberell to be
    Ambassador to Bahrain; and Dr. Steven Dowd to be U.S. Director
    of the African Development Bank.
        A more concerted effort is planned by the administration to
    address U.S. interests in Afghanistan through a more focused
    and more firm diplomacy with Afghanistan's neighbors and
    others. Our embassy country team in Kabul must be properly
    prepared, equipped, and led to make the most of this new U.S.
    effort to create better outcomes that serve our national
    security interests. I believe Ambassador Bass has that
    experience, and I look forward to hearing how he plans to
    utilize our resources to meet the President's expectations.
        Bahrain is an important ally of the United States and the
    Middle East, and hosts a critical military base for our forces
    in the region. Sadly, the country is also facing unrest amongst
    its majority Shi'a population against a Sunni-led monarchy,
    resulting in government crackdown of its dissidents. I look
    forward to hearing from Mr. Siberell about his goals and the
    vision for U.S. engagement in Bahrain in this complicated
    political environment.
        The African Development Bank provides resources developing
    countries that, if utilized properly, present opportunities to
    help those countries grow their economies, improve their
    standards of living, which ultimately serves our U.S. interest.
    If confirmed the U.S. Director at the African Development Bank,
    Mr. Dowd would play an important role in representing the
    United States interests at an operational level, helping to
    ensure money is spent wisely, and protecting our investments.
        With that, I would like to recognize our distinguished
    Ranking Member for his comments.
        Senator Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank
    you for scheduling this hearing.
        I want to welcome all four of our nominees, and thank each
    of them for their willingness to serve our country in
    critically important positions. It is a great sacrifice for
    public service, and we thank you for that. And we know it is a
    family issue, that the family has to be supportive of that
    effort, so we thank the members of the family for being willing
    to share your family member with our country.
        Mr. Ueland, it is good to see you, member of the Senate
    family. It is always nice to have a member--you get certain
    privileges--not all, but you get certain privileges by your
    association with the United States Senate. You have been
    nominated to a position of great trust and importance for the
    proper functioning of the Department of State, the Under
    Secretary of Management. This is--it is not a job that often
    generates flashy headlines, but it is a job that is absolutely
    critical, often behind the scenes, in a quiet way, for the
    proper functioning of our foreign policy.
        And as I consider the challenges that you face that I
    have--I have been struggling, over the past several months, to
    understand the management philosophy of the Department's
    current leadership. I am struggling to understand the
    administration's approach to the Department's budget,
    management, reorganization, and personnel. There is a
    significant obligation on you, as we consider your nomination,
    to help this committee better understand how the administration
    is thinking about and approaching these issues, and helping us
    to work through our concerns as we move forward.
        As I have expressed before, I remain deeply concerned that
    the administration's approach to reorganization of the State
    Department is a solution in search of a problem. It has the
    appearance of a precooked and ideological-driven exercise. Both
    this committee and the Appropriations Committee have expressed
    our concerns and made it clear that the road to reorganization
    runs through Congress.
        I also want to flag a couple of issues where we have had
    concerns over the past few months, including the way the
    Department handled the Rangel and Pickering Fellows, the
    suggestion that the Consular Affairs and the Population,
    Refugee, and Migration Bureau be moved wholesale from the
    Department to the Department of Homeland Security, and the
    apparent lack of urgency in filling critical positions, such as
    the Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security. I do this, not
    to relitigate concerns with you, but, rather, to suggest that
    real, pressing needs for proper management guidance at the
    Department.
        When we see things like the Department seeking to reduce
    its workforce through attrition, where critical functions and
    expertise are lost, it suggests an operation that either does
    not understand or does not care about using proper management
    tools to steer that process. So, as I said, I have concerns
    about the management of the Department. I am hopeful that you
    will be able to reassure this committee on the core issues of
    how you intend to bring to bear your experience in order to
    institute functional management and processes for the
    Department.
        My overriding concern is that, without proper management
    and leadership at the Department, the United States is at risk
    of effectively leaving the stage as a global leader. The
    Department of State plays a vital role at the heart of our
    Nation's foreign policy by maintaining our global stature,
    ensuring the security of our citizens, enhancing our
    prosperity, and supporting our allies and partners around the
    globe who share the ideals and values that are the heart of
    what makes America a unique and exceptional Nation. I trust
    that we would--you would agree that, if the Department does not
    function properly, the United States role in the world, our
    national security, is at risk. Your job, if confirmed, will be
    to see that that does not happen. So, I look forward to the
    discussion that we will have during this hearing.
        I also wanted to welcome the three nominees that will be on
    the second panel. For Ambassador Bass, thank you for being
    willing to come back for a second hearing before this
    committee. And usually one is all people can tolerate. So,
    thank you for your willingness to continue to serve our
    country. I think the President has selected a very well-
    qualified person for this critical and difficult posting.
        I must express my concern, however, over President Trump's
    long-awaited announcement of a South Asian strategy, last
    month, which was short on details and has raised many questions
    on what his implementation will entail. I diverge from the
    President on his proposed troop increase. I think that this is
    a singular focus on killing terrorists, ignores the complexity
    of the situation in Afghanistan and United States interests
    there. Our approach to Afghanistan must be centered around a
    bold renewed effort to forge a negotiated political settlement,
    working with the Afghan and regional actors. We also must spur
    progress on accountability for human rights abuses and an end
    to corruption, which undermines the Afghan Government's ability
    to secure a suitable peace. These goals are the best long-term
    bulwarks against the risk that Afghan territory could again be
    used as a base for terrorist activities against us or our
    allies. I will be introducing legislation shortly that
    addresses these considerations by hosting the United States
    diplomatic and programmatic engagements on peace, justice, and
    reconciliation in Afghanistan. I hope this committee will have
    the opportunity soon to have a full hearing on Afghanistan and
    South Asia, giving the pressing U.S. foreign policy interests
    in that region.
        Our Ambassador to Afghanistan will be on the front lines of
    implementing this administration's strategy, and I welcome the
    opportunity to hear from you today about your priorities and
    prospectus on how best to approach this task. I believe that
    sustained diplomatic engagement by senior U.S. officials is
    needed now more than ever. We will not solve this conflict
    through military engagement alone, and our counterterror
    interests in Afghanistan are intertwined with political,
    economic, and social issues. So, the diplomatic and
    programmatic efforts of the State Department of Afghanistan are
    critical, and our most senior diplomat in Kabul must engage
    personally and regularly to help move the ball forward on
    peace, justice, and reconciliation.
        Mr. Siberell, for--on--Bahrain and the United States have a
    longstanding partnership and many shared interests, including
    confronting Iran's aggression, reversing the spread of ISIS,
    countering terrorist financing, and maritime security. I
    listened to the Chairman as he expressed his concerns about
    Bahrain. Bahrain is a key partner to the United States. Key
    partner. We have military interests, we have counterterrorism
    interests. And yet, there are significant human rights concerns
    that we have with the way that Bahrain treats the Shi'a
    population. We must engage those issues to have a sustained
    partnership with Bahrain. And our Ambassador must take the lead
    to make it clear that we can have partners that have very
    important strategic interests, but we also must make
    advancements on the manner in which they handle human rights
    and protection of universal freedoms, such as the freedom of
    speech and assembly. These developments that have occurred in
    Bahrain undermine Bahrain's stability, compromise its ability
    to be a security partner, and run contrary to U.S. interests.
        Finally, I am pleased to welcome Joseph Dowd, nominee to be
    the U.S. Executive Director of the African Development Bank.
    Africa is a continent of great promise, but today it is--it--
    presenting us with great challenges. I noticed you have some
    interesting early history in Africa, and dealmaking experience
    in the area of food, infrastructure, and transportation that
    are key priorities for Africa today. I believe that will suit
    you well for the position that you have been nominated to.
        I look forward to the discussion with all four of our
    nominees.
        The Chairman.  We thank all four of you, for being here and
    for listening to long opening comments by both of us, but we
    got it all out of the way, and now we are ready for you.
        And so, Eric, if you would, take about 5 minutes to make
    your comments. Any additional materials, without objection,
    will be entered into the record. And, with that, go ahead and
    present your testimony. Thank you for being here.

    STATEMENT OF ERIC M. UELAND, OF OREGON, NOMINEE TO BE AN UNDER
                    SECRETARY OF STATE (MANAGEMENT)

        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very
    much.
        Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Cardin, Senators, good
    morning. Thank you for the privilege of appearing before the
    committee.
        With me this morning are my wife, Cathleen, and my
    daughters, Brigid and Charlotte.
        My public service, as you mentioned earlier, has centered
    for many years on the legislative branch. And, thanks to the
    courtesy of several members, we have all had the chance to see
    Congress up close as part of that extended Senate family. We
    thank you very much for that privilege, and for the privilege
    extended to us from any different predecessors.
        I am humbled this morning at the prospect of serving our
    Nation as Under Secretary of State for Management. I am
    grateful to both President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for
    their confidence in me and for nominating me to serve in this
    capacity.
        Our Nation is now engaged in a robust conversation about
    her appropriate role on the world stage and how to confront the
    challenges that we face. The Department serves to express the
    voice and the vision of the President through the Secretary. If
    confirmed, I look forward to taking responsibility for the
    management family at the Department. The 16 bureaus and offices
    for which the Under Secretary is responsible provide the
    platform for our Nation's diplomacy, including security,
    embassy construction, logistics, medical services, human
    resources, budget and finance, training, and many other
    critical functions. Our foreign policy must be carried out
    around the world at 275 embassies, consulates, and other
    missions on a platform that supports the President's foreign
    policy.
        While the Department does much very well, I know it also
    faces continued challenges in several areas which fall under
    the management portfolio. For example, the security of staff in
    facilities overseas remains an issue. The Department, with
    congressional support, continues a strong construction program
    for new secure embassies and consulates, with 133 new
    diplomatic facilities completed since 1999. Additionally, a
    consolidated security training center is under construction in
    Virginia to provide all Foreign Service Officers hands-on
    training every 5 years. Both of these efforts have, and they
    will, save lives overseas. I expect to be particularly focused
    on staff and facility security during my tenure, if confirmed
    by the Senate.
        As with many government and private institutions,
    cybersecurity is a major concern, especially with the
    Department's worldwide presence and extensive data systems. I
    will work to ensure that the Department has a modern and robust
    IT infrastructure that supports our diplomatic efforts and
    protects the critical data of the Department. During my tenure
    as staff director of the Budget Committee, I have faced the
    challenges of working to harmonize specific department and
    agency budgets, along with congressional and administration
    priorities, inside an integrated budget framework. I anticipate
    the need for harmony, collaboration, and cooperation in this
    job, too, if confirmed, including with Congress.
        The formulation of negotiation for, and implementation of,
    Department spending rests in the Office of the Under Secretary
    of State for Management. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with partners inside the executive branch and here in
    Congress to bring the State Department's budgets into law and
    see that those laws are faithfully executed. Given the past
    challenges Congress has faced authorizing the State Department,
    I hope also that we can work together to write and enact a
    durable and long-lasting authorization statute to reflect
    shared priorities of Congress and the executive branch.
        Although the executive branch will be a new environment for
    me, I am confident that lessons I have learned here in the
    Senate will serve me well in my new role. During my decades in
    the Senate, I have recruited, assembled, and deployed highly
    qualified staff, created professional and legislative goals,
    identified partnerships and built coalitions, and worked
    strongly on behalf of other staff and other members. I am
    excited to now work on behalf of the President and the
    Secretary in the Department, and look forward to finding new
    opportunities for public service there.
        If confirmed, I will be committed to a continued
    partnership with the committee and Congress in support of a
    strong and capable Department that effectively advocates for
    the United States interests around the world.
        Thank you again for the privilege of appearing before you
    this morning and your consideration of my nomination. Senators,
    I am happy to take your questions.
        [Mr. Ueland's perpared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Eric M. Ueland

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, Senators, good morning. Thank
    you for the privilege of appearing before the committee.
        With me this morning are my wife, Cathleen, and my children,
    Stephen, Brigid, and Charlotte. My public service has centered for many
    years on the legislative branch, and thanks to the courtesy of several
    Members, we've all had the chance to see Congress up close, as part of
    the Senate family. We extend our thanks to you and many predecessors
    for such a privilege.
        I am humbled at the prospect of serving our nation as
    Undersecretary of State for Management. I'm grateful to both President
    Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence in me and for
    nominating me to serve in this capacity.
        During my years of service on Senate staff, the world has changed
    quite a bit. From the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Soviet
    Union, to the rise of terrorism, and even the creation of new nations,
    I have witnessed a wide variety of international opportunities and
    challenges for the United States.
        But through them all, what endures has been the Department's
    responsibilities on behalf of the United States.
        Our nation is now engaged in a robust conversation about her
    appropriate role on the world stage, and how to confront the challenges
    we face. The Department serves to express the voice and vision of the
    President through the Secretary. If confirmed, I look forward to taking
    responsibility for the management family at the Department. The 16
    bureaus and offices for which the undersecretary is responsible provide
    the platform for our nation's diplomacy, including security, embassy
    construction, logistics, medical services, human resources, budget and
    finance, training, and other critical functions.
        Our foreign policy must be carried out around the world--at 275
    embassies, consulates, and other missions--on a platform that supports
    the President's foreign policy. While the Department can do much well,
    I know it also faces continued challenges in several areas which fall
    under the Management portfolio.
        For example, the security of staff and facilities overseas remains
    an issue. The Department, with Congressional support, continues a
    strong construction program for new, secure embassies and consulates,
    with 133 new diplomatic facilities completed since 1999. Additionally,
    a consolidated security training center is under construction in
    Virginia, to provide all Foreign Service Officers hands-on training
    every five years. Both of these efforts have, and will, save lives
    overseas. I expect to be particularly focused on staff and facilities
    security during my tenure, if confirmed by the Senate.
        As with many government and private institutions, cyber security is
    a major concern, especially with the Department's worldwide presence
    and extensive data systems. I will work to ensure that the Department
    has a modern and robust IT infrastructure that supports our diplomatic
    efforts and protects the critical data of the Department.
        During my tenure as staff director of the Budget Committee, I've
    faced the challenges of working to harmonize specific department and
    agency budgets, along with Congressional and administration priorities,
    inside an integrated budget framework. I anticipate the need for
    harmony, collaboration, and cooperation in this job too, if I am
    confirmed.
        The formulation of, negotiation for, and implementation of
    Department spending rests in the Office of the Undersecretary of State
    for Management. If confirmed, I look forward to working with partners
    inside the executive branch, and here in Congress, to bring the State
    Department's budgets into law, and see that those laws are faithfully
    executed.
        Given the past challenges Congress has faced authorizing the State
    Department, I hope that we can work together to write and enact a
    durable and long-lasting authorization statute to reflect our shared
    priorities.
        This begins with ensuring clarity of mission. The Department of
    State has had multiple mission statements over the years as well. We
    need to ensure that everyone knows where we are going, what we are
    doing, who is responsible, how the work is to be carried out, and when
    the job is done, that we all ended up where we set out to go.
        Next, our personnel. The people of the Department are its strongest
    asset. They are the face of our country to the world. Here at home,
    many employees work to support those abroad. And together, they bring
    their talents to bear on a multiplicity of problems and challenges, to
    advance the United States' agenda in the international arena, build
    partnerships with other departments, agencies, and nations, and work in
    the most dangerous parts of the world. A strong, talented,
    representative workforce is essential for the Department's success.
        Then, processes. For decades under both Republicans and Democrats,
    leadership at the Department has worked to help ensure the Department
    could adapt to an ever-evolving world. If confirmed, my job will be to
    help Secretary Tillerson and Deputy Secretary Sullivan move ahead with
    the improvement and re-design underway at the Department, while
    supporting efforts to advance the foreign policy of the President.
        And finally, execution. The role and responsibility of the
    Undersecretary for Management is to support the Secretary and ensure
    effective operations of the Department. With a workforce of over 14,000
    Foreign Service employees and 11,000 civil service employees, and an
    appropriated budget of nearly $56 billion for Fiscal Year 2017, my work
    to help enhance recruitment, identify and focus talent, ensure smooth
    and successful operations, prepare budgets, and coordinate with the
    White House, the OMB, and other departments and agencies with whom we
    collaborate--all to contribute to a successful and fully engaged
    Department.
        Although the executive branch will be a new environment for me, I'm
    confident that the lessons I've learned in the Senate will serve me
    well.
        During my decades in the Senate, I've recruited, assembled, and
    deployed highly qualified staff, created professional and legislative
    goals, identified partnerships and built coalitions, and worked
    strongly on behalf of others. I am excited to work on behalf of the
    President and the Secretary in the Department, and look forward to
    finding new opportunities to serve.
        If confirmed, I will be committed to a continued partnership with
    the committee and Congress in support of a strong and capable
    Department that effectively advocates for the United States' interests
    around the world.
        Thank you again for the privilege of appearing before you this
    morning, and your consideration of my nomination.

        The Chairman.  Thank you. I will probably ask a few, and
    then retain the rest of my time for later. But, thank you for
    that testimony.
        Obviously, we have begun the process, over the last several
    years, of State Department authorizations. We feel that it is
    important for us to do that, and ultimately complete an entire
    State Department authorization. Just wondering what your
    thoughts are, after spending decades on the Hill, relative to
    that process.
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question.
    And yes, over the years here, I know that this committee has
    worked repeatedly on efforts to bring State Department
    authorizations into existence. Democrat majorities, Republican
    majorities; Democrat administrations, Republican
    administrations. I think, in my previous roles here on the
    Hill, I have always worked hard to be very supportive of the
    committee and its legislative efforts to authorize the full
    scope and ambit of Department programs. And I expect that, if I
    have the opportunity to serve, following confirmation, that I
    will be robustly engaged with this committee as it works to
    bring a State Department authorization through the Senate,
    through Congress, and ultimately for signature to the
    President.
        The Chairman.  So, you and I have had a good deal of
    interaction. And, just on that note, sometimes staffers who
    have been up here for many, many years can take on an attitude
    that Senators work for them. And I have seen that happen in--
    even in some of our encounters. And so, I think it is important
    for you to talk a little bit about that. The culture at the
    Department is not good right now. There is not a lot of
    teamwork felt there right now. And having someone who takes on
    a temperament of being very effective but sort of running over
    people in the process could be detrimental to the organization.
    And I wonder if you might talk a little bit about that here.
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question.
    And I very much appreciate the reality that transitioning from
    the legislative branch to the executive branch, as I said in my
    prepared testimony, will be a new venue, a new environment for
    me.
        I do know that I have a lot to learn, and I do know that
    some of the most capable teachers for that education process
    are going to be the very talented staff at the Department.
    There are 16 offices and bureaus for which the Under Secretary
    of State for Management is responsible. And I expect that I
    will be going through a very accelerated education process in
    order to understand, crisply and clearly, their needs and
    opportunities for action, as well as their day-to-day
    responsibilities for creating and sustaining this very strong
    platform and prosecution of America's foreign policy around the
    world.
        As I said, I have a lot to learn. And I am not coming in
    with a presumption that I not only know it all, but that I have
    learned it all as a result of the confirmation process and the
    education that I have received so far. So, I am going to enter
    this job, if I have the privilege of being confirmed, with big
    ears wide open, with an objective to learn as much as I can as
    quickly as I can on behalf of the personnel in our Foreign
    Service, our Civil Service, and certainly our locally employed
    employees around the world, in order to fully and successfully
    carry out the State Department's mission and objective of
    prosecuting America's foreign policy around the world.
        The Chairman.  Yeah. One of the things, though, that we all
    count on--we actually engage a great deal with the person in
    this position. It is very important that we have a good
    relationship with this person, because there are congressional
    notifications that take place. Many cases, we want to know
    background and materials; we want to do that on a timely basis.
    And I guess I would like to have you not just speak to the
    staff that will be underneath you, but just your interactions
    with people here on the Hill, relative to those kinds of issues
    that are important to us. And, you know, once people are
    confirmed, sometimes they take on a little bit different
    attitude as to how they deal with folks. I wonder if you might
    address that.
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very for--much for that, as
    well. And I agree, I have had colleagues and friends, over the
    years, who have been confirmed and sometimes forget from where
    they came. Because of those experiences over the years, I think
    that, as I mentioned in my prepared opening statement, the
    emphasis on partnership with Congress is going to be
    omnipresent with me. To your point, this role has a significant
    continued interaction with both this committee, its counterpart
    in the House, and certainly the Appropriations Committees. And
    I expect that counsel of the Assistant Secretary for
    Legislative Affairs to be spending a fair amount of time
    comprehensively engaged with the Hill to explain operations and
    objectives and responsibilities, and ways that we are
    recommending proceeding forward on anything from reorganization
    to our budget and spending priorities--to your point, required
    notifications and appropriate interactions, as well as seeking
    input; not just letting you know what is going on, but seeking
    counsel, advice, potential opportunities for direction, and
    information to feed back into, not just the execution of this
    role, but, as appropriate, report it back to the Deputy
    Secretary and the Secretary, as well.
        So, I do not think that I am going to lose sight, having
    been a congressional staffer for many years, of the need and
    the value for a robust conversation and partnership with this
    committee, if I have the privilege of being confirmed.
        The Chairman.  Yeah. Well, thank you. I have some
    additional questions, unless they are asked by others.
        With that, Senator Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Ueland, I really appreciate your testimony,
    particularly your encouragement on the Congress passing a State
    Department authorization in a routine manner, which I think
    would strengthen the unity on foreign policy in this country.
    So, I think that is a very important point. Under Chairman
    Corker's leadership, we have been making significant progress
    on that in the last 3 years. We passed out of this committee a
    State authorization, this year, that we hope will move forward.
    And I just want to concentrate on one part of that, which deals
    with reorganization of the State Department. A new
    administration is looking at potentially significant changes
    within the State Department. And, as I said in my opening
    comment, it is critically important that that be done in
    conjunction with the Congress. Both our committee and the
    Appropriations Committee have already spoken to our
    expectations, that there is going to be a close relationship in
    this process. Secretary Tillerson has testified before this
    committee indicating his commitment to work with this committee
    in a close manner.
        And one of the more visible signs of reorganization is how
    Special Envoys are handled. And I want to compliment the
    administration in listening to us. There has been some
    correspondence back and forth. We have it also in our State
    Department authorization bill. And we are certainly consulting
    as to how the Special Envoys will be handled. Do we have your
    commitment that that close relationship--does not mean we will
    always be in agreement, but that close relationship will exist
    between you, if confirmed, and this committee and the Congress
    on input as to how reorganization takes place so that the
    Congress is part of the process?
        Mr. Ueland. Absolutely, Senator. I think, to your point,
    both the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary, in conversations
    here at this committee, have expressed their interest and
    willingness to interact with the committee as they go through
    the process, with the employees, of thinking through ways to
    more effectively prosecute America's diplomacy in the 21st
    century. And I certainly expect that, to your point, if I have
    the privilege of being confirmed--to the extent, in addition to
    the responsibilities that the portfolio of bureaus and offices
    have that already require constant communication with Congress,
    to be part of, not just the reorganization effort, by virtue of
    everything that the Under Secretary of Management is
    responsible for, but, again, to be working very cooperatively,
    conversationally, providing information, seeking input and
    feedback, providing explanations and rationales for the thought
    process that we are engaged, and potential recommendations
    about ways to continue to strengthen the ability of the
    Department to execute foreign policy around the world.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. There will be times, as the
    Ranking Democratic member on this committee, that I will be
    requesting information from you in order to carry out our
    responsibilities here on the committee. Will you respond
    promptly and fully to those requests?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, I expect that I will be responding
    promptly and fully to all requests, ranking as well as
    majority, during the pendency of my tenure, unless I am told by
    higher authority not to, or modify the response. But, my
    instinct--again, having been a Senate staffer for many years--
    is to provide as much information as possible, as quickly as
    possible, to the committee, upon request, but, as well,
    continue a very extensive conversation with this committee, the
    House committee, and our Appropriations Committee as part of
    the portfolio of what I am responsible for, but also the effort
    underway by the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary on questions
    of reorganization.
        Senator Cardin. The Subcommittee on Foreign Ops has made
    its recommendations, in the Senate Appropriations Committee, on
    the State Department budget. The President submitted his
    budget. The comments, among Democrats and Republicans, as to
    the President's budget, as it related to the State Department,
    was pretty consistent, a pretty different view. Do you have an
    opinion as to the resources that you need and whether the
    Congress is doing the right thing in providing more resources
    than the administration has asked for?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you for that question. The
    legislation was reported on Thursday, and, courtesy of
    preparing for this hearing, I have not had a chance to sit down
    and review the reported proposals from the subcommittee from
    last week. Until--unless I have the privilege of being
    confirmed, sir, I do not have fully formed opinions. I have
    read the budget justification for the submission for FY18--
    2018--that was provided earlier this year. Obviously, how a
    statute is enacted is a cooperative process between the
    executive branch and the legislative branch.
        Senator Cardin. Let me ask you the question in a slightly
    different way.
        If Congress passes the resources, and it is signed into
    law, will you carry out the congressional mandate and intent
    through the funds that we appropriate for the purpose in which
    Congress has appropriated those funds?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, if Congress has passed, and the
    President has signed, legislation calling for expenditure of
    resources in particular areas, absolutely. When I said that--
    earlier, that I really believe in the need that laws be
    faithfully executed, that covers this question, I believe, and
    is one of the important responsibilities of the Under
    Secretary, if I am confirmed.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        Mr. Ueland. Your welcome, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Senator Portman.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Chairman.
        And, Mr. Ueland, thank you for being here, because that
    means you are stepping up to take on a new task that is really
    important, management of the State Department. I think Chairman
    Corker said it right when he said we have got some morale
    issues there right now, from what I understand. And it is also
    important that you have been a former chief of staff to a
    Majority Leader and to a Whip. And I got to work with you when
    you were director of the Budget Committee. As the staff
    director, you did a good job, and were effective in not just
    your command of the budget numbers, but also managing a team
    that focused on the Chairman's priorities at the time. So, I
    have seen you in operation. You know us. This committee is
    incredibly important in the process of the management side, as
    we have seen with the authorization bill we got through the
    committee, with the Chairman's help. So, that relationship you
    have with this place, understanding how we operate, I think is
    very important, on the management issues and beyond.
        I have got two questions for you. One is with regard to
    security. I noticed, in your testimony, you talked about your
    interest in protecting, I think you said, staff and facilities.
    And, you know, sad that we live in a world of increasing danger
    to our Foreign Service staff and those in-country nationals and
    Americans. In recent testimony, Secretary Tillerson has noted
    the potential budget impact on the embassy security issues
    beyond 2018. So, my question to you is very simple. How do you
    intend to work with the Secretary and others to ensure that the
    Bureau of Diplomatic Security remains properly resourced and
    ensuring the protection of U.S. personnel, as you talked about,
    and facilities, in the context of budget cuts to the State
    Department's budget that have been proposed?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question.
    What I expect, if I have the privilege of being confirmed and
    working with the Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security,
    is to, every day, be reviewing our security posture and the
    support that we provide for security across all fronts at all
    our posts around the world, including seeking, in conversations
    with Congress, inside the executive branch, with the OMB, and
    others, that there be an appropriate amount of resources
    dedicated to security, and then expend it properly for security
    on behalf of our personnel. Security and safety will be one of
    my constant responsibilities that I will expend significant
    time focused on and advocating for appropriate resources in
    order to ensure that our Foreign Service Officers and our
    personnel deployed around the world are in facilities that are
    safe, are able to safely execute their duties, and have the
    security for themselves and, as appropriate, for their families
    and loved ones, is something that is going to be a critical
    calling that I will work to follow through on, if I have an
    opportunity to be confirmed.
        Senator Portman. I think that is important. And I was glad
    to hear you talk about it in your testimony. And, you know,
    we--again, the morale question came up earlier. I think that is
    one of the things that people are concerned about, is even
    their physical security. And knowing that you are behind them,
    I think, will be very important.
        You and I talked a lot about the Global Engagement Center
    when we met, in the context of this nomination, and I told you
    my concern about State Department not seeking the funding to be
    able to effectively push back against authoritarian regimes
    around the world who are using disinformation and propaganda
    more, meddling here in our own country, but also in fledgling
    democracies around the world. And you gave me your commitment,
    in those meetings, that you wanted to focus on that issue, as
    well. And I noted that Secretary Tillerson did ask for the
    funding from the Department of Defense recently that we had
    authorized here in this body, and I was really pleased to see
    that. And I appreciate Deputy Secretary Sullivan reaching out
    to me in the last few days, in fact, about this issue, and
    ensuring that, you know, they have a commitment to getting the
    GEC stood up properly, both with regard to counternarrative on
    terrorism, ISIS, but also with regard to pushing back on
    disinformation. Can you make a commitment today to us that you
    will indeed continue that focus of making sure that the Global
    Engagement Center works effectively to push back and provide
    adequate resources for that?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, absolutely. To your point, we did have
    a good conversation on this. I believe the mission of the
    Global Engagement Center is critically important to advocating
    the United States point of view against both nonstate and state
    actor propaganda and agitation against our way of life and the
    values that we represent. So, no question that, if I have the
    privilege to be confirmed, be working to seek to, in any way
    that my portfolio interacts or supports the Global Engagement
    Center, in ensuring that we are robustly acting through the
    Global Engagement Center, as well as across a wide variety of
    platforms throughout the Government, on behalf of the
    expressions of our values, and pointing out some of the
    challenges that these other values being advocated for truly
    present to the world.
        Senator Portman. Well, thank you. My time is expired. I
    just--I know it is very important to this committee. Senator
    Murphy and I did have this legislation that is now in law, and
    we want to be sure it is properly implemented. Every day, there
    is a headline about some other aspect of disinformation. So, we
    appreciate your focus on that.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Ueland, for being willing to be
    considered for this post, and for taking the time to meet with
    me and other members of this committee.
        I want to follow up on your last line of discussion with
    Senator Cardin, because I want to make sure I understood very
    clearly what you committed to.
        I am a member of the SFOPS Subcommittee of Appropriations,
    and so I voted for the 51.2 billion in funding for the State
    Department, which, as you know, is significantly more than the
    proposal submitted by the President and the administration. And
    I understood you to say that, if you are confirmed, that you
    will work to protect this budget and make sure that the
    expenditures are made as Congress directed. Did I understand
    that correctly?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, in relation to the question--again,
    thank you very much for your time and our conversation--yes, if
    statute is brought into law, enacted and signed by the
    President, my responsibility--our Budget Office, Comptroller's
    Office responsibility--is to ensure that those monies do flow,
    as called for by statute. So, to the extent that the President,
    the administration, and the legislative branch have agreed upon
    appropriate funding, both at an overall level as well as what
    goes on in accounts and subaccounts, and the money is to flow,
    the money shall flow.
        Senator Shaheen. I think it is important to raise this,
    because there have been some suggestions and concerns raised
    about the administration using impoundment to actually not
    spend monies that have been appropriated. I know that, in our
    office, we have raised, with several departments within State
    government--or within Federal Government, concerns about money
    that had been appropriated and had not been spent and--in order
    to try and urge that spending. But, again, you are putting to
    rest concerns that, when you are at the State Department, that
    you will not use impoundment as a way to prevent the spending
    that has been directed by Congress from getting done. Do I
    understand you correctly?
        Mr. Ueland.Senator thank you for that question, as well.
        During the preparation process for this entire
    confirmation, an explanation of the responsibilities of the
    Deputy--I am sorry--Under Secretary of State for Management and
    all the bureaus and offices for which I would be responsible,
    no one has ever raised with me, inside the administration,
    anything in relation to impoundment. There is a statutory
    construct about impoundment, as we all know, in the Budget Act,
    which talks about two different ways monies can be looked at by
    an executive branch as it goes about evaluating whether or not,
    and how best, to move resources forward--funded resources
    forward. As well, every year, as you know, as a member of the
    Appropriations Committee, the Appropriations Committee and the
    executive branch figure out ways, at times, move resources
    around, pull monies back, reprioritize as it goes through the
    spending conversation, and again, jointly agree as to how
    monies should be spent. So, I am not aware of any calling,
    responsibility, or demand that I am going to be impounding
    money.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Mr. Ueland. Last point, Senator, if I may. That sort of
    question, implementation of, might fall in my lane. Again, I
    have not been told any of that. But, the interpretation of the
    Constitution and the impoundment power and all that, that is
    not in the Under Secretary of State for Management's
    responsibilities.
        Senator Shaheen. It is my understanding that the Department
    of State is the only agency now within the Federal Government
    that has a self-imposed hiring freeze after the
    administration's freeze was rescinded. Is that your
    understanding? And do you think that is a sound personnel and
    management decision, given the number of crises we have around
    the world and the continued concern about morale within the
    Department?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you for that question.
        I am not aware of the unfolding of the freeze policy in
    relation to other departments and agencies. In relation to the
    Department of State, yes, the freeze does continue. The
    Secretary has a variety of powers to address the issue while
    this reorganization conversation continues internally. And the
    budget conversation, appropriations conversation for resources,
    will continue with the Congress. My understanding is, he has
    exercised that power in relation to a variety of circumstances
    that have been presented to him.
        And, in terms of staffing, appointments, nominations, and
    all that, I believe that the Secretary and the Department
    continues to work through recommendations for potential
    nominees, ultimately to the Senate and to this committee. Just
    sent a number of nominees to Congress last week, to the Senate
    last week. The Deputy Secretary of State addressed this issue
    at his townhall last month in the Department, saying that
    approximately 60 percent of confirmable positions either have a
    nominee, would have a nominee, or have individuals under
    consideration for them. So, the Department, as I understand it,
    its leadership, based on public reports, is focusing on working
    through the system and providing nominees to the Senate for
    advice and consent and review.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations, and I have great confidence in your
    ability to do this job, and I am delighted that the President
    has chosen to nominate you. Terrific.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Barrasso. You know, in Wyoming, we have a veteran
    memorial. It is located on F.E. Warren Air Force Base. It
    honors 48 U.S. soldiers that were massacred in the Philippines
    during the Philippine-American War. This memorial displays the
    bells that the Filipino insurgents used to signal the attack on
    our U.S. troops. Recently, the U.S. Ambassador to the
    Philippines publicly pledged to move the bells from this
    memorial to the Philippines. The--during the confirmation
    process for Secretary Tillerson--I had asked him about this,
    and he stated, ``The Bells of Balangiga are an important war
    memorial that holds real significance for many Americans,
    especially our veterans.'' Secretary Tillerson assured me that
    he would support an inclusive process with the U.S. Department
    of Defense to ensure that Congress is fully informed and the
    views of local communities and veterans are fully respected
    when evaluating the management of war memorials.
        So, last week, I sent a letter to the President, along with
    Senator Enzi and Representative Cheney, and to Secretary
    Tillerson, as well. And, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
    that this letter to the President be included in the record.

        [The information referred to above is located at the end of
    this transcript on pages 615-16.]

        Senator Barrasso. So, we sent a letter to the President and
    to Secretary Tillerson raising concerns about the U.S.
    Ambassador to the Philippines pledging to dismantle the Wyoming
    War Memorial. In Wyoming, we have strong tradition of never
    forgetting the sacrifices of our brave men and women. So, the
    letter asks the President to direct the Department of Defense
    and the Department of State to cease any efforts to deconstruct
    existing war and veterans memorials.
        So, my question to you is, if confirmed, will you raise
    this issue with this member of our Diplomatic Corps and share
    with him the importance of protecting our Nation's veterans
    memorials?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for the question.
        And this story is incredibly inspiring, and a very
    significant aspect to your point of our World War II history
    and the work of our soldiers during that conflict. I do pledge
    that, if I have the opportunity to serve as Under Secretary of
    Management, as confirmed--if confirmed, that I will do
    everything I am capable of to bring this information forward--I
    associate myself with the comments of the Secretary during his
    confirmation hearing on this matter--and provide all the
    appropriate information that the Under Secretary of State of
    Management can provide in relation to this, because it is an
    important issue--I think, not just for you, but, again, for
    veterans across our country.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And, Mr. Ueland, congratulations on the nomination.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Kaine. I want to ask you a couple of questions in
    the embassy security space. You talked about that as a key
    priority, should you be confirmed. You mentioned the
    construction of the facility in Virginia that is underway, and
    look forward to working on that with you. There was an
    Accountability Review Board that was done at the State
    Department in the aftermath of the loss of life at Benghazi,
    that horrible attack. There were 29 recommendations that were
    made that the State Department should follow, going forward, to
    reduce the chance of it happening again. There are three
    recommendations that are not yet closed out. Twenty-six have
    been closed out and implemented. The three that have not been
    are all dealing with embassy security issues: actual
    improvements to physical facilities, full training of the
    additional marine security guards called for in the ARB report.
    This will be a responsibility, as you indicate, that you will
    tackle, and I have two concerns. One, I am concerned about the
    budgetary issues that have been raised before, should there be
    a significant reduction in budgetary resources to State, as
    proposed in the President's budget, what that would do to the
    ability to deal with the embassy security questions. And
    second, there is an Assistant Secretary for Embassies--
    Assistant Secretary for Security.
        Mr. Ueland. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kaine. As far as I know, there has not been a
    nomination forwarded to the Senate on that position. I wonder
    if you could address both the budgetary issues and your
    commitment to making sure we are spending appropriately on
    these security issues, and, second, do you have any idea or
    information about when the State Department is intending--I am
    sorry--when the administration is intending to forward us a
    nomination on the embassy security position?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you for the question, and I
    appreciate your raising it, very much.
        To your point, as I testified and in previous answers have
    indicated that I will be focusing a significant amount of time
    on security matters. And, as for resources, as discussed
    earlier, I expect that I will be spending significant amount of
    time understanding the need and advocating in behalf of
    appropriate resource levels, significant resource levels, on
    behalf of diplomatic security efforts for our 275 posts around
    the world.
        To your point, we have about 33 of those posts that are
    high-risk, high-threat. We have an internal validation process
    for our presence and reviewing where we are and our security
    needs as we go through a regular look at where we are deployed.
    And decisions about security are very important and flow
    through a variety of decisionmaking methodologies that are all
    part of the responsibility of the Under Secretary for
    Management. So, in addition to resources, ensuring that
    processes are going to be followed properly and aggressively
    are also going to be part of my work.
        In terms of the Acting Assistant Secretary, my
    understanding is, he has been at the Department of State in the
    Foreign Service since 1987, that he has served as the assistant
    to the Assistant Secretary of State prior, as well as running
    the HRHT operation in the past. So, I believe, based on what I
    have read, that I am very confident in the Assistant
    Secretary--Acting Assistant Secretary right now. But, I do know
    that--if I have the privilege to be confirmed, that I will be
    diving in to examine the leadership, but I have no information
    on where the administration stands, in terms of a potential
    nominee. I expect that, if confirmed, I will learn quite a bit
    very quickly.
        Senator Kaine. I would want to have a followup conversation
    about that. I appreciate what you have said about an--about the
    Acting. And I am glad you mentioned that, because sometimes,
    you know, we act as if a--if there is a--there has not been a
    nomination, it looks like nobody's doing the job. And we have
    plenty of Actings, and many of our Actings do very well.
    However, there is also a degree of uncertainty about an Acting.
    It sends a message, if you do not fill a position. You know, we
    had Acting Administrators of the Centers for Medicaid and
    Medicare Service for 6 and a half years. It is only the largest
    line item in the Federal budget. That sends a signal that
    Medicaid and Medicare was not that important. And, similarly,
    if there is not a nominee forwarded to the committee on this
    important security position, it kinds of sends--it sends a
    signal, in addition--the person doing the job as an Acting
    might be fine, but it sends a signal that it is not a priority,
    and it should be. I would love to follow up on that.
        Mr. Ueland. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kaine. When I tour, as a member of this committee,
    and I go to embassies abroad, I always sit down and have coffee
    with first- and second-tour FSOs. And I do not let the
    Ambassador come. And I ask them this question, ``You have been,
    you know, picked for this wonderful opportunity that is very,
    very hard to get. What is going to make you decide whether to
    make it a career or depart early?'' And I am always struck by
    how often the decision points are kind of management issues,
    like, ``I had to be intensely vetted for the security to get
    this job, but then to requisition a pencil, they treat me like
    I am a potential felon,'' you know, ``in order to get an office
    supply.'' And so, I may want to come and just offer some
    insights on some of these management issues that affect the
    morale of people who are doing great jobs or--around the world.
    And I would look forward to that discussion.
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, I would welcome that very much. And
    the internal process is--for those of you who have reviewed the
    June report, points to constant examples, anecdotally, along
    those lines. I would love to follow up and be part of a
    continuing partnership on this matter, going forward.
        Senator Kaine. All right. Thanks so much.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Ueland. Thanks, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations on your nomination. The Chairman referenced
    the morale issue at the Department today. And I think it is
    difficult to overestimate a morale crisis at the Department of
    State today. I think we are at the lowest point in the modern
    history of the State Department. We have had scores of senior
    diplomats leave over the last 6 months. People that come back
    from visiting our embassies in the field tell me that there are
    even more mid-level and junior staffers who are planning on
    leaving. And it is not hard to understand why. They perceive
    this administration and this Secretary of State to be openly
    advocating for a fairly dramatic winnowing of authorities at
    the Department of State, a lack of interest in democracy
    promotion and human rights advancement. But, it is also because
    of some very specific personnel policies that have been applied
    to the Department of State with an enthusiasm that does not
    exist in other departments. The hiring freeze, for instance,
    which had, at first, applied to almost all government agencies,
    now still specifically targets the State Department. The freeze
    on promotions and the freeze on lateral moves within the
    Department is sending a pretty clear signal to people who are
    there that they maybe should look other places rather than make
    that long-term career decision that Senator Kaine referenced.
        And so, you are going to be inheriting a responsibility for
    staff management at a time when lots of your most important and
    most valuable staff are getting a signal that they should maybe
    find a career somewhere else.
        In your preparation for this job and for this hearing, can
    you tell us what you have learned about the plans to continue
    the hiring freeze, the freeze on promotions, and the freeze on
    lateral moves? Can you give us any idea for when those
    practices will end? Because if they do not end soon, I fear
    that you are going to have a real vacuum of experienced
    personnel on your hands, sooner rather than later.
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question.
        In my preparation for the confirmation process, my
    nomination, and in preparation for this hearing, I have been
    given no explanation, nor has there any conversation, about a
    plan in relation to personnel. So, if I have the privilege to
    be confirmed, learning what, if any, plan might be in relation
    to personnel will be part of the core calling. Clearly, in the
    Under Secretary of State for Management's portfolio, human
    resources is a significant aspect of the responsibility that I
    have and the work that we engage in.
        As I understand things, though, more generally, Senator,
    from the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary as they have worked
    through this reorganization process, one of things they have
    emphasized repeatedly is that there are no predetermined
    outcomes. And I think they have been true to that as they go
    about evaluating what employees point out to them as potential
    opportunities for more successfully prosecuting our foreign
    policy here that--around the world on behalf of the United
    States. As I understand it, they have been very clear,
    repeatedly. They have an open mind about how better to do the
    job of representing our values and our democracy around the
    world. And so, I take that declaration at its word. And if I am
    confirmed, I expect not only to learn more about, and
    participate in, the reorganization plan, but then to very
    robustly engage with Congress to explain the thinking of the
    Department's leadership, its goals, its objectives, and be in
    cooperation with this committee, as well as its peer committee
    in the House, in relation to the authorization bill,
    appropriations bill, as it works through the process.
        So, I expect that there is going to be a very engaged back-
    and-forth.
        Senator Murphy. I think you need to explain it to us, but,
    I think, more importantly, you are going to need to explain it
    to the people that work for you, who right now are mystified as
    to why the State Department seems targeted by these policies in
    a way that almost no other agency is targeted by them.
        Let me ask one more question.
        Mr. Ueland. Yes, sir.
        Senator Murphy. You are the third senior-level nominee to
    tell this committee that the State Department is going to
    consult with Congress on the reorganization. We have gotten
    plenty of promises on consultation, and no consultation. We
    just passed a State Department appropriations bill in which we
    just simply guessed at what the State Department would look
    like. The Deputy Secretary has still not submitted written
    answers to questions, to this committee, relevant to his
    confirmation hearing.
        So, put a little bit more flesh on the bones. When you say
    that you are going to consult with Congress, you are saying
    they same thing that everybody else has, and yet no one has
    consulted with us. So, what do you mean by that? What is the
    form of the consultation going to take? When can we expect it?
    Will we see a plan before it is announced? Will we not see a
    plan before it is announced? Give us a little bit of detail.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you very much for the question, Senator.
        And at least as I interpret my obligation for consultation,
    in relation to your question, is that I would be expending a
    fair amount of shoe leather and time coming to the Hill to
    explain, as I mentioned earlier, the rationale, the ideas, the
    potentialities, the objectives, the goals of whatever
    reorganization recommendations that the Secretary and the
    Deputy Secretary, as a result of all this feedback, ultimately
    provide. So, in any way that I am able to, at the counsel and
    direction of the Secretary, and in the counsel of the Assistant
    Secretary for Legislative Affairs, coming to the Hill to
    explain where matters stand, where the leadership is intending
    to go, and what role, if any, I play in that, that is the flesh
    on the bones of my commitment.
        Senator Murphy. Will we see it before it is implemented?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, I have not been told much about any of
    that. If I can find an answer through this process, I am happy
    to provide that to you.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Merkley.
        Senator Merkley. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And appreciate your bringing up cybersecurity in your
    initial remarks. Certainly, we have been very concerned about
    the--both the commercial hacking, the governmental hacking that
    has occurred by foreign nations and foreign forces, including
    Russia and North Korea. Even the NSA has been hacked. I was
    surprised, therefore, that the Special Representative for
    Cybersecurity was on the list to be eliminated by the State
    Department. Why would that be eliminated? And, when you say
    that you are concerned about cybersecurity, how does that
    translate to a management initiative?
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you very much for the question, Senator.
        In relation to the elimination of the cybersecurity, I am
    not--been briefed on any of that, but I am happy, again,
    through this process, to try to elicit what information I can
    in relation to that.
        For the responsibilities that the Under Secretary of State
    for Management has, including information technology, there are
    a variety of initiatives already underway in our information
    technology area to address questions of cybersecurity,
    including a risk officer being identified, a joint operating
    committee being established, and more resources being put
    towards the question of cybersecurity, both as nominal dollars
    as well as a percentage of our IT spend. I expect that, if I
    have the opportunity to be confirmed and working with the CIO
    to not only reinforce those efforts, but to elicit from them
    additional recommendations to continue to harden and defend the
    Department, which suffers millions of efforts every year on the
    cyber front to attack and penetrate our defenses, in an effort
    to enhance the stability and protection of the IT platform for
    all the employees, we have about--a little over a hundred-
    thousand points of contact, I guess is the best way to put it,
    computers hooked up to our network. And so, ensuring that all
    our employees are able to interact with each other on a
    platform that is stable and secure is going to be something
    that I--as I mentioned in my prepared statement, I want to
    spend a fair amount of time on.
        Finally, Senator, there is the potentiality of partnering
    with the private sector to elicit best practices and work from
    them that might benefit the Department of State and across the
    Government throughout all our platforms. Hopefully, there is
    the ability to also seek out and work in cooperation with the
    private sector, as well, to assist in this effort.
        So, I look forward to, if I am confirmed, diving in on
    this, as well, inside the Department of State.
        Senator Merkley. Well, I certainly encourage that, because
    a hundred-thousand points of contact is hundred point--a
    hundred-thousand points of vulnerability, and privacy,
    confidentiality is so important to diplomatic conversations.
        My colleague mentioned the freeze on personnel, the--and
    you and I talked about the hiring of eligible family members,
    educational fellowships, also of Civil Service promotions. And
    as you answered him, I did not hear your opinion. What opinion
    are you bringing to this? Is it time to end this freeze in the
    State Department?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question,
    as well.
        In terms of my opinion, I do not have a fully formed view
    on the issue. I am aware of a lot of feedback from employees,
    to your point, expressed by members through a variety of
    private meetings, as well as feedback that I have read and
    media reports in relation to this. And so, if I have the
    opportunity to be confirmed, I expect that I will be learning
    more about why matters stand as they currently do, and
    potential plans for addressing this in the future. Again, to my
    earlier conversation, in my conversation with you, the
    Secretary does have ability to work through specific issues on
    personnel, even in relation to the freeze, has done so, and I
    expect would continue to, but, if I am confirmed, be diving
    into this to examine where matters stand, to see if I have an
    independent opinion and what the opinion of the Department is
    that ultimately, in conversation with you, working through this
    matter with the committee and the Appropriations Committee as
    well.
        Senator Merkley. These kinds of, kind of, basic pieces have
    a huge impact on the retention of talent, and morale, and the
    capability of the Department.
        But, moving on to two specific questions, in the half-
    minute left. Do you support transferring the consular functions
    out of the State Department to Homeland Security? And,
    similarly, do you support transferring the Bureau of
    Population, Refugees, and Migration to Homeland Security?
        Mr. Ueland. I do not, sir. And I am not aware, during the
    preparation of this process, of any plans along those lines. I
    have read a lot of media reports, a lot of speculation, but
    nobody has told me that that is a plan, going forward.
        Senator Merkley. When you say ``I do not,'' you would like
    to see those stay in the State Department.
        Mr. Ueland. Yes, sir. I think they are essential aspects of
    our foreign policy and our diplomacy. Those are some of the
    most significant interactions foreign nationals have with our
    United States Government. And it seems to me, at least as an
    undereducated amateur from the outside, that it is a natural
    marriage that they reside in the Department of State and that
    our consular officers and our Bureau of Consular Affairs
    conduct this work in conjunction with and cooperation with the
    Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, our
    intelligence community, and law enforcement officials. Because,
    of course, visa decisions are also national security decisions,
    safety on behalf of the American people, but the Department of
    State, to me at least, seems to be the right place for these
    sorts of conversations to occur every day.
        Senator Merkley. I am delighted to hear that. I certainly
    support keeping them in the State Department. Thank you.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you.
        The Chairman.  Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Corker, Ranking Member
    Cardin.
        Thank you, Mr. Ueland, for your service. Congratulations on
    your nomination. I regret my schedule did not allow us time to
    meet individually before this, but I hope we get a chance to
    work more closely together, in the event you are confirmed.
        And I am also appreciative that someone with your
    seasoning, your service here in the Senate will be in a fairly
    senior role in the State Department, if confirmed, because, as
    you have heard from a whole series of my colleagues, there is
    real concern about communication with Congress about the
    redesign. So, if confirmed, you will have a central role in the
    implementation of the redesign of the State Department, and I
    just wanted to drill down a number of the broader questions I
    wanted to ask about consultation with the FSO community and
    morale have been asked by colleagues, and I agree. I have
    recently visited four embassies in West Africa, and heard many
    of the same themes. Earlier in the year, I was in South Asia. I
    heard many of the same themes.
        So, let me ask you about two specific programs. In meetings
    with Foreign Service Officers, I have heard repeatedly about
    problems created by the freeze and eligible family members
    being hired. Often, Foreign Service Officers have spouses with
    advanced degrees or with a deep experience in business or
    management, or in operations, or in State, who could be
    assisting our efforts overseas, but the State Department chose
    to freeze the program as part of the broader freeze Senator
    Murphy was referencing. If confirmed, will you work with this
    committee to explore ways to lift the hiring freeze for
    eligible family members and to analyze and understand the value
    that eligible family members of Foreign Service Officers posted
    overseas have for our embassies, not just for the work/life
    balance and morale of Foreign Service Officers, but for the
    reach and effectiveness of the foreign post?
        Mr. Ueland. Senator, thank you very much for that question.
        And, to your point, the EFM program appears to be an
    extremely valuable addition to all the work that our Foreign
    Service Officers do around the world. To the earlier
    conversation with other Senators in relation to the Secretary's
    discretion in reacting to the freeze when it comes to the EFM
    program, many waivers have been granted because of the value
    and importance of this program. So, I do expect that, if I have
    the opportunity to serve, after confirmation, to be engaged in
    a very good effort to fully understand both the EFM as well as
    the hiring freeze, potential plans, if any, that will be
    briefed to me if I have the privilege of serving, and then
    coming and discussing with Congress the plan and approach in
    relation to the EFM program.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. Let me ask one other that is in
    the same vein about President Management Fellows. Some of our
    most talented staff have come from the ranks of former
    Presidential Management Fellows. And I understand the State
    Department suspended hiring from the finalist pool, even to the
    extent of freezing the onboarding process for 35 Fellows who
    had already received appointments for positions within the
    Department. Do you think the Department should be honoring its
    agreements with these highly skilled and distinguished Fellows?
    And, if confirmed, would you work to do so? And, more
    importantly, frankly, will you commit to working with this
    committee to make sure that the State Department is as aligned
    as successfully as possible with recruiting and retaining high-
    skilled and high-performance staff?
        Mr. Ueland. Well, thank you for that question, as well.
        And in relation to PMFs, if confirmed, to your point, a
    portfolio underneath the Under Secretary of Management does
    have interaction with this program. And I expect that I will
    have the opportunity to understand fully matters as they stand,
    and, in relation to the earlier question as well, what, if any,
    plans for the future are.
        To your point more broadly about recruiting talent, as you
    know, the Secretary spoke to this issue, in very broad terms,
    last month, where he observed the need for the Department to
    look far and wide for extremely talented and highly capable
    individuals to come to the Department of State and serve on
    behalf of our foreign policy. So, I expect that, again, my
    portfolio will work very hard to support that goal and that
    objective, and I expect, as well, that the Department, under
    the Secretary, will be working with Congress for ways--to find
    ways, I should say, to support that work that he set out for
    all of us to do inside the Department of State.
        Senator Coons. Well, thank you, Mr. Ueland. I just--I would
    close by imparting to you, as my colleague Chris Murphy did, I
    think there are five members of this committee that are also on
    the Appropriations Subcommittee for State and Foreign Ops. And
    it is September. I understand there is a very full menu of
    foreign policy challenges, even crises, around the world that
    demand the full engagement of the senior ranks of the State
    Department. But, I was deeply frustrated. We concluded our
    appropriations process without really having a sense of the
    direction of this redesign. So, I hope you will convey a sense
    of urgency about both the consultation and the forward
    progress. I hope to be a good partner in pursuing a balanced
    and appropriate and a responsible effort at trimming some of
    the costs but retaining the vast majority of the personnel and
    the programs of the State Department. At a time when we need
    effective diplomacy more than ever, I was struck at how long it
    has taken to get this process underway. And my hunch is that
    your confirmation might well contribute to advancing it, and
    certainly to advancing communications with the Senate.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your patience.
        Thank you, Mr. Ueland.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        With that, we are going to move to the second panel. The
    record will remain open for questions until the close of
    business on Thursday. If you could promptly respond to those,
    it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for willingness to
    serve in this capacity.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Chairman, if I could, just for the
    record. I--diversity in the Department is extremely important,
    not--for many, many reasons, not the least of which is our
    effectiveness in this globally, so I will be asking you some
    questions for the record as it relates to the Pinkering and
    Rangel Fellows and as to your commitment on maintaining and
    expanding the diversity within the Department.
        Mr. Ueland. Thank you, Senator. I will look forward to
    answering any and all written questions.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Absolutely.
        So, the second panel, if you would come up, we would
    appreciate it.
        Okay. Today on the second panel, we have The Honorable John
    Bass to be Ambassador Afghanistan. Mr. Bass is a career member
    of the Senior Foreign Service, a Class of Minister-Counselor,
    has served in the--as an American diplomat since 1988. He is
    currently Ambassador to the Republic of Turkey, a position he
    has held since 2014. He has also served as Ambassador to the
    Republic of Georgia from 2009 to 2012.
        We thank you for your willingness to--as we discussed
    yesterday, to serve in this prospective capacity. And we thank
    you for being here today.
        Next, we have Mr. Justin Siberell. Is that pronounced
    correctly?
        Mr. Siberell. Yes, it is.
        The Chairman:--to be Ambassador to Bahrain. Mr. Siberell, a
    career member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-
    Counselor, has served as an American diplomat since 1993. He
    has served as the Acting Coordinator and the Principal Deputy
    Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the State Department. He
    has also served at six postings in the Middle East, and speaks
    Arabic and Spanish.
        Thank you for your willingness to serve.
        And lastly, we have Mr. Steven Dowd to be U.S. Director of
    the African Development Bank. Mr. Dowd co-founded Ag Source,
    LLC, a global agricultural logistics, transportation, and
    finance company. His prior experience also includes overseeing
    food aid, operations, and leading port infrastructure projects
    in Africa.
        Thank you for doing that, and for your willingness to
    serve.
        We will now turn to the nominees. And if you--each of you
    could keep your comments to 5 minutes or so, any written
    documents you want to have entered into the record, we will do
    so, without objection.
        And, with that, Ambassador Bass.

    STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN R. BASS, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER OF
       THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR,
     NOMINEE TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF
        THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF
                              AFGHANISTAN

        Ambassador Bass. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
    Cardin, members of the committee. It is an honor to appear
    before you today as the President's nominee to be the next U.S.
    Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. It would be
    an honor to again represent our great Nation overseas, and I
    want to thank the President and Secretary Tillerson for the
    opportunity to do so. I look forward, if confirmed, to working
    closely with all of you to advance our interests in
    Afghanistan, and I will welcome frequent opportunities, as I
    have during my past two ambassadorships, to consult with you.
        I am grateful to be joined today by my wife, Holly, a
    career diplomat who also will serve in Kabul, as well as my
    sister, Kristin Bass. And I would like to also recognize and
    thank some colleagues, some of who are here today, some of who
    are absent, who have become family during service together in
    challenging locations.
        I have spent much of the past decade focused on curbing
    threats that terrorists pose to our country and our allies, and
    I have had the privilege to support my colleagues in Kabul,
    through diplomacy, to broaden our coalition and sustain our
    coalition there. And, if confirmed, I will focus on achieving
    the results we all seek in Afghanistan: a political settlement
    and sufficient government capacity to prevent its use anew as a
    platform from which terrorists can strike the homeland.
        I know many of you, and many of our fellow Americans, are
    questioning why the United States must continue to devote so
    many resources to this problem and to this country. And I
    understand why they ask how it is we can afford this when we
    have such pressing needs at home. I believe, however, that we
    cannot afford not to sustain our efforts in Afghanistan. We do
    not have to guess at the consequences of choosing otherwise. We
    experienced them 16 years ago; and, over the past 3 years,
    after ISIS set up shop in under- or ungoverned spaces in Syria
    and Iraq, we have experienced the consequences there, as well.
    And, as the President has made clear, we cannot afford to shy
    away from tackling the challenges that these terrorist
    organizations pose to us, head-on.
        I am not naive, obviously, 16 years into this, about the
    scale and complexity of the challenges we face. Fortunately, we
    have a bit more to work with than in the past. We have a
    government that wants our help, increasingly listens to our
    advice, and is making some progress building a government that
    can provide security to most Afghans. It sounds like a low bar,
    but if you think about where Afghans started 16 years ago, they
    have made some important strides forward in some key areas,
    including health and education. It is a different country
    today, and, importantly, President Ghani, Chief Executive
    Abdullah, and the Government are starting to make some
    important progress curbing corruption, I think, having made
    more significant progress in this area in the past year than in
    the previous 15 years combined.
        In seeking to fulfill my mandate, I will follow the new
    strategy approved by the President. The goal here is a
    sustainable political outcome that prevents terrorists from
    using Afghanistan as a safe haven. We have to make clear to the
    Taliban that it cannot outlast us on the battlefield, and that
    the only path forward for them is through a negotiated
    political settlement.
        As the President emphasized, our strategy requires a whole-
    of-government effort. Diplomacy and focused development efforts
    will be instrumental to success. And a key element of our
    diplomacy, obviously, focuses beyond Afghanistan's borders. And
    I can assure you that, if confirmed, I will work closely with
    my colleague, Ambassador Hale, in Islamabad to improve
    Afghanistan and Pakistan's bilateral relationship, which fuels
    some of the challenges we face in Afghanistan.
        Now, obviously, success cannot, will not, be driven
    primarily by the efforts and sacrifices of Americans. We will
    sustain the support of our allies and partners. In some cases,
    we will be asking them to do more as we go forward. I think it
    is important to remember and to acknowledge that our approach
    should not be misunderstood as a desire to occupy or remain in
    Afghanistan against the will of its people. We respect Afghans'
    fierce independence. We do not seek a permanent military base
    or bases there, or a presence in Afghanistan that would
    threaten its neighbors. And I think that is an important piece
    of the calculation as we continue to reinforce the diplomatic
    efforts with other neighbors.
        It is clear to us that the Afghan Government has other
    large obligations to fulfill. We cannot build Afghanistan for
    Afghans. They have to do it themselves. But, we are certainly
    going to work with them and encourage reforms that enables
    Afghanistan to be more self-sufficient over time. Government
    welcomes this approach. We saw, after the strategy was
    announced, that Chief Executive Abdullah declared that,
    ``Nation-building is our job.'' And I will be working closely,
    if confirmed, with him, with President Ghani, to help them
    undertake that important work.
        Making progress has been hard. It will undoubtedly continue
    to be hard. But, I believe it is worth the effort and the
    investments, because the alternatives all lead to worst
    outcomes for the United States.
        And I would just note, in closing, one of the first
    priorities of every U.S. Ambassador today is to think first of
    the safety and security of the people who work for them, who
    serve beside them. Determining how best to achieve our key
    objectives, while also protecting our people, will be foremost
    in my mind every day. And, if confirmed, I will ensure that I
    do everything possible to spend whatever level of funding we
    have for Afghanistan wisely.
        In closing, I want to thank this committee for its support
    to the vital work of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. And, as I
    noted at the outset, if confirmed, I would welcome a candid,
    ongoing dialogue with you about the challenges and
    opportunities we face.
        Thank you again very much for the opportunity to appear
    before, and I look forward to your questions.
        [Ambassador Bass's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of John R. Bass

        Mr. Chairman, Senator Cardin, members of the committee--thank you
    for the opportunity to appear before you today as the President's
    nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan. It would be an honor to again represent our great nation
    overseas, and I want to thank the President and Secretary Tillerson for
    the opportunity to do so. I look forward, if confirmed, to working
    closely with you to advance America's interests in Afghanistan. I will
    welcome frequent opportunities to consult with you.
        I am grateful to be joined today by my wife Holly, a career
    diplomat who also will serve in Kabul, and my sister, Kristin Bass. I
    would like to recognize and thank colleagues here today who became
    family during our service together in Baghdad and other challenging
    locations. All of us who serve in harm's way can only succeed with the
    support of our family and friends.
        During a career devoted to serving the nation, I have spent much of
    the past decade focused on curbing threats terrorists pose to our
    country and allies. I have supported through diplomacy our efforts in
    Afghanistan. As U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Georgia, I mobilized and
    sustained additional military and financial contributions to support
    the International Security Assistance Force and its successor. If
    confirmed, I expect to apply extensive experience leveraging our
    bilateral and multilateral partnerships to achieve the results we all
    seek in Afghanistan--a political settlement and sufficient government
    capacity to prevent its use anew as a platform from which terrorists
    can strike our Homeland.
        I know many of you, and many of our fellow Americans, are
    questioning why the United States must continue to devote so many
    resources to supporting the people and Government of Afghanistan. I
    understand why they ask: can we afford these big expenditures at a time
    when we have so many pressing needs here at home? I understand why many
    Americans carry these sentiments.
        I believe the short answer, though, is that we cannot afford not to
    sustain our efforts in Afghanistan. As a nation, we cannot afford the
    increased risks and peril that would come from a wholesale departure or
    rapid reduction in our footprint in Afghanistan.
        We don't have to guess at the consequences from that policy choice.
    We experienced those consequences 16 years ago. And on a smaller but no
    less lethal scale, we have experienced the consequences that followed
    when ISIS set up shop in ungoverned spaces in Syria and Iraq, plotting,
    directing, and inspiring terrorist attacks against the United States
    and many of our friends and allies. We also know ISIS has used these
    spaces to conduct research on how to conduct mass casualty attacks
    using chemical weapons and to evade detection equipment--just as an al-
    Qai'da affiliate did in Yemen seven years ago.
        As the President made clear in his address to the nation on August
    21, we cannot--and will not--shy away from tackling these challenges
    head-on. The security and safety of our homeland and our fellow
    citizens demands it.
        I'm not naive about the scale and complexity of the challenges we
    and our allies face in supporting the Afghan people and their
    government. Fortunately, we have more to work with now than 10 or 5
    years ago--starting with a government, led by President Ghani and Chief
    Executive Abdullah, that wants our help; increasingly listens to our
    advice; and is making progress building a reasonably effective
    government that can provide security and basic functions for most
    Afghans. That sounds like a low bar and modest results for our efforts.
    But if you think about where Afghans started 16 years ago, they have
    made important strides forward. In many key areas--health, education,
    access to news and information, governance--Afghanistan today is a
    different country. We have real achievements to build on. President
    Ghani and his government have made more progress curbing corruption in
    the past year than in the previous 15 years combined.
        In seeking to fulfill my mandate, I will follow the new strategy
    approved by the President last month. The strategy accounts for both
    enduring challenges and new factors in Afghanistan and across South
    Asia. It directs us to tackle the root causes of the enduring conflict
    in Afghanistan--which include the safe havens the Taliban continues to
    enjoy in Pakistan, and the support it at times receives from other
    neighboring states--rather than simply treating the symptoms.
        The goal of the new strategy is a sustainable political outcome
    that prevents the reestablishment of terrorist safe havens in
    Afghanistan. We will make clear to the Taliban that it cannot win or
    outlast us on the battlefield; the only path to peace and political
    legitimacy is through a negotiated political settlement. As you have
    heard in briefings on the new strategy, our support for the Afghan
    Government's efforts to combat Taliban violence and intimidation and
    resolve the conflict will be dictated by conditions on the ground--not
    by abstract deadlines. Through our actions, we will demonstrate to the
    Taliban that it cannot wait us out. We are signaling support to the
    Afghan public and the entire region that the United States is
    determined to create the conditions that enable a political settlement.
    Those settlement talks, if and when they come, must remain an Afghan-
    owned, Afghan-led process.
        As the President emphasized, this strategy requires a whole-of-
    government effort. Diplomacy and focused efforts by our development
    professionals are instrumental to success. A key element of our
    diplomacy focuses beyond Afghanistan's borders. If confirmed, my first
    regional engagement priority, as directed by Washington, will be to
    work closely with Ambassador Hale in Islamabad to encourage and support
    improvements in Afghanistan and Pakistan's bilateral relationship. I
    intend to supplement this effort with equally focused work with my
    fellow ambassadors to ensure key regional countries with a stake in the
    region's stability--including India, Russia and China--are doing
    everything possible to achieve that shared objective. We must address
    and prevent the hedging among some regional actors that has empowered
    the Taliban and lengthened the conflict.
        Success cannot--and will not--be driven primarily by the efforts
    and sacrifices of American soldiers, diplomats and taxpayers. There is
    a broad international military coalition led by NATO and a community of
    donor nations that have been essential partners in our common effort to
    stabilize Afghanistan. We will sustain the support from these partners
    and in many cases will look to them to do more.
        This sustained commitment should in no way be misunderstood as a
    desire by the United States or our allies to occupy or remain in
    Afghanistan against the will of its people. We respect Afghans' fierce
    independence, which is reminiscent of Americans'. We do not seek any
    permanent military bases in their country--or a presence that would
    threaten Afghanistan's neighbors.
        Success will depend fundamentally on the continued bravery and
    sacrifices of the Afghan security forces, and improved effectiveness of
    the national government. If confirmed, I will work closely with General
    Nicholson and the Pentagon's leadership to help the relevant Afghan
    ministries provide the logistical and materiel support essential to the
    success of their troops in the field.
        The Afghan Government has large obligations to fulfill as well. As
    the President made clear, our commitment to Afghanistan does not mean
    we are in the business of nation-building. The Afghans must build their
    own nation. We cannot do it for them. But we will work with them to
    encourage the kinds of reforms that will enable Afghanistan to be more
    self-sufficient and less reliant on donor assistance over time. The
    Afghan Government welcomes this approach. Chief Executive Abdullah has
    recently declared: ``Nation building is our job.''
        On August 23, two days after the President's address to the nation,
    President Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah joined our Charge and
    General Nicholson to launch a new set of initiatives--the Kabul
    Compact. This compact sets benchmarks for reforms, including anti-
    corruption reforms, across the Government. The Afghan Government has
    asked us to hold them accountable to these commitments; if confirmed, I
    will lead our efforts to do so. Our support for their reforms will help
    bolster the legitimacy of the Afghan Government. It will make their
    security forces more effective.
        Another critical area for reform involves steps to improve the
    electoral process, avoid the conflict and discord we saw in the 2014
    presidential election, and increase the legitimacy of the Government in
    the eyes of its citizens. Next year's parliamentary elections will be
    an important test of the Afghan Government's reform efforts and a
    bellweather for the presidential election in 2019. In addition to these
    reforms, we will continue to support efforts to ensure the ability of
    women to participate in the electoral process, both as voters and as
    candidates.
        We also will continue to support the Afghan Government's efforts to
    continue to grow the licit economy and increase public revenues. As
    with reform and governance, this is properly the responsibility of the
    Afghan Government, not the American taxpayer. As it focuses on creating
    the legal framework and conditions to attract additional foreign
    investors and partners to develop the country's enormous resource
    potential, I will ensure we support American companies who see those
    opportunities--as we do in embassies around the world.
        Making progress has been hard. It will continue to be hard. That
    does not mean it is not worth the effort--because all of the
    alternatives lead to worse outcomes for the United States.
        The perilous times in which we live demand that every U.S,
    Ambassador think first of the safety and security of their people. That
    has been true for me over three difficult, dangerous years in Turkey,
    and it will be especially true in Afghanistan. Determining how best to
    achieve our key objectives while also protecting our people will be
    foremost in my mind, every day, if I am confirmed.
        Like my fellow diplomats, I am also a taxpayer, and wasted
    resources frustrate me. If confirmed, I will do everything possible to
    ensure that the funds we spend in Afghanistan are used effectively and
    transparently.
        In closing, I want to thank this committee for the support it has
    provided, and continues to provide, for the vital work of the U.S.
    Mission in Afghanistan. If confirmed, I would welcome a candid, ongoing
    dialogue with you about the challenges and opportunities we face. Thank
    you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I look forward to your
    questions.

        The Chairman.  Thank you very much.
        Mr. Siberell.

       STATEMENT OF JUSTIN HICKS SIBERELL, OF MARYLAND, A CAREER
        MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-
         COUNSELOR, NOMINEE TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
    PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM
                               OF BAHRAIN

        Mr. Siberell. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin,
    members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the
    United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of Bahrain.
        I am extremely grateful to the President and to Secretary
    Tillerson for the confidence they have shown in me to this
    nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely
    with the Congress and with this committee to advance our
    Nation's vital interests with Bahrain.
        I am privileged to be joined today by my family: my wife,
    Arnavaz, our son, Samuel, and daughter, Emmeline. Our youngest
    son, Benjamin, is in school today. Ours is a true Foreign
    Service family, with each of our children born during one of
    our assignments in the field: Sam in Tunisia, Emmie in Jordan,
    and Ben in the United Arab Emirates.
        Mr. Chairman, the United States and Bahrain share a
    longstanding partnership based on common interests in regional
    security and the friendship of our two peoples. Since the
    1940s, Bahrain has hosted the United States Navy, and is
    currently home to thousands of Americans attached to the U.S.
    Naval Central Command and the U.S. Fifth Fleet. The operational
    and logistical support that the Kingdom provides our military
    is essential to the success of our campaign against ISIS, and
    enables our Navy to lead a 31-country international coalition
    that counters piracy, drug trafficking, and terrorism across 2
    and a half million square miles of ocean and seas.
        The United States works closely with the Bahrain Defense
    Force to ensure Bahrain has the tools and capabilities to
    defend against external aggression in strength and cooperation
    with U.S. and other allied regional militaries.
        Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, the administration recently
    notified the Congress of the approval of a number of possible
    defense sales that will address critical needs in the Bahrain
    Defense Force's air, land, and naval capabilities, including
    the sale of new F-16 aircraft and upgrades to previously
    purchased F-16s. These new military sales will provide Bahrain
    with reliable capability and increased interoperability with
    U.S. forces.
        I look forward to the close cooperation with colleagues at
    the Department of Defense to continue to support Bahrain's
    armed forces to address shared threats. In this regard, we are
    committed to working together with Bahrain to ensure it is able
    to counter persistent threats from Iran, including Iran's
    training and supply of lethal aid to individuals and groups
    targeting the Government and security forces of Bahrain.
        Success in confronting shared threats in the Gulf region
    rests, in large part, on the commitment of our close partners
    to work together towards inclusive and mutually supportive
    security arrangements. It is for this reason that the United
    States continues to encourage a rapid resolution to the ongoing
    dispute among the GCC states. If confirmed, I will work to
    support the efforts of Secretary Tillerson to assist the
    parties in resolving their differences.
        Enhancing our security cooperation with Bahrain does not
    diminish the enduring emphasis we place on human rights issues.
    Indeed, our counterterrorism and military cooperation with
    Bahrain is paired with a clear understanding that Bahrain's own
    long-term stability and security depend on it achieving
    political reconciliation and upholding its commitments to
    universal human rights.
        We continue to be concerned with government actions against
    nonviolent political and human rights actors, and will continue
    to urge the Government of Bahrain to take steps to ensure
    inclusive elections in 2018 and to advance reform efforts for
    the benefit of Bahrain's long-term security and our mutual
    interests in regional stability. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that we continue to have an open and honest dialogue
    with Bahrain on the full range of issues affecting our
    bilateral relationship, including human rights.
        Increasing American exports and jobs for the American
    people is a top priority for me. The United States and Bahrain
    enjoy a strong economic partnership highlighted by the U.S.-
    Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. Since that agreement entered into
    force in 2006, bilateral U.S.-Bahrain trade has more than
    doubled, to $1.7 billion annually. More than 180 U.S. companies
    do business in Bahrain, a number I am committed to grow, if
    given the opportunity.
        Bahrain deserves some praise for its efforts to end human
    trafficking within its own borders by developing a national
    referral mechanism, promoting a national anti-trafficking
    strategy, investigating potential trafficking cases, and taking
    steps to amend elements of the sponsorship system that
    increases workers' vulnerability to forced labor and debt
    bondage. There is more that can be done, as is indicated in the
    State Department's Annual Trafficking-in-Persons Report,
    including proactive identification of potential forced-labor
    victims and increased prosecutions of forced-labor crimes. This
    issue is very important to me and to this administration, as I
    know it is to this committee.
        Advancing our interests in Bahrain will be facilitated by
    the close bonds of friendship that have been developing over--
    have been developed over many decades with the Bahraini people,
    beginning more than 100 years ago through the founding of the
    American Mission Hospital, which continues to serve patients in
    Bahrain today.
        Hundreds of Bahraini students come to the United States
    each year to attend U.S. colleges and universities, providing
    Bahrainis with a deeper understanding of American society and
    the American people. And more than 2,500 Bahrainis have
    participated in official cultural and academic exchanges over
    the several decades, including the Fulbright Program.
        Finally, Mr. Chairman, ensuring the safety of the people
    who serve at Embassy Manama and the American citizen community
    resident in Bahrain will be my foremost priority, if confirmed
    as Ambassador to Bahrain. During my career in the Foreign
    Service, I have served across the Middle East, including in
    high-threat posts under persistent threat of terrorist attack.
    I understand the importance of prudent and proactive security
    measures to protect our personnel, as well as the need for
    close and open communication with the American citizen
    community to ensure their safety and security.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. It is a singular honor to have been nominated to serve
    as Ambassador to Bahrain.
        I welcome any questions you may have for me. Thank you.
        [Mr. Siberell's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Justin Siberell

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the committee,
    Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    Bahrain. I am extremely grateful to the President and to Secretary
    Tillerson for the confidence they have shown in me through this
    nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the
    Congress and with this committee to advance our nation's vital
    interests with Bahrain.
        I am privileged to be joined today by my family--my wife Arnavaz,
    our son Samuel and daughter Emeline. Our youngest son, Benjamin, is in
    school today. Ours is a true Foreign Service family, with each of our
    children born during one of our assignments in the field--Sam in
    Tunisia, Emmie in Jordan, and Ben in the United Arab Emirates.
        Mr. Chairman, the United States and Bahrain share a long-standing
    partnership based on common interests in regional security and the
    friendship of our two peoples. Since the 1940's, Bahrain has hosted the
    United States Navy and is currently home to thousands of Americans
    attached to U.S. Navy Central Command and the U.S. Fifth Fleet. The
    operational and logistical support that the Kingdom provides our
    military is essential to the success of our campaign against ISIS and
    enables our Navy to lead a 31-country international coalition that
    counters piracy, drug trafficking, and terrorism across 2.5 million
    square miles of ocean and seas.
        The United States works closely with the Bahrain Defence Force to
    ensure Bahrain has the tools and capabilities to defend against
    external aggression and strengthen cooperation with U.S. and other
    allied regional militaries. Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, the
    administration recently notified the Congress of the approval of a
    number of possible defense sales that will address critical needs in
    the Bahrain Defence Force's air, land and naval capabilities, including
    the sale of new F-16 aircraft and upgrades to previously purchased F-
    16s. These new military sales will provide Bahrain with a reliable
    capability and increased interoperability with U.S. forces.
        I look forward to close cooperation with colleagues at the
    Department of Defense to continue to support Bahrain's armed forces to
    address shared threats. In this regard, we are committed to working
    together with Bahrain to ensure it is able to counter persistent
    threats from Iran, including Iran's training and supply of lethal aid
    to individuals and groups targeting the Government and security forces
    of Bahrain.
        Success in confronting shared threats in the Gulf region rests in
    large part on the commitment of our close partners to work together
    towards inclusive and mutually-supportive security arrangements. It is
    for this reason that the United States continues to encourage a rapid
    resolution to the ongoing dispute among the GCC states. If confirmed, I
    will work to support the efforts of Secretary Tillerson to assist the
    parties in resolving their differences.
        Enhancing our security cooperation with Bahrain does not diminish
    the enduring emphasis we place on human rights issues. Indeed, our
    counterterrorism and military cooperation with Bahrain is paired with a
    clear understanding that Bahrain's own long-term stability and security
    depend on it achieving political reconciliation and upholding its
    commitments to universal human rights. We continue to be concerned with
    government actions against nonviolent political and human rights
    actors, and will continue to urge the Government of Bahrain to take
    steps to ensure inclusive elections in 2018 and to advance reform
    efforts for the benefit of Bahrain's long-term security and our mutual
    interests in regional stability. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    that we continue to have an open and honest dialogue with Bahrain on
    the full range of issues affecting our bilateral relationship,
    including human rights.
        Increasing American exports and jobs for the American people is a
    top priority for me. The United States and Bahrain enjoy a strong
    economic partnership, highlighted by the U.S.--Bahrain Free Trade
    Agreement. Since that agreement entered into force in 2006, bilateral
    U.S.--Bahrain trade has more than doubled to $1.7 billion annually.
    More than 180 U.S. companies do business in Bahrain, a number I am
    committed to grow if given the opportunity.
        Bahrain deserves praise for its efforts to end human trafficking
    within its borders by developing a national referral mechanism,
    promoting a national anti-trafficking strategy, investigating potential
    trafficking cases, and taking steps to amend elements of the
    sponsorship system that increases workers' vulnerability to forced
    labor and debt bondage. There is more that can be done, as indicated in
    the State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report, including
    proactive identification of potential forced labor victims and
    increased prosecutions of forced labor crimes. This issue is very
    important to me and to this administration, as I know it is to this
    committee.
        Advancing our interests in Bahrain will be facilitated by the close
    bonds of friendship that have been developed over many decades with the
    Bahraini people, beginning more than 100 years ago through the founding
    of the American Mission Hospital, which continues to serve patients in
    Bahrain today. Hundreds of Bahraini students come to the United States
    each year to attend U.S. colleges and universities, providing Bahrainis
    with a deeper understanding of American society and the American
    people, and more than 2,500 Bahrainis have participated in official
    cultural and academic exchanges over several decades, including the
    Fulbright Program.
        Finally, Mr. Chairman, ensuring the safety of the people who serve
    at Embassy Manama and the American citizen community resident in
    Bahrain will be my foremost priority if confirmed as Ambassador to
    Bahrain. During my career in the Foreign Service, I have served across
    the Middle East, including in high threat posts under persistent threat
    of terrorist attack. I understand the importance of prudent and
    proactive security measures to protect our personnel, as well as the
    need for close and open communication with the American citizen
    community to ensure their safety and security.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. It
    is a singular honor to have been nominated to serve as Ambassador to
    Bahrain.

        The Chairman.  Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.
        Mr. Dowd.

     STATEMENT OF J. STEVEN DOWD, OF FLORIDA, NOMINEE TO BE UNITED
     STATES DIRECTOR OF THE AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK FOR A TERM OF
                               FIVE YEARS

        Mr. Dowd. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and
    distinguished members of the Foreign Relations Committee, it is
    a great honor to appear before you today as the nominee to
    serve as Executive Director of the African Development Bank.
        For decades, I have worked in project finance,
    agribusiness, and logistics in developing countries. And, if
    confirmed, I will marshal all my professional experiences
    toward bettering the African Development Bank and furthering
    U.S. interests.
        I would like to introduce my wife, Lillian, my life's
    inspiration, and our three children, Steven, Thomas, and
    Andrea. Lillian is an attorney who previously served as a
    Deputy Attorney General in Delaware. Lillian is profoundly
    committed to combating human trafficking and child stunting and
    malnutrition, a commitment I share. If confirmed, I will search
    for ways to make the Bank a forceful check on these twin
    scourges.
        My first encounter with development economics was as a
    teenaged merchant crewman delivering Food for Peace PL-480
    grain cargoes to hungry nations. I watched as the desperately
    poor struggled to survive and made the most of the grain we
    delivered to them. Later, postgraduate studies at the
    Georgetown School of Foreign Service allowed me to deepen my
    knowledge of development economics in the context of global
    issues. Since then, I have worked in logistics and finance on
    private development projects around the world. Therefore, I
    believe I am well equipped to address the challenges facing the
    African Development Bank.
        If confirmed, I would lead the effort to leverage the U.S.
    contribution to the Bank in order to ensure that its finance
    efforts are used to the best benefit for Africa, that they are
    consistent with U.S. policy interests there, and that American
    taxpayers get a good return for their money. I will strive to
    open Africa to American investment and know-how and facilitate
    U.S. companies doing business in Africa. I will also advocate
    for additional efforts to curb corruption and abuses of power
    that inhibit Africans to live longer, healthier, better lives.
        Finally, if confirmed as Executive Director of the African
    Development Bank, I will work closely with the members of this
    committee and its staff, and with other Members of Congress, to
    perform my responsibilities as effectively as possible.
        Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to be--to
    appear before you and the other members of the committee. And I
    look forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Dowd's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of J. Steven Dowd

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members
    of the Foreign Relations Committee, it is a great honor to appear
    before you today as the nominee to serve as Executive Director of the
    African Development Bank. For decades, I have worked in project
    finance, agri-business and logistics in developing countries, and if
    confirmed, I will marshal all my professional experiences toward
    bettering the African Development Bank and furthering U.S. interests.
        I would like to introduce my wife Lillian--my life's inspiration--
    and our three children: Steven, Thomas and Andrea. Lillian is an
    attorney who previously served as a Deputy Attorney General in
    Delaware. Lillian is profoundly committed to combatting human
    trafficking and child stunting and malnutrition, a commitment I share.
    If confirmed, I will search for ways to make the bank a forceful check
    on these twin scourges.
        My first encounter with development economics was as a teen-age
    merchant crewman delivering Food for Peace PL-480 grain cargoes to
    hungry nations. I watched as the desperately poor struggled to survive
    and made the most of the grain we delivered to them. Later, post-
    graduate studies at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service allowed me
    to deepen my knowledge of development economics in the context of
    global issues. Since then I have worked in logistics and finance on
    private development projects around the world. Therefore, I believe I
    am well equipped to address the challenges facing the African
    Development Bank.
        If confirmed, I would lead the effort to leverage the U.S.
    contribution to the bank in order to ensure that its finance efforts
    are used to the best benefit for Africa, that they are consistent with
    U.S. foreign policy interests there, and that American taxpayers get a
    good return for their money. I will strive to open Africa to American
    investment and know-how, and facilitate U.S. companies doing business
    in Africa. I will also advocate for additional efforts to curb
    corruption and abuses of power that inhibit Africans to live longer,
    healthier, better lives. Finally, if confirmed as Executive Director of
    the African Development Bank, I will work closely with the Members of
    this committee and its staff, and with other Members of Congress, to
    perform my responsibilities as effectively as possible.
        Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before you
    and the other members of the committee, and I look forward to your
    questions.

        The Chairman.  I am deferring to Senator Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And again, I thank all three of our nominees, and thank you
    for your public service, and thank your families.
        Mr. Siberell, I would like to start with Bahrain. Secretary
    Tillerson said, ``In Bahrain, the Government continued to
    question, detain, arrest Shi'ite clerics, community members,
    and opposition politicians, members of the Shi'ite community
    there, continue to report ongoing discrimination in government
    employment, education, and the justice system. Bahrain must
    stop discriminating against the Shi'ite communities.''
    Secretary Tillerson. Are you prepared, if confirmed as
    Ambassador, that our mission in Bahrain will be open to the
    Shi'ite community be able to have an advocate on behalf of
    their concerns against the Bahrain Government?
        Mr. Siberell. Senator, thank you very much for the question
    and for your interest in this particular issue. Those remarks
    are from the Secretary's release of the International Religious
    Freedom Report recently. And absolutely, to answer your
    question, my mission would remain open to all voices within the
    Bahraini political and civil society, as we have been. And I
    look forward to continuing that and being open to all voices.
        Senator Cardin. And I want it to be open to all voices, but
    the Shi'ite population has a particular urgent need.
        Mr. Siberell. Understood. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Cardin. And you will keep this committee and me
    informed as to what you are doing in regards to that.
        Mr. Siberell. I look forward to that opportunity, Senator,
    absolutely, yes.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Dowd, can you just share with us your
    commitment in regards to the operations at the Bank or the
    member countries in fighting corruption, which is a major
    problem in that region?
        Mr. Dowd. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        Absolutely. You are correct that corruption is a scourge of
    the continent. It is pervasive. And I--although I am not onsite
    yet, and I do not really know what the Bank is currently doing
    in this regard, I will certainly advocate forcefully for the
    maximum control of corruption and malfeasance.
        Senator Cardin. I am going to be asking all three of you,
    in your--if confirmed--in your missions, to keep my staff
    informed as to your progress being made on behalf of good
    governance, human rights, anti-corruption, where you can all
    three play a major role.
        Ambassador Bass, you and I had a chance to talk about the
    fact that you are not going to have a lasting peace in
    Afghanistan unless the Government is respected the rights of
    all the people of Afghanistan.
        But, I want to ask you a particular question. I agree with
    your statement that we do not seek any permanent military bases
    in their country, referring to Afghanistan. Now, we have been
    there since 2001. Sixteen years might not be permanent, but it
    is starting to look like a permanent presence of American
    troops in Afghanistan. What is it going to take for us to be
    able to get our troops home? Do you really envision that your--
    during your term of Ambassador, assuming that you are
    confirmed, that we will be able to bring our troops home?
        Ambassador Bass. Senator, thank you for articulating one of
    the key questions that we are all asking, and have been for a
    number of years.
        It has been out of my lane to offer an assessment on the
    military side, in terms of where a tipping point will come. I
    do not think it is realistic to expect that--whether it is 2
    years from now or 3 years from now, that we will have a much
    smaller military footprint.
        Senator Cardin. I agree with that assessment. It is a very
    honest response. How do you have credibility with this
    statement that we are not seeking a permanent military base in
    Afghanistan, when, upon your arrival, there will be more
    American troops arriving with you?
        Ambassador Bass. I think the key aspect of that is what we
    are doing, and will be doing, which is primarily to support the
    Afghan Security Forces to get better over time at taking care
    of their own security needs. And if we are successful in doing
    that over time, there is less of a requirement for U.S. forces
    to be there. Easier said than done. As I said, this is going to
    be hard, and it is complicated. But, I think that is our road
    to a smaller footprint over time, hopefully through a
    negotiated political settlement. And it is through that
    settlement that I think we ensure that we do not have to have a
    permanent military presence there.
        Senator Cardin. And I think credibility is very important.
    And, as you said, ``a smaller footprint over time'' still gives
    me less comfort that we do not have a permanent presence in
    Afghanistan, of American troops. Something that I strongly
    believe is critically important for Afghans' future, is that
    there is a end--a light at the end of the tunnel that we will
    be bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. And, quite
    frankly, I do not see that in the game plan that has been
    presented. It looks like a permanent U.S. presence.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Ambassador Bass, I appreciated you making the mention of
    corruption, because Afghanistan continues to experience
    corruption, really at all levels. Systemic corruption in
    Afghanistan, it is a major threat to U.S. objectives, I
    believe, in that country, to the point that the Special
    Inspector General for Afghanistan has uncovered terrible
    examples, as you know, of waste, of corruption, of fraud, in
    the way that reconstruction funds have been spent in
    Afghanistan. We talked about it here previously in this
    committee.
        Last year, the Special Inspector General found, quote,
    ``The United States contributed to the growth of corruption--
    the United States contributed to the growth of corruption by
    injecting tens of billions of dollars into the Afghan economy,
    using flawed oversight in contracting practices, and partnering
    with malign power brokers.''
        So, you know, what is your assessment of the amount of
    foreign assistance that Afghanistan can actually absorb? And
    these are bipartisan concerns. In the hearing with the
    Inspector General's finding--I mean, this is not a partisan
    issue at all; this is an American issue of great concern. So,
    could you visit a little bit about that?
        Ambassador Bass. Thank you, Senator. Again, another key
    piece of the challenge set, and what we need to be focused on.
        I did note, as you mentioned, an emphasis during my tenure,
    if I am confirmed, in ensuring that we focus a great deal of
    our efforts on helping the Afghan Government address this
    problem set, and on ensuring that we are spending wisely,
    whether we have a lot of resources to work with or not very
    many. For me, the key variable is making sure we get an impact
    and a result for spending the taxpayers' dollars.
        I think the key is, we now have a government that is taking
    this problem seriously in Afghanistan, just released a new set
    of measures under a term called the Kabul Compact, which
    includes a lot of key reform efforts they are committed to
    undertaking. And, importantly, they have asked us to hold them
    accountable for results. And, if I am confirmed, I can assure
    you that will be a top priority for me.
        Senator Barrasso. I appreciate it, because accountability
    is a big issue for all of us, and then the oversight to make
    sure--as you said, to hold them accountable. Can you talk a
    little bit about what you could do to improve our abilities--
    the ability of our government to--just to oversee and to
    monitor this assistance?
        Ambassador Bass. Well, I think we are going to continue to
    need to be creative and thoughtful and imaginative about how we
    do that, given some of the security challenges. Obviously, I do
    not want to put people in harm's way unduly, but, at the same
    time, I also want to make sure we are getting results for our
    funding.
        My understanding is, we have got some pretty thorough
    third-party monitoring efforts in place utilizing a lot of
    Afghans, sometimes at risk to themselves. But, I certainly will
    want to take a fresh look at it to see if there are ways we can
    improve that.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, you hit the key word that I have
    been--my next--my little notes to myself is--what about the
    security? How has the security situation and violence impacted
    the effectiveness of our civilian mission?
        Ambassador Bass. It has definitely made doing our work more
    challenging. It is harder for people to be out and about in
    society, but I think my colleagues have done a good job of
    finding ways to continue to interact with Afghans, whether it
    is them coming to see us more regularly, working through
    intermediaries, in some cases. But, as the security environment
    continues to change, we obviously have to adapt and change with
    it, whether it is getting worse or whether it is getting
    better. And I think that is a key piece of what Chiefs of
    Mission are responsible for, is to make sure we can do that.
        Senator Barrasso. Because, I mean, you have broad
    experience, a wonderful career. You have been a lot of places,
    so that--I mean, that is my question, is, How does the
    Government then properly evaluate and monitor programs in
    countries across the world, where there are serious
    restrictions on freedom of movement and a deteriorating
    security environment?
        Ambassador Bass. As I noted, I think we have to be
    creative, we have to be thoughtful, and we have to adapt to
    conditions as they exist. And we have to learn as we go. And my
    sense is that we are doing that. And we need to continue to do
    that. But, I think, most importantly, we need to make sure that
    we continue to have some degree of visibility on individual
    programs, individual projects so that we are constantly
    evaluating whether we are getting the results we should.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you. Thank you very much for
    your willing to serve.
        And congratulations to all of you, and to your families, as
    well.
        My time is expired.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you all very much for your willingness to serve
    the country. And congratulations on your nominations.
        Ambassador Bass, as we again increase troops in Afghanistan
    and look at the military conflict there, one of the significant
    pieces of success is the importance of our local partners on
    the ground. And one of the promises that we have made is that,
    for those Afghans who help us in our mission there, that if
    they are threatened, that we will try and allow them to come to
    the United States, out of harm's way. And I wonder, if you
    would--if you can commit, this morning, to publicly continue to
    support the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa Program, and whether
    you agree that it is important that we keep this program in
    place.
        Ambassador Bass. Thank you, Senator.
        I think we have a solemn obligation to support local
    colleagues who often work for us, serve the interests of the
    United States, at great risk to themselves and their families.
    My colleague, Mr. Siberell, and I have both worked with Iraqis
    who would tell us stories of a 2-hour commute in each
    direction, with five and six changes of transportation, to make
    sure that it was not visible. And I am sure you have heard many
    of those kinds of stories. And within the construct of
    resources and at ref to larger administration policies,
    certainly I will be continuing to advocate that we do the right
    thing by those people in Afghanistan who have been serving us.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
        On Monday, the Pakistani Foreign Minister went to Iran. And
    the news out of his meetings with Mr. Rouhani were that they
    discussed the importance of a political solution in
    Afghanistan. Can you talk about the role of the region in
    Afghanistan and in our potential to reach a political
    settlement there, and how important the role of Pakistan and
    other countries are in doing that?
        Ambassador Bass. Thank you.
        It--we will not succeed if we do not have the support and
    cooperation of Pakistan's neighbors and the wider circumference
    of significant countries in the wider region who also have an
    enormous stake in the stability and relative security of
    Afghanistan. I think one of the things working in our favor as
    we pick our way through this complicated landscape is that,
    generally speaking, everyone wants to see the same result in
    Afghanistan. It is not in anyone's interest for Afghanistan to
    remain a sinkhole of violence and a safe haven for extreme
    terrorism.
        So, the challenge we have got is to ensure that we have got
    a common approach among all of these countries about how we
    achieve that result we all want to see, and ensuring that the
    neighbors and the--this wider set of countries continue to
    support the Afghan Government in its efforts, not simply to
    deal with the violence and the terrorism inside the country,
    but to also build that government capacity so that, if we do
    get to a political settlement, there is a capable government
    that can negotiate with the Taliban and then perform the basic
    functions of government on the other side of that.
        Obviously, Pakistan has a key role to play. They have been,
    as we know, a source of some of the significant challenges in
    Afghanistan in enabling the Taliban to rest and refit, plan
    coordinated attacks. So, I think we have got a lot of work to
    do. And, as I noted, I am going to be working very closely, if
    I am confirmed, with Ambassador Hale and many colleagues here
    in the Department to try to change the Pakistani Government's
    approach towards this problem set and how they best see a
    resolution.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Mr. Siberell, you mentioned, in your opening statement, the
    fact that we have just approved a sale of F-16s to Bahrain. And
    you also pointed out the concerns about human rights there, and
    how we address those. During the previous administration, the
    sale of F-16s had been held up. And, as I understand, there was
    a linkage to human rights violations as part of that sale. Do
    you think we should continue to try and be--look at tying what
    is happening on the human rights front to other military
    assistance to Bahrain, or other aid that we give them?
        Mr. Siberell. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question.
        I think it is absolutely vital that we pursue the broad
    range of our interests with the Government of Bahrain, both
    strengthening their own capability to defend the country from
    very real threats from Iran and others in the region, and from
    terrorist threats, but, at the same time, never step away from
    our obligations to continue to hold a very open and serious
    dialogue with the Government of Bahrain about conditions inside
    the country, to include the promotion and protection of human
    rights.
        There are some cases in which we have not been willing to
    sell the Bahraini Government certain items, particularly with
    regard to crown control and internal security. And those remain
    in place. But, the linking directly of the military sales,
    which get to the, you know, key element of our partnership to
    help Bahrain defend itself, and also operate alongside U.S.
    forces, this is a very important component of our military
    cooperation, to the human rights issue, those just need to be
    brought together in our conversation, in a broadbased
    conversation with the Bahraini Government, in my view.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  If I could, on that note--a very good
    question--I think that Senator Cardin had a conversation with
    them. It is my belief that we should not tie human rights
    directly to arms sales, but we certainly should work at it side
    by side. These sales, by the way, are ones that were approved
    prior to the hold that was placed on sales to all GCC members
    as relate to the--as it relates to the conflict that exists
    right now between these countries and Qatar. So, this was a
    previously approved sale. And I know there has been some
    misreporting on that. The sales that were discussed after the
    fact are still on hold, and hopefully will help bring
    resolution to the conflict there.
        Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And congratulations to each of you.
        Mr. Dowd, you are--you have a good fortune of being on a
    panel with two people whose billets are pretty controversial.
    That means they get most of the questions.
        But, let me ask Mr. Siberell, just on the Bahraini
    question. I was in Bahrain only once. And it has now been a
    number of years ago. But, obviously, with the Fifth Fleet
    there, the situation in Bahrain is very important to us. They
    are facing a very real challenge of Iranian-supported efforts
    to destabilize the Government, but they also have a citizenry
    that is 70-percent Shi'a, and a wide perception, in and outside
    the country, that the Shi'a population there is not being
    treated well. So, you are going to have a lot of instability if
    you do not treat 70 percent of your population well. And if you
    just try to blame it on somebody else, that is not going to go
    very far.
        My perception, over the last few years, is, whether it is,
    you know, threatened arms sales or not, that the human rights
    situation in Bahrain, and the sincere effort to deal with and
    then make progress on concerns of 70 percent of the population,
    there has not really been much progress. I would love to be
    wrong about that assumption. Am I wrong about that?
        Mr. Siberell. Well, Senator, thank you very much for your
    question. I think you have identified one of the critical
    challenges we have.
        On the one hand, Bahrain faces very real, credible threats
    from Iran. Those have been voiced by senior officials in the
    Quds Force that have threatened Bahrain. We know of Iranian
    training and equipping of individuals and groups who threaten
    the Bahraini Security Forces. There have been----
        Senator Kaine [continuing]. Efforts to ship arms into
    Bahrain.
        Mr. Siberell. Absolutely.
        Senator Kaine. Yeah.
        Mr. Siberell. That is right. And, in fact, earlier this
    year, the State Department designated two individuals who are
    part of the al-Ashtar brigades, one of whom is resident in
    Iran, who had been involved in attacks against the Bahraini
    state and the Government. So, there is a serious threat, there
    is a real threat there.
        At the same time, as you pointed out, channels, and
    effective channels, for political discourse for involvement in
    the affairs of the country are critical to ensuring the
    essential stability upon which our partnership must rest, and
    ultimately for the stability and strength of the Bahraini state
    and its relationship with its people.
        When I was previously--in my previous position in the
    Counterterrorism Bureau, we frequently emphasized, with
    partners in governments, that there need be no contradiction
    between promotion and protection of human rights, fundamental
    civil and human rights, and an effective security practices,
    which protect the population. And that is a point I will
    continue to emphasize, if given the opportunity, if confirmed
    as Ambassador to Bahrain, that we need to bring these two
    together. To conflate security and terrorism with--or to
    conflate, rather, legitimate political speech with terrorism is
    to potentially cut off channels for the kind of discourse that
    is required for, ultimately, a healthy and stable society.
        Senator Kaine. I think it is very important. And again, it
    is important, in and of itself, but, with the Fifth Fleet
    presence being so important, and its continued viability, long-
    term, in Bahrain being connected certainly to the stability in
    that country, it really achieves a huge importance. So, thank
    you for that.
        Ambassador Bass, you are going to do a--as good a job as
    any human can do in this position. I have such confidence in
    you from my work with you when you were Ambassador to Turkey.
    One of the things we are really going to need from you, should
    you be confirmed, is candor. An area that I always find
    perplexing here is, when it comes to Afghanistan, whether I am
    talking to State, DOD, or our intel agencies, I get very
    different--very, very different pictures of what might happen.
    And so, we are going to really need candor from you. And once--
    one of our lead military officers in Afghanistan said something
    really candid to me, and I say, ``I appreciate your candor,''
    and he goes, ``I am going to be candid. What are they going to
    do? Send me to Afghanistan?'' [Laughter.]
        Senator Kaine. So, we are going to need your candor,
    because I think there is a lot of confusion about the future
    mission, but also what is the likelihood of success.
        And we really need to hear from the administration on this.
    The President made a speech that, I think, at the top level,
    was fine, but there were not a lot of details. And then we got
    a good briefing last week, in a classified setting, members of
    the Senate did, but, like the briefing we got about the ISIS
    plan, it was in a classified setting. We have not had public
    briefings. And this is something that the public really needs
    to hear. That is more likely to be a briefing in the Armed
    Services Committee than here. But, we cannot operate just on
    the basis of classified briefings about what the plan is. We
    have to bring the public into this.
        Let me just ask you one question, quickly. What is your
    perception, as somebody's who is really skilled in this area--
    what is your perception about the arc of progress in Pakistan
    in fighting extremist terrorist elements that are on the
    Afghanistan-Pakistan border? Are we going in the right
    direction, are we in stasis, or are we going in the wrong
    direction?
        Ambassador Bass. Thank you very much, Senator.
        I think we are going in the right direction. But, as with
    all of these challenges, it is not necessarily always going to
    be a linear process. The adversaries adapt. We have to then
    make adjustments. They adapt again. I have seen this happen
    persistently through the last 3 years of--from Turkey, working
    with our colleagues in uniform on that--on the problem set in
    northern Iraq and northern Syria.
        Senator Kaine. So, you believe--and I will be very quick--
    you believe we are going in the right direction. It is not
    linear, so we might wish the pace would be faster. But, the way
    you just said it is, adversaries adapt. So, to the degree to
    which we are not going fast enough, you view it as more the
    adaptation of adversaries rather than any equivocal commitment
    on behalf of the Pakistani Government and military?
        Ambassador Bass. I would not make that stark an assessment.
        Senator Kaine. Okay.
        Ambassador Bass. I think we need both. We need to continue
    to adapt our tactics. Obviously, outside my lane. But, in my
    lane, we have got to continue to mobilize diplomatic persuasion
    and some pressure on the Government of Pakistan to make sure we
    get the right performance on the safe-haven challenges.
        Senator Kaine. Right.
        Thank you for letting me go over, Mr. Chair.
        The Chairman.  Oh, no problem.
        I am going to go ahead and call on Senator Merkley, and
    then Senator Coons. I have to step out to the ante room for a
    moment. I know that you all will work cooperatively with each
    other.
        So, Senator Merkley?
        Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, each of you, for your
    willingness to serve the United States.
        Ambassador Bass, which is more complicated, Turkey or
    Afghanistan?
        Ambassador Bass. Senator, I think it depends on the day.
        Senator Merkley. Well, two extraordinarily difficult
    situations.
        The President has said that we will not dictate to the
    Afghan people how to live or how to govern their own complex
    society, and that we are not going to be engaged in nation-
    building. Does this mean our investment in health centers is
    ending?
        Ambassador Bass. Thank you very much for identifying that
    aspect of our ongoing efforts.
        As I noted in the outset, we are going to continue to need,
    on the civilian side, to ensure that we have a government that
    is capable of governing on the other side of a political
    settlement, if we are successful in creating the conditions
    that bring the Taliban to the table. From my perspective, a
    government that is capable is a government that is responsive
    to the needs that are identified by its citizens.
        Senator Merkley. Well, I am just trying to get clarity on
    this point. Are we planning to continue investing in health
    centers, or not?
        Ambassador Bass. My understanding is, in the short term, we
    certainly are.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Let us turn, then, to our investment
    in road infrastructure. Is that--is the intention to continue
    that investment, as well?
        Ambassador Bass. I believe, for out years, that is under
    consideration by AID as they reevaluate priorities and the
    security.
        Senator Merkley. What projects are we actually canceling,
    in terms of the President's dictates to no longer engage in
    nation-building?
        Ambassador Bass. My understanding, based on my initial
    consultations with AID, is that they are now reviewing their
    current portfolio and planning to put some recommendations
    forward, but I do not have an specifics.
        Senator Merkley. So, there is no answer. At this point, it
    is just a policy idea out there in the air, but no concrete
    plan.
        Ambassador Bass. It is.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. We have responded to a few things
    within Afghanistan that are very offensive to Americans:
    widespread child rape by warlords, and also the widespread
    societal discrimination against women and girls. When the
    President says we are not going to dictate how to govern, does
    this mean we are not going to weigh in on those issues anymore?
        Ambassador Bass. I believe we will continue to express our
    strong concerns about practices and activities in Afghanistan
    that are outside of commitments Afghans have made to themselves
    under their constitution and with their international
    commitments.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Well, so far, this sounds very much
    like our current policy. And we throw in pressure on
    corruption, which we have been doing forever, there are a few
    show trials to make us happy, but international organizations
    say it is as bad as it has ever been, or perhaps worse, with
    the strength of some of the warlords. We have pressured
    Pakistan before; in fact, to the point that they shut down the
    Khyber Pass, and we had to airlift and turn to Central Asia to
    import things into our supply chain into Afghanistan. We say
    our new strategy is to support the Afghan forces. That has been
    our old strategy, to enable them to do that work. We say,
    ``Well, we are working to set the stage for political
    settlement.'' That is, in fact, our old policy.
        So, on these five fundamental principles, this sounds very
    much like a continuation of the existing policy. What am I
    missing?
        Ambassador Bass. Well, I think you are going to see a
    renewed focus on the broader regional challenge. My
    understanding, from my colleagues at the Pentagon, is that they
    believe that, notwithstanding the challenges of the past few
    years, fighting seasons, the Afghan defense forces are becoming
    more capable, and they are taking on more to the fight,
    themselves. So, I think it is a different fight, if you will,
    from 5 years ago. And I think, importantly, on the civilian
    side, we have a government now that wants our help, is willing
    to listen to us, is asking us to hold them to commitments they
    are making to themselves. And my understanding is, that is a
    bit different from some of the past dynamics.
        Senator Merkley. I would just note that, in terms of
    pressuring Pakistan on the safe haven, we applied enormous
    pressure before. And not only did they shut down our movement
    of goods into Afghanistan, but they have noted that they have
    had 50,000 civilian deaths, or 5,000 Security Force deaths,
    taking on extremists within Pakistan. That is a higher price
    than virtually anyone else has paid. And our failure to
    recognize that is profoundly offensive to them. And they are
    also very concerned about the drone strikes that have killed
    many civilians within Pakistan, as well, at least in the
    opinion of the Pakistani Government.
        The argument has always been, ``Well, we are not going to
    let Afghanistan be a haven for terrorists.'' Al-Qaeda,
    essentially, long gone, down to less than 100, years and years
    ago. The Taliban, obviously, control a significant share of the
    country. They can hold meetings all over the country. But,
    those meetings occur with far less logistical support than
    terrorists--related terrorists can have in Somalia, in Yemen,
    where there is more communications, more access to ports.
        The long and short of it is, Afghanistan today, a planning
    can be held in any one of thousands of buildings. They control
    more territory. Does not affect whether or not they can hold
    meetings. Is there not something kind of missing in our basic
    theory that we are denying--that somehow our current presence
    is denying planning meetings from occurring inside Afghanistan?
        Ambassador Bass. Senator, always hard to prove a
    hypothetical. What I would offer is different context, but what
    I have watched over the last 3 years is what happens when you
    have ungoverned space that is violent, unstable, and creates
    new opportunities for even more extreme terrorist groups to
    take root. And I think one of the most disturbing trend lines
    of the last couple of years is the creation of an ISIS
    affiliate in Afghanistan that potentially could inject a
    sectarian dimension into the conflict, which largely has not
    been there in the past. And if we think we have a big problem
    set now, it could get even worse.
        So, you know, my answer would be, we have to continue this
    effort, because I think all the alternatives are even worse for
    us.
        Senator Merkley. But, you would acknowledge there is a lot
    of ungoverned space that fits that definition right now within
    Afghanistan.
        Ambassador Bass. Yes.
        Senator Merkley. Yeah. Okay, thank you.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. With the concurrence of my
    wonderful colleague, Senator Young, I am going to proceed, if
    that is okay.
        Senator Young. Duly concurred.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
        Many of us have competing hearings. And so, forgive me for
    having departed and returned. So many others do, as well, and
    it leads to some of this uneven timing.
        Thank you, all three of you--Mr. Dowd, Mr. Siberell, and
    Ambassador Bass--for your willingness to serve our country in
    these important different posts and regions.
        And, Mr. Dowd, when I realized that your wife had served as
    a Deputy Attorney General in Delaware, I realized I had to come
    back. I--there was no way I could miss an opportunity to
    highlight both your passionate engagement in issues in Africa
    and your wife's dedicated service to law enforcement, and to
    the important work against trafficking.
        Let me begin, if I might, with Ambassador Bass. It is great
    to see you again. I respect your service in Turkey and, as
    several of my colleagues have referenced, taking on now the
    challenge in Afghanistan is one that dwarfs, I think, even the
    challenge in Turkey.
        Not to put too fine a point on it, but one of the things
    that I found striking about the President's address, about our
    path forward in Afghanistan, and was in some ways repeated in
    your opening statement. I think I quote you, ``We have to make
    clear to the Taliban they cannot outlast us on the
    battlefield.'' That is clearly our new conditions-based, as it
    were, framework. How long do you think the Taliban can last on
    the battlefield? Twenty-five years? Fifty years? A hundred
    years?
        Ambassador Bass. Senator, thank you for that question.
        Senator Coons. It is a question I think all of us should be
    wrestling.
        Ambassador Bass. Absolutely.
        Senator Coons. It is not meant as a gotcha question.
        Ambassador Bass. No, no.
        Senator Coons. It is a question I wrestle with.
        Ambassador Bass. No. And it is one of the reasons why I
    welcome this--these exchanges, because these are the right
    questions for all of us to be wrestling with. Bit difficult for
    me to answer it at this stage of my preparations, given how
    much of it is informed by, you know, detailed assessments of
    our analysts and our military colleagues.
        Senator Coons. Well, then, in the interest of time, let me
    simply say that, as we work together to clarify and refine our
    Nation's strategy with regards to Afghanistan, one of my core
    concerns is that, when we are considering people who live in
    caves and who are deeply dedicated to their work against us, I
    think we would be wise to assume a longer, rather than a
    shorter, timeline of their determined unwillingness to
    negotiate and their commitment to the fight. And I just wish
    the President's call to arms for a longer-term engagement had
    been clear about that. And I think all of us wrestle with that.
    Sixteen years is an awfully long time to be at war in
    Afghanistan. But, if we are moving to a conditions-based
    strategy, we might very well be facing a generational
    commitment.
        Now, decades after the Korean conflict ended, we still have
    significant military assets on the Korean Peninsula. It is not
    that the United States is unfamiliar with long-term
    commitments. We still have military units on the ground in
    Germany, many decades after the end of the second World War. It
    is not impossible that we would choose to make a generational
    commitment to the stability and security of Afghanistan. I just
    think we need to be more clear-eyed about the consequences of
    that.
        Let me briefly ask you how you think we might deal with
    expanding Russian and Iranian influence in Afghanistan, as
    well, before I turn to your two colleagues.
        Ambassador Bass. Sir, the--I think we have to do two
    things. We have to make sure that we are in constant dialogue
    with them, notwithstanding some of the other challenges in our
    relationship with Russia, and potentially through Russia with
    the Iranian Government or others who are talking directly with
    them, to make sure we have got as close to common assessment of
    what is happening on the ground as we can. And we also got to
    continue to work to ensure that they are putting the weight of
    their effort behind supporting the Afghan Government in this
    effort, because, to the extent they start to hedge or intensify
    hedging by supporting the Taliban, that does not lead to a good
    outcome.
        Senator Coons. I am, frankly, gravely concerned, given the
    role that Vladimir Putin's Russia has played in the North
    Korean challenge, in Ukraine, in our recent election, that he
    will choose this moment to actively engage in opposition to our
    interests and our security in Afghanistan, particularly given
    he is a leader motivated by grievance over the fall of the
    Soviet Union, and it was, in many ways, our role in Afghanistan
    that accelerated the Soviet departure from Afghanistan. So, I
    would urge you to be attentive to that and communicate with us
    about it. Thank you for your willingness to take this on.
        Mr. Siberell, if I might briefly--while I am grateful for
    Bahrain's support, partnership with us in military matters and
    in counterterrorism, as a co-chair of the Senate Human Rights
    Caucus, I am concerned about the poor human rights conditions,
    which you referenced in your opening statement, in Bahrain.
    They have imprisoned the country's leading human rights
    defender, for tweets; they have banned the country's largest
    opposition party; they have killed clerics who have called for
    political reform. How will you encourage Bahrain's rulers and
    leaders to respect human rights?
        Mr. Siberell. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question.
        This will be very high priority for me in my discussions
    with the Bahraini Government. We do raise our concerns with
    regard to the specific issues in cases you addressed, and
    maintain a--an ongoing dialogue with the Government of Bahrain
    about the importance of protecting fundamental human rights. It
    is not--obviously, these are critical principles for the United
    States that we raise in many of our relationships, but, with
    regard to Bahrain in particular, given the strength of the
    security partnership, given the importance of a strong and
    stable partnership that must rest also upon stability
    fundamentally within Bahrain, this takes on a very important
    role in our dialogue, and I am committed to advancing that
    dialogue as I engage with senior leadership in the--in Bahrain,
    in the Government.
        Senator Coons. Thank you.
        Mr. Dowd, I was moved to read your characterization of your
    first engagement in Africa as a merchant crewman on a PL-480
    cargo ship. It is rare we hear that. Chairman Corker and I have
    worked to understand and to have a positive impact on U.S. food
    relief programs, both to sustain Food for Peace, in my
    appropriations role, but provide more efficient alternatives.
    This is a electric benefits card that is currently being used.
    I was in a refugee camp in Nigeria just a week ago. And there
    are other models, other than direct commodity relief. Commodity
    relief is appropriate in some settings, other more streamlined
    electronic relief is appropriate in other settings. Any
    exposure to that, any thoughts about that, on how the African
    Development Bank might accelerate the use of more transparent,
    accountable mechanisms for the delivery of assistance and aid?
        Mr. Dowd. Thank you, Senator. That is really a terrific
    question.
        I do not--not being there, I honestly cannot speak to it,
    but I would make a comment, if I may. I have read--I was very
    moved by the--your trip and the Chairman's trip last spring,
    when you went to the camps. And I am sure that was a profound
    experience for you. And I share it. And any way that I can
    encourage or lead the African Development Bank to assist in
    these matters, I am there. And I would certainly welcome your
    input in those, and that of your staffs.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Dowd. I had a great meeting
    with Bank president Adesina, and we had a long conversation
    about his high-five agenda, sort of the five priority items.
    And I would welcome a chance to follow up with you about that
    and other matters of concern.
        I know I am now really impinging on my colleague's good
    graces.
        Thank you, to you, to your wife, Lillian, for your passion
    for fighting human trafficking and malnutrition. And if we can
    work together to find ways to do that that are more cost
    effective and efficient, that would make me a--very grateful,
    indeed.
        So, thank you, all three of you gentlemen, to you and your
    families, for your careers of service and for the service you
    are about to undertake.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        Senator Young.
        Senator Young. Well, I thank all our panelists, all our
    nominees, for your distinguished careers and for your
    willingness to continue serving.
        Ambassador Bass, I enjoyed our visit yesterday. I look
    forward to supporting your confirmation.
        I just want to reiterate my view that the U.S. military
    presence in Afghanistan should be based on our national
    security interests, on the advice of our commanders, and on the
    facts on the grounds. We observed, of course, the 9/11
    anniversary yesterday, and remembered our fellow citizens who
    were killed. And every year, we are reminded, we can never
    again allow the terrorists to use Afghanistan as a training
    ground and a launching pad for terrorist attacks against our
    homeland or that of our allies. For that reason, I applaud the
    Trump administration's rejection of withdrawal timelines that
    are disconnected from realities on the ground. At the same
    time, we have to be honest that the progress is not what it
    should be in Afghanistan, and the American people are right to
    demand better, to ask tough questions and insist on more detail
    and more accountability, moving forward.
        So, I will continue to scrutinize the strategy in
    Afghanistan--I look forward to staying in touch with you as I
    make efforts to do that, Ambassador Bass--to ensure that this
    administration has established clear and attainable metrics,
    milestones, objectives, and so forth, and also to ensure that
    our diplomats, our development experts, and our troops on the
    ground have the resources that they need to accomplish the
    mission. So, I look forward to working with you in that regard.
        I am going to turn now to the African Development Bank, Mr.
    Dowd. According to the U.N., between 2017 and 2050, the
    populations of 26 African countries are projected to expand to
    at least double their current size. To state it differently:
    During that same period, 1.3 billion of the globe's additional
    2.2 billion working-age people will be in Africa. If there is
    not a corresponding increase in jobs and economic opportunities
    to accompany this increase in population, then we are in
    trouble. We are going to have a hard time making sustainable
    progress with respect to development goals, and we are going to
    see grinding poverty that causes human suffering, promotes
    instability, and serves as a push factor for more migration
    crises.
        Mr. Dowd, how do you believe the African Development Bank
    can better work with the private sector to create the
    sustainable jobs that we need, and to lessen the predictable
    jobs crisis that would otherwise accompany the dramatic
    population growth in Africa?
        Mr. Dowd. Thank you, Senator. Certainly, this is a profound
    question.
        The focus of the Bank, of course, is on infrastructure. The
    notion is, of course, that, led by proper and effective
    infrastructure, private investment would follow, and, from
    that, hopefully employment, to begin to deal with this surging
    population that you alluded to. Not being in the Bank
    currently, I really cannot speak to the effective--
    effectiveness of these programs, but I can tell you that I will
    be committed to a cost-benefit analysis, a rigorous cost-
    benefit analysis, to, hopefully, gain control of these
    infrastructure projects so that they really work and they are
    not the proverbial road to nowhere.
        Senator Young. Is there a model you will be looking to, as
    you engage in cost-benefit analysis, to determine which
    programs are working, which ones are not? Perhaps you could
    mimic another module for another development bank, for example.
        Mr. Dowd. I do not have a lot of experience or knowledge of
    other development banks----
        Senator Young. Right.
        Mr. Dowd [continuing]. But I know, from private development
    projects, what I looked for. And there are triggers and
    effective yardsticks that can be brought to bear that I think
    might apply here. And I honestly cannot speak a heck of a lot
    farther about that at this point, not being on the ground.
        Senator Young. Your private-sector experience may even be
    more valuable, frankly, than having worked in, or spent time
    immersed in, development banks.
        Mr. Dowd. I hope so, sir.
        Senator Young. I attended a briefing last week on
    multilateral development banks. And a number of experts were
    present. And more than one of the individuals made the point
    that we have to make it easier for U.S. companies to compete
    for contracts with development banks, including the African
    Development Bank. According to our Congressional Research
    Service, despite our country's contributions to the Bank, U.S.
    firms accounted for only 0.4 percent of ADB procurement in
    2016. In contrast, Chinese firms accounted for over 22 percent
    of procurement in that same year.
        Mr. Dowd, do you believe there should be efforts to
    increase participation by U.S. firms in the African Development
    Bank? And, if so, how do you believe we can make it easier for
    U.S. companies to compete?
        Mr. Dowd. I--thank you very much, Senator--I would think
    this would be a good application for value-for-money bidding.
    That is to say, it is not always the lowest bid that is the
    best bid, but the way things often operate, it is that way. And
    so, the Chinese, that is their forte. Very low quality, cheap
    bidding. And so, perhaps, I hope, we can impose value bidding
    to help U.S. companies. In addition to helping U.S. companies.
        Senator Young. That is looking at the entire life cycle of
    the project, right?
        Mr. Dowd. Indeed, Senator. And another element that you
    allude to there is, perhaps even contingency payments for some
    of these longer-term loans to make sure they are not just
    wandering off into who knows where, so that there would be
    regular monitoring and accounting and auditing of ongoing
    project funding.
        As far as encouraging U.S. companies to invest and operate
    in Africa, you are exactly right, the percentage is appalling.
    And I will do what I can to be a cheerleader for Africa, I
    suppose, and to meet with, hopefully, and facilitate American
    businesses trying to do business in Africa.
        Senator Young. Thank you much, Chairman.
        Mr. Dowd. Thank you, sir.
        The Chairman.  Thank you.
        And thank all three of you for your willingness to serve,
    your families' willingness to be a part of that.
        The record will remain open until the close of business on
    Thursday, as you heard from the close of the first panel. To
    the extent you can answer those questions quickly, we would
    appreciate it. I know you all are anxious to get to the post
    you have been assigned.
        Again, I think, for all of us, it is heartwarming to have
    people like you who are willing to serve in these capacities.
    And we thank you for that. We thank you for your testimony
    today, and the preparation that went into it. And I look
    forward to you being confirmed.
        Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator James E. Risch

        Question 1. Article 25 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
    Relations states that the ``receiving State shall accord full
    facilities for the performance of the functions of the mission.''
    However, some host nations have imposed size restrictions on U.S.
    diplomatic pouches, which has limited the ability of U.S. missions to
    receive diplomatic pouches.

       Does the imposition of size restrictions on U.S. diplomatic pouches
            entering a host nation constitute, in your view, contravention
            of Article 25 of the Vienna Convention?

        Answer. I agree that size restriction on U.S. diplomatic pouches
    can have an impact on our overseas diplomatic facilities. If confirmed,
    I look forward to exploring this issue with the Department's legal
    experts and seeking ways to eliminate any burdens imposed on the
    Department's ability to do its business overseas.

        Question 2. Are there circumstances under which diplomatic pouches
    bound for a U.S. embassy should be subject to a host nation's
    inspection?

        Answer. As a general rule, I understand that diplomatic pouches are
    protected from search and inspection. If confirmed, I look forward to
    exploring this issue with the Department's legal experts and protecting
    the interests of the United States.

        Question 3. According to the U.S. State Department's own materials
    on diplomatic pouches, ``international law does not set any limits on
    the permissible size, weight, or quantity of properly designated
    diplomatic pouches.''

       What, in your view, is the appropriate U.S. response to a host
            nation imposing limits on the permissible size, weight, or
            quantity of properly designated diplomatic pouches?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to consulting with the
    Department's experts to explore strategy and solutions as matters
    arise.

        Question 4. Under such circumstances, what course of action would
    you personally be willing to support in response to limitations?

        Answer. While I would need to review each case individually, if
    confirmed, I would be willing to explore the full range of options that
    have a reasonable possibility of motivating the counterpart government
    to lift its restrictions. I look forward to consulting with the
    Department's experts to explore strategy and solutions as matters
    arise.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

        Question 1. Regardless of the mechanism that the executive branch
    chooses, if the President wants to rescind or cancel funds that
    Congress has previously appropriated and the President has signed into
    law, Congress still must agree to cancel out or rescind those funds
    through enacting a subsequent law. As a longtime budget staffer and now
    having reviewed various impoundment procedures, is it your
    understanding that if Congress does not agree or act in some way to
    rescind or cancel funds, the executive branch agency must spend the
    appropriated funds within that fiscal year?

        Answer. The process as set out in the Impoundment Control Act is
    clear. The President must transmit a message to Congress proposing a
    rescission when he wishes to withhold appropriated funds from
    obligation permanently, or proposing a deferral for certain authorized
    purposes when the withholding of funds is temporary. Funds proposed for
    rescission may be withheld from obligation for 45 days of continuous
    congressional session. If the rescission is not enacted into law during
    this period, the President must release the funds on the 46th day.

        Question 2. Will you give us your commitment that, if confirmed,
    will you recommend to your superiors in the administration that the
    Department not seek rescission or cancellation of appropriated funds
    below the levels outlined in the applicable appropriations laws?

        Answer. I understand that use of the Impoundment Control Act
    process has been relatively rare, with President Clinton being the last
    President to propose a rescission with regard to a State Department
    appropriation. I would advise my principals to follow applicable
    appropriations laws and, if there is a strong reason to propose a
    rescission, to follow the statutory procedures under the Impoundment
    Control Act.

        Question 3. Should the President choose to seek to rescind or
    cancel funds that Congress has previously appropriated and which have
    been enacted into law, do you commit to communicate any such request to
    this committee and provide a briefing regarding the rationale for such
    a request?

        Answer. Yes, I commit to brief the committee on the rationale for
    any requests by the President to Congress for a rescission of State
    Department funds. As was discussed at my hearing, an important aspect
    of my work will be communication with the committee.

        Question 4. What are the most important actions you have taken in
    your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has
    been the impact of your actions?

        Answer. In 1998, I worked on bringing to passage through the Senate
    the International Religious Freedom Act, which created the Office of
    International Religious Freedom at the Department of State. As the
    Department website outlines, among its other duties the Office carries
    out significant responsibilities including issuing an annual report on
    international religious freedom issues, advocacy on behalf of religious
    freedom in countries, and review of countries for potential religious
    freedom violations that could cause their listing as Countries of
    Particular Concern. The Act also created an ambassador-at-Large for
    Religious Freedom, and the United States Commission on International
    Religious Freedom.
        administrations. The level of focus on international religious
    freedom issues by the United States Government and the Department of
    State, and the work of the Foreign Service and the Commission on these
    issues, have been a worthy addition to the range of roles and
    responsibilities of the U.S. Government in advocating appropriately on
    behalf of our values around the world.

        Question 5. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 6. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 7. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I agree with the Secretary's recent speech, in which he
    stated that a strong, talented, representative workforce is essential
    for the Department's success. If confirmed, I will encourage mentoring,
    career development counseling, and active engagement with the
    Department's various, diverse employee constituencies. I will aim to
    ensure all our supervisors reflect the strengths of our nation and
    promote an inclusive merit-based culture that encourages collaboration,
    flexibility, and fairness.

        Question 8. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Department are fostering an environment that is
    diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. I agree with the Secretary's recent speech, in which he
    stated that a strong, talented, representative workforce is essential
    for the Department's success. If confirmed, I will encourage mentoring,
    career development counseling, and active engagement with the
    Department's various, diverse employee constituencies. I will aim to
    ensure all our supervisors reflect the strengths of our nation and
    promote an inclusive merit-based culture that encourages collaboration,
    flexibility, and fairness.

        Question 9. How do you plan on committing to the retention of
    diverse foreign and civil service employees while at the same time
    making drastic cuts and changes to personnel policy which are causing
    the attrition of diverse applicants?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure that any reduction in
    budget and personnel does not negatively affect the Department's
    diversity, inclusion, and retention efforts. I agree with the
    Secretary's recent speech, in which he stated that a strong, talented,
    representative workforce is essential for the Department's success. I
    will continue to apply resources to appropriate training, details and
    fellowship programs to help mid-level employees attain the career
    skills necessary for promotion into the senior ranks.

        Question 10. How do you intend to support civil service career and
    executive professional development programs that focus on diversity
    retention?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to apply resources to appropriate
    training, details, and fellowship opportunities for the Civil Service
    workforce to provide invaluable professional development. The Secretary
    has publicly stated that the Department is a stronger organization when
    it embraces and incorporates diverse points of view into its work
    product. If confirmed, I will help the Department expand its mentoring
    and career development counseling services to assist employees develop
    the skills necessary for advancement while strengthening the leadership
    and adaptive capacity of our workforce.

        Question 11. If confirmed, will you commit to making sure the
    Department responds promptly to my letters and other requests for
    information?

        Answer. Yes. As I said in my hearing, having been a congressional
    staffer for many years I appreciate the need and the value for a robust
    conversation and partnership with this committee if I have the
    privilege of being confirmed.

        Question 12. Will you come before this committee for full, public
    hearings on the restructuring of State and USAID if major changes are
    proposed, prior to making such changes?

        Answer. Yes. As I said in my hearing, having been a congressional
    staffer for many years I appreciate the need and the value for a robust
    conversation and partnership with this committee if I have the
    privilege of being confirmed.

        Question 13. What is your view on the proposed cut to the State
    Department budget?

        Answer. I am confident the FY 2018 budget request will allow the
    Department to support the President's priorities to defend national
    security, assert U.S. leadership, foster opportunities for U.S.
    economic interests, and ensure accountability to the U.S. taxpayer. The
    Secretary has publicly acknowledged that the Department had to make
    tough decisions.
        I agree with the Secretary, who has stated publicly that it is
    first and foremost our people who will determine our ability to succeed
    in meeting our important foreign policy objectives--not the level of
    resources. I support the focus of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary on
    ensuring that our people have the organizational support and tools they
    need to achieve our top goals.

        Question 14. What is your view on the proposed cuts to the foreign
    assistance budget?

        Answer. I am confident that the FY 2018 budget request will allow
    the Department to support the President's priorities to defend national
    security, assert U.S. leadership, foster opportunities for U.S.
    economic interests, and ensure accountability to the U.S. taxpayer.
        I agree with the Secretary, who has stated publicly that it is our
    people first and foremost--not the level of resources--that will
    determine our ability to succeed in meeting our important foreign
    policy objectives. I support the Secretary and Deputy Secretary's focus
    on ensuring that State Department personnel have the organizational
    support and tools they need to achieve the administration's top goals.

        Question 15. More than 80 senior positions at the State Department
    currently have no named nominee. Many of those do not even have an
    Acting in place, and are vacant. I have shared my concerns in a letter
    to Secretary Tillerson about the ability of the State Department to
    effectively carry out its duties with so many unfilled positions. The
    Department has assured me that it is ``working closely with the White
    House to identify qualified candidates for [its] vacant senior
    leadership positions,'' yet acknowledged that there is ``no firm
    timeline for those remaining vacancies.'' As of today, there are no
    Assistant Secretary nominees for the Middle East, Asia, or Africa--at a
    time of daunting challenges and humanitarian crises in those regions.
    Nor is there an ambassador nominee to South Korea, at a time of
    increasingly tense relations with North Korea. If confirmed, do you
    commit to prioritizing filling senior vacancies, particularly for
    regions facing pressing challenges? How will you work with the
    Department and White House to ensure these positions are filled as
    promptly as possible?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to prioritizing the filling of
    vacant senior positions at the Department. This will include working
    with the Bureau of Diplomatic Security to ensure selected candidates
    move through the entensive vetting and clearance process in a timely
    manner.

        Question 16. One proposal under consideration as part of the
    administration's efficiency review process is to move the State
    Department's Consular Affairs and Population, Refugees, and Migration
    Bureaus to the Department of Homeland Security. I am pleased that
    Secretary Tillerson opposes this shift and believes this work is
    ``essential to the Department's mission.'' Can you expand on why is it
    so critical for these functions to remain under State Department
    leadership?

        Answer. I agree with the Secretary's view that the Consular Affairs
    bureau belongs at the Department of State. The functions of the CA
    bureau are vital to the Department's mission to secure our borders and
    protect the American people. U.S. border security depends on a system
    of ``layered defense'' for maximum effectiveness, and the current
    system of vetting and adjudicating visas has built-in checks that
    strengthen our national security. The Population, Refugees, and
    Migration Bureau guides the entire resettlement process and determines
    which refugee populations can become eligible for consideration for
    resettlement in the United States. This determination is inherently a
    foreign policy function. Loss of this function by the Department would
    undercut the U.S. Government's ability to address international
    humanitarian crises and respond to the needs of key allies.

        Question 17. Please describe the redesign/reorganization process
    and the next steps.

        Answer. The redesign process has been employee led, to include
    35,000 State and USAID employees in the United States and around the
    world who shared views in listening sessions; 200 State and USAID
    employees who participated in the working groups; and numerous ideas
    and suggestions submitted through online portals. As I understand it,
    the Secretary recently submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
    an Agency Reform Plan with specific recommendations for improving State
    and USAID. The Department will now pivot toward preparing for
    implementation of reforms as soon as they are approved by OMB, as well
    as reforms not requiring OMB approval. If confirmed, I look forward to
    being briefed on these reforms and engaging the Congress to discuss
    them.

        Question 18. If confirmed, will you commit to regular consultations
    with this committee throughout the redesign process to ensure
    sustainable reforms to the State Department and our foreign assistance
    agencies?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to regular consultations with the
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the redesign.

        Question 19. How would you seek additional input from the broader
    stakeholder community?

        Answer. The redesign process began with listening to State
    Department and USAID employees. Additionally, it is my understanding
    that the State Department and USAID sought input from external
    stakeholders as part of the process. If confirmed, I would continue to
    seek input from stakeholders through continued engagement.

        Question 20. If confirmed, will you work to ensure that the
    Department's ability to carry out its mission is not hindered by the
    redesign process?

        Answer. The role and responsibility of the Under Secretary for
    Management is to support the Secretary and ensure effective operations
    of the Department. The Department has a workforce of over 14,000
    Foreign Service employees and 11,000 civil service employees, and an
    appropriated budget of nearly $56 billion for Fiscal Year 2017. If
    confirmed, I would work to help enhance recruitment, identify and focus
    talent, ensure smooth and successful operations, prepare budgets, and
    coordinate with the White House, OMB, and other departments and
    agencies with whom the Department collaborates to ensure a successful
    and fully engaged State Department both during the redesign process and
    as long as I would hold the position.

        Question 21. In your view, what redesign actions can the Secretary
    take administratively, without legislation?

        Answer. In light of not having been confirmed, I have not been a
    part of the redesign process, nor have I received any briefings on
    Secretarial authority. If confirmed, I am committed to working
    cooperatively with Congress and provide information and rationale and
    seek input and feedback on the redesign.

        Question 22. How do you plan to work with this committee and with
    Congress more broadly to approach reorganization matters? For changes
    that require legislative approval or action, with you submit draft
    legislation o this committee? Will the Department consult with Congress
    on changes that can be made administratively, without Congressional
    action? In my view, such consultation would foster broader support and
    sustainability for the redesign.

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to working cooperatively with
    Congress and provide information and rationale and seek input and
    feedback on the redesign. To the extent that legislation might be
    necessary, if confirmed I would support efforts here as well.

        Question 23. During his confirmation process, Deputy Secretary
    Sullivan noted that the reorganization effort should enhance
    coordination between regional and functional bureaus at the State
    Department to address transnational threats and new means of
    communication and technology. Could you share an example of a proposal
    under consideration to improve coordination between bureaus?

        Answer. In light of not having been confirmed, I have not been a
    part of the redesign process. If confirmed, I will certainly consult
    and discuss these efforts with Deputy Secretary Sullivan. Also, if
    confirmed, I look forward to working in partnership with Congress on
    the redesign effort.

        Question 24. Just last week, the GAO released a report reviewing
    the Department's Diplomatic Security operations since January 2017, and
    assessing its progress on outstanding recommendations. The report
    identified a number of remaining issues, including physical security
    weaknesses, ensuring U.S. personnel receive threat information in a
    timely and effective manner, and filling positions with experienced
    personnel. How do you plan to ensure that Diplomatic Security meets
    these ongoing challenges and addresses these outstanding
    recommendations, particularly at a time when the administration is
    seeking to shrink the Department's budget and resources?

        Answer. If confirmed, I plan to work closely with the Assistant
    Secretary for Diplomatic Security to ensure the Bureau of Diplomatic
    Security is being managed effectively and the challenges you outline in
    your question are being addressed. I expect to devote a significant
    amount of time on the safety and security of the Department of State's
    personnel, and will advocate for appropriate resources in order to
    ensure that our Foreign Service officers and personnel deployed around
    the world are in facilities that are safe, are able to safely execute
    their duties, and have the appropriate amount of security for
    themselves, their families and loved ones.

        Question 25. Do you commit to coming back before this committee if
    confirmed to address the outstanding issues facing the Diplomatic
    Security bureau?

        Answer. Yes. There is nothing more important than the safety and
    security of our staff here at the Department. The Bureau of Diplomatic
    Security is essential to keeping this mission, and to the overall
    mission of diplomacy. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing to
    engage Congress on the issues facing the Bureau.

        Question 26. If the Senate Appropriations Committee's proposal on
    the Foreign Operations bill gets approved, will you work to protect
    this budget of $51.2 billion in funding for the State Department and
    USAID as opposed to arbitrarily slashing it?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Department of State and
    USAID leadership, bureaus, and offices to follow applicable laws and
    notification requirements with regard to the budget.

        Question 27. How would you ensure a reduction in funding for the
    State Department does not threaten our ability to address key national
    security challenges, such as the situation in Afghanistan?

        Answer. Enhancing and protecting the national security of the
    American people is the President's top priority. I am confident that
    the FY 2018 budget request will allow the Department to support the
    President's priorities to defend national security, assert U.S.
    leadership, foster opportunities for U.S. economic interests, and
    ensure accountability to the U.S. taxpayer. The Secretary has publicly
    acknowledged that the Department had to make tough decisions.
        If confirmed, I will work with the Bureau of South and Central
    Asian Affairs to ensure resources are available to promote the
    stability of Afghanistan and the entire region, which is critical to
    safeguarding U.S. national security.

        Question 28. If the State-Foreign Operations bill is confirmed,
    will you commit that any action you take related to the management or
    expenditure of appropriated funds is consistent with all legal
    requirements and the intent of Congress?

        Answer. Yes, as I said in my hearing, if confirmed, one of the
    important responsibilities I will have as the Undersecretary will be to
    ensure that the laws are faithfully executed by the Department.

        Question 29. I understand that as part of the Buy Hire America
    Executive order, changes which could substantially change the J-Visa
    programs are under consideration. What is your view on the value of the
    J-Visa programs? If confirmed, will you commit to continuing to support
    both federally-funded and private sector exchange programs as key
    elements of America's diplomatic engagement with the world? Can you
    assure me that, if confirmed and recommendations are made to eliminate
    or decrease the size of this program, the Department: a) notifies the
    appropriate Congressional committees and b) follows appropriate
    procedures and engages in a formal notice and comment in order to
    ensure stakeholder input and a fulsome record prior to making changes?

        Answer. Educational and cultural exchange programs are undeniably
    an important part of the State Department's diplomatic mission. The
    Department knows that they increase American global competitiveness,
    forge relationships and understanding, and contribute to increased
    national security. I can assure you that if I am confirmed we will
    continue to support our educational and cultural exchange programs in
    ways that best serve the needs of the American people. Also, if
    confirmed, as the Department considers ways to strengthen these
    programs, we will consult with Congress and stakeholders.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. If you are confirmed as the Under Secretary of State
    for Management, you will be one of the officials responsible for the
    performance and health of the State Department's work force. There have
    been numerous press reports over the past six months on low morale in
    the Department. Do you believe that morale is low? If so, why? What do
    you intend to do to address the situation? Do employees feel like they
    understand the mission of the Department? Do they feel like the
    important work they do for our country matters?

        Answer. The Department of State is fortunate to have a talented and
    highly motivated workforce. I agree with the Secretary, who has
    publicly stated that the State Department's employees are its most
    valuable resource. As I understand the goal of the redesign process, it
    is for an employee-led process that will lay a new foundation for our
    diplomacy and development professionals to define America's leadership
    in the world for generations to come.
        You raise important questions. If confirmed, I will seek answers to
    these during my listenening sessions and meetings with stakeholders
    across the Department. Further, if confirmed, I will work to ensure
    that this process leads to an organization in which our people have the
    support and tools they need to achieve our foreign policy goals.

        Question 2. My understanding is that the State Department is the
    only Executive Branch agency that continues to have a hiring freeze and
    that it includes a freeze on promotions as well as lateral transfers.
    What is the rationale behind the continued hiring freeze? What is the
    Department doing to ensure that its best employees stay with the
    Department during a time of no upward or lateral movement? When do you
    expect the promotion and lateral freezes to end?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward working with the Secretary to
    further understand his vision on the hiring freeze policy and its
    correlation with the redesign project. My initial understanding is that
    this is a tool to ensure the Depmartent is hiring enw employees with
    the skill sets necessary to accomplish the State Departemnt mission in
    a challenging world environment. I believe employee-led reviews,
    starting with listening, is a great way to maintain a talented
    workforce.

        Question 3. It is my understanding that A-100 classes have re-
    started, meaning that the hiring freeze now only applies to the Civil
    Service. Are you concerned that the Department is now treating its two
    largest groups of employees differently? Do you expect this to create
    tension within the Department between the Foreign Service and the Civil
    Service?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Secretary
    to understand his vision for the hiring freeze policy, and what the
    path forward is. I agree with the Secretary, who has publicly stated
    that an organization's employees are its most valuable resource, and I
    will seek to relay my appreciation for the hard work of all the
    Department's employees--both Civil Service and Foreign Service.

        Question 4. The Presidential Management Fellows program is one of
    the best ways to get America's best-and-brightest graduate students
    into the Civil Service. Does the Department intend to continue
    participating in this program? Why or why not?

        Answer. As the Secretary said in his August 18th, 2017, remarks to
    student program participants, the Department's current fellowships are
    valuable pipelines of talent for the Department and necessary to
    achieving its diversity objectives. My understanding is that the
    Secretary has approved limited PMF hiring. If confirmed, I will do my
    best to ensure that PMFs continue to be recognized as an integral part
    of the Department's workforce.

        Question 5. My office has been a beneficiary of the State
    Department's participation in legislative fellows programs. I believe
    that these programs provide the Department with an invaluable insight
    into the legislative process, while also providing offices like mine
    with additional subject matter expertise. I was troubled to see reports
    that the Department is suspending its participation in the program. Can
    you confirm that the Department does not plan to participate in the
    program in 2018? Why or why not?

        Answer. The Secretary said in August that the Department will keep
    the fellowship and internship programs that advance the Department's
    goals and objectives. And, during my Senate visits, I was proud to meet
    several Pearson Fellows. If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring the
    Department continues this practice.

        Question 6. Florida is a significant beneficiary of the J-1 visa
    program. A Washington Post article on September 10, 2017, indicates
    that the program is under review and could potentially be limited. Is
    the J-1 visa program being reviewed? If so, who in the U.S. Government
    is reviewing the program? Why is the program being reviewed? When
    should the review process be completed? When do you expect J-1 visa
    applicants and employers to be notified of updated guidance on the
    program?

        Answer. Educational and cultural exchange programs are undeniably
    an important part of the State Department's diplomatic mission. The
    Department knows that they increase American global competitiveness,
    forge relationships and understanding, and contribute to increased
    national security. While the Department is currently undertaking a
    review of the program pursuant to the President's Executive Order on
    Buy American and Hire American, I can assure you that if I am confirmed
    we will continue to support our educational and cultural exchange
    programs in ways that best serve the needs of the American people.
    Also, if confirmed, as the Department considers ways to strengthen
    these programs, we will consult with Congress and stakeholders.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. I was extremely pleased that Secretary Tillerson
    acknowledged in a speech in August 2017 that the State Department has a
    ``diversity gap.'' As I have previously flagged, Hispanic and Asian
    representation within the Department of State's workforce are at 6
    percent each; and although African Americans represent 15 percent of
    the total State Department workforce, they only represent 5 percent of
    the Foreign Service. Moreover, only 12 percent of our senior Foreign
    Service officers are non-white.

       What will you do to ensure the recruitment, retention, and
            promotion to senior leadership of minorities within the
            Department of State?

        Answer. In his recent speech, Secretary Tillerson said that a
    strong, talented, representative workforce which is representative of
    the American people is essential for the Department's success and the
    key to increasing minorities in leadership positions is to identify
    qualified individuals early in the process, and ensure that they are
    seeking and are afforded the opportunities to prepare for those senior
    roles. If confirmed, I will encourage mentoring, career development
    counseling, and active engagement with the Department's various,
    diverse employee constituencies. I will aim to ensure all our
    supervisors reflect the strengths of our nation and promote an
    inclusive merit-based culture that encourages collaboration,
    flexibility, and fairness.

        Question 2. The Charles B. Rangel International Affairs Program and
    Thomas R. Pickering Foreign Affairs Fellowship Program are integral to
    recruiting young, diverse talent to join our diplomatic corps, so I was
    concerned to find out that the June incoming class of Fellows were
    being deferred entry to the Foreign Service, because of the hiring
    freeze. Although, I understand that Secretary Tillerson has since
    issued a waiver for future incoming classes, I would like to know if
    you will continue to support these programs and ensure the continued
    successful recruitment and training of these future diplomats?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to support these and other
    programs that ensure the Department follows the Secretary's charge in
    his recent speech to ensure that the Department appropriately reflects
    the diversity of America.

        Question 3. As was raised at your hearing, there have been numerous
    reports regarding the dire state of morale in the Department of State.
    Department staff have complained about a lack of cohesive policy, lack
    of leadership, and lack of communication between the Secretary's
    advisors and career diplomats.

       How will you work on increasing morale within the Department of
            State and ensure our diplomatic corps is motivated and
            empowered?

        Answer. The Department of State is fortunate to have a talented and
    highly motivated workforce. I agree with the Secretary, who has
    publicly stated that the State Department's employees are its most
    valuable resource. As I understand the goal of the redesign process, it
    is for an employee-led process that will lay a new foundation for our
    diplomacy and development professionals to define America's leadership
    in the world for generations to come. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that this process leads to an organization in which our people
    are empowered with the support and tools they need to achieve our
    foreign policy goals.

        Question 4. As I previously raised in a hearing with Deputy
    Secretary Sullivan, there are several recent policy changes that seem
    to be affecting morale negatively including a freeze on lateral
    movements in the Department (significantly limiting the career growth
    opportunities of civil servants), as well as a freeze on hiring
    eligible family members (EFMs) at overseas posts and hiring retired
    Foreign Service Offices to backfill critical positions.

       What is your position on these policies and would you support a
            review or change of these recent policies?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Secretary
    to understand his vision for the hiring freeze policy. I will support
    the Secretary in aligning the Department's staffing programs to
    strategically recruit, retain, and develop the workforce of the future.
    I will continue to work with the Secretary and the employees of the
    Department to ensure that their ideas are incorporated and encourage a
    culture where employees are empowered.

        Question 5. The Department of State has a handful of training/
    detail assignments that are important professional development
    opportunities for Foreign and Civil Servants. These programs include
    obtaining graduate degrees, as well as working within other federal
    agencies, the military, and Congress, which makes Foreign and Civil
    Service Officers more effective and strengthens the agencies/
    organizations in which they serve. As such, I was disappointed to find
    out that the Secretary was considering significantly reducing and/or
    ending these opportunities.

       As Under Secretary of State for Management will you ensure that
            these important professional development opportunities are
            continued? How do you plan to ensure the continued development
            of the diplomatic corps?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that professional development
    continues to be a priority. Developing a workforce that is responsive
    to the threats of today and tomorrow requires continued investment in
    their training and professional development and is one of my top
    priorities.

        Question 6. I appreciated your commitment during your nomination
    hearing to ``consult with Congress'' on the reorganization/redesign
    process, because I have serious concerns regarding the process of
    implementation. In particular, beyond the ``listening tour'' and
    working groups used to inform the initial modifications, how do you
    plan to socialize the organizational changes within the Department of
    State?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson and Deputy Secretary Sullivan have been
    very clear that the redesign effort is employee led. In addition to the
    listening tour, more than 200 State Department and USAID employees took
    part in the working groups. In addition, I understand that the
    Secretary and Deputy regularly communicate various milestones in the
    process to the Department's employees, meet with Embassy staffs, and
    engage in town halls. If confirmed, I would respect and reinforce the
    employee-led nature of the redesign process and similarly engage with
    the Department's employees.

        Question 7. As was raised during your hearing, there are many high-
    level positions within the Department of State that have yet to be
    filled and are critical to the successful operations of our diplomatic
    mission, including the Director General of Human Resources. How will
    you encourage the administration to nominate and fill these positions
    in a timely fashion?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to prioritizing the filling of
    vacant senior positions at the Department. This will include working
    with Diplomatic Security to ensure any selected candidates move through
    the extensive vetting and clearance process in a timely manner.

        Question 8. We are concerned about reports that there are efforts
    to consolidate decision-making power within the Department,
    specifically in the Office of Policy Planning that is staffed with non-
    Senate confirmed officials. This would undermine the role of the Deputy
    Secretary and Under Secretary for Political Affairs that are Senate-
    confirmed positions and hold critical roles within the Department. Will
    you ensure that individuals responsible for final decisions on specific
    policies, budget, funding disbursement, and anything else related to
    implementing major foreign policy objectives of the United States will
    be made by principals who have been confirmed by the Senate?

        Answer. While many individuals in the Department provide valuable
    advice, the Secretary of State is responsible for decisions made on
    implementing major foreign policy objectives.
        The Department has a deep bench of experienced professionals
    serving in key positions across the Department who are highly capable
    and help the Secretary lead the Department and advance U.S. interests
    worldwide.

        Question 9. I was pleased you highlighted the importance of
    cybersecurity as one of your priorities as Under Secretary, because I
    was seriously concerned by reports that the Department was considering
    closing the Office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues. The recent
    Department of State/Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill for FY 2018,
    specifically allocated funding for this office, because of its
    indisputable importance given the growing use of cyberwarfare,
    including the Russian attack against the United States in the last
    Presidential election. Can you confirm that you will ensure the Office
    of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues is preserved under the
    reorganization? Also, what other strategies will you propose to
    strengthen our ability to combat cyberwarfare?

        Answer. It is my understanding that there are a variety of
    initiatives already underway to address issues of cybersecurity. While
    I have not been briefed on the specifics of the disposition of the
    office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues, if confirmed, I commit to
    reinforcing those efforts and elicit additional recommendations to
    strengthen the Department's cybersecurity and defend against cyber
    attacks.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Ron Johnson

        Question 1. Often, there is a wide gulf between U.S. foreign policy
    actions and how they are perceived around the world. The resulting
    anti-Americanism has a toxic effect on the United States' ability to
    secure our vital interests globally--a problem that has been compounded
    by the neglect of our public diplomacy programs since the end of the
    Cold War. Thankfully, one aspect of U.S. public diplomacy that has been
    maintained is our international exchange programs. I know the
    administration is considering curtailing some of these programs as part
    of its State Department review. As Undersecretary of State for
    Management, you will be involved in the fate of these exchanges. What
    is your view of their value to U.S. foreign policy? Specifically, do
    you believe that International Military Education & Training (IMET)
    funding is vital to achieving U.S. foreign policy goals? Do you support
    continuing the Summer Work Travel (SWT) exchange program?

        Answer. If confirmed, I pledge to consult with Department experts
    to learn more about these programs and their value to U.S. foreign
    policy. I agree with you on the value of exchanges generally in
    fostering engagement and dialogue. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    that the overall budget request concentrates resources where they offer
    the most value and impact to U.S. national security and foreign policy
    priorities.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1. Mr. Ueland, when I asked you about the potential for
    the administration to use ``impoundment'' to enforce budget cuts, which
    goes against the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, you replied that
    ``the Budget Act talks about two different ways monies can be looked at
    by the executive.'' I'm assuming you were alluding to rescissions and
    deferrals. Given your experience on the Senate Budget Committee, could
    you explain, with detail, the circumstances under which an
    administration would be in violation of the Impoundment Control Act?
    What procedures would an administration need to follow in order not to
    be in violation of the Act?

        Answer. My answer may have been a bit rusty--I cannot recall the
    last time I discussed impoundment before your question in the hearing.
    I have reviewed the issue and found that in general, the Impoundment
    Control Act of 1974 (ICA) provides for specific procedures with respect
    to potential impoundments, including the submission by the President of
    a special message to Congress each time a permanent rescission of
    budgetary resources is proposed and each time funds are deferred as
    provided for under the ICA. The circumstances under which such a
    message would be submitted to Congress would have to be addressed on a
    case-by-case basis.

        Question 2. At the end of our discussion, you mentioned that the
    ``implementation [of impoundment] might fall in your lane.'' Could you
    explain what you meant? How, and under what circumstances, would you
    administer the impoundment of funds at the Department of State?

        Answer. As I discussed at the hearing, throughout my preparation
    for confirmation no one has approached me about anything in relation to
    impoundment. Questions at the committee were the first time the topic
    has been raised to me. To the extent if carrying out such a
    hypothetical instruction touches any of the bureaus or offices in the
    portfolio of the Undersecretary for Management, it ``might fall in [my]
    lane,'' and that's what I meant.
        During my hearing, I stated that no one has approached me about
    anything in relation to impoundment, so I have no information as to
    how, or under what circumstances, I would administer such hypothetical
    impoundment of funds at the Department of State, if such execution
    would touch on the operation of any of the bureaus or offices in the
    portfolio of the Undersecretary for Management.

        Question 3. Would you describe, in detail, the difference between
    routine administrative actions and delays and impoundments? Please use
    examples.

        Answer. While I cannot comment on hypothetical scenarios, I do
    believe that issues related to administrative actions and delays and
    impoundments depend on the specific facts and circumstances. If
    confirmed, I would seek to ensure that the Department obligates funding
    appropriated by Congress consistent with applicable law, including the
    Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

        Question 4. Could you please detail your interpretation of the 1975
    Supreme Court case, Train v. City of New York, which is referenced in
    the report to the FY18 State, Foreign Operations Appropriations
    Subcommittee bill? What impact did this case have on the President's
    ``power of impoundment?''

        Answer. I am not in a position to provide an interpretation of this
    specific Supreme Court decision. If confirmed, I would seek to ensure
    that the Department obligates funding appropriated by Congress
    consistent with applicable law, including the Impoundment Control Act
    of 1974.

        Question 5. Mr. Ueland, referring back to your testimony, is there
    a legal difference between instructing someone to impound funds and
    implementing an order to impound funds?

        Answer. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 sets forth the required
    procedures for the proposed rescission or deferral of funds. Beyond
    that, no one has raised impoundment with me, beyond the questions
    raised at the hearing.

        Question 6. If confirmed, will you commit that any action you take
    related to the management or expenditure of appropriated funds is
    consistent with all legal requirements and the intent of Congress?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit that any action I take related to
    the management or expenditure of appropriated funds will be consistent
    with applicable law, including the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

        Question 7. In response to Ranking Member Cardin's question about
    whether you would respond promptly and fully to committee requests, you
    began by saying you ``expect to respond promptly and fully to all
    requests,'' and went on to say, ``unless [you're] told by higher
    authorities not to.'' Mr. Ueland, you are nominated to fill one of only
    six Under Secretary positions at the State Department. The Under
    Secretary for Management, in particular, is a prestigious position with
    vast authorities. Your predecessor regularly came to Capitol Hill to
    brief Senators and staff. Could you please clarify which ``higher
    authorities'' you expect may prevent you from answering requests from
    Capitol Hill? When you answered this question, what issues came to mind
    as topics that may require a higher authority to tell you not to
    respond to a committee request?

        Answer. I have an interest in a strong partnership with the Senate
    and Congress, including participating in regular discussions with
    Senators and staff on matters that fall within the portfolio of the
    Undersecretary for Management.
        In the event of my confirmation, while carrying out my
    responsibilities and working cooperatively with the Senate and
    Congress, I will also be looking to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary.
    They are the ``higher authorities'' I referenced. What came to mind as
    I answered that question was not any issue, but the knowledge that
    working in partnership with Congress is a key objective, and both the
    Secretary and Deputy Secretary have the capacity to set direction and
    provide guidance and feedback to me as I carry out all elements of my
    work, including with Congress. I believe that both the Secretary and
    Deputy Secretary have told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of
    their interest in working with Congress, as have I. I look forward to
    carrying out our shared commitment.

        Question 8. In your testimony, you note that ``the security of
    staff and facilities overseas remains an issue.'' If confirmed, will
    you ensure that the department continues to spend at least $2.2 billion
    annually for new embassy construction and maintenance, as recommended
    by the Benghazi Accountability Review Board? Please explain whether you
    believe the $2.2 billion figure properly reflects the Department's
    needs with regard to these expenses in the coming years.

        Answer. The security of staff and facilities overseas is of
    paramount importance, as recognized in the President's FY 2018 budget
    request of $2.2 billion for new embassy construction and maintenance.
    If confirmed, I will support the administration's commitment to
    sustaining a robust budget for embassy security and maintenance
    consistent with the recommendations of the Benghazi Accountability
    Review Board.

        Question 9. This week, the State Department submitted its
    ``redesign'' recommendations to OMB, outlining proposed reforms to the
    State Department and USAID in response to the President's March
    executive order directing a reorganization of the executive branch.
    Does the State Department plan to submit this report to Congress? If
    so, when?

        Answer. In light of not having been confirmed, I have not been a
    part of the redesign process. If confirmed, I am committed to working
    cooperatively with Congress and provide information and rationale and
    seek input and feedback on the redesign. Further, I will encourage the
    Department to provide reguarl updates to Congress on the issue.

        Question 10. Mr. Ueland, the post of Director General of the
    Foreign Service has been vacant since the last DG, Arnold Chicon, left
    on June 2, 2017. It is currently being filled in an acting capacity by
    the Human Resources Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, William E.
    Todd, who is a former ambassador to Cambodia and a member of the Senior
    Executive Service, but not the Senior Foreign Service. According to
    law, he is ineligible to be nominated by the President to be a
    permanent replacement. Also according to this law, a Senior Foreign
    Service officer must be in place to advise the Secretary on personnel
    matters. The need for such professional advice is great as the
    Department carries out planning for a major reorganization. While the
    Department is weighing the Trump administration's reorganization plans,
    if confirmed, who do you and Secretary Tillerson intend to go to for
    advice on Foreign Service personnel matters in the absence of a Senate-
    confirmed Director-General? When do you believe a replacement for
    Chicon will be nominated?

        Answer. I share your interest in filling the position of Director
    General of the Foreign Service as soon as possible. If confirmed, I
    will ensure that the Department continues to work closely with the
    White House on this and other senior leadership positions. The
    Department has a deep bench of experienced career professionals that
    are highly capable and able to lead the Department and advance U.S.
    interests worldwide such as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Todd,
    a career Senior Executive Service Civil Servant and two-time
    ambassador. He is assisted by two career Senior Foreign Service Officer
    Deputy Assistant Secretaries and a career Senior Executive and can tap
    into the experience and expertise of a number of senior Foreign Service
    Officer colleagues, including Under Secretaries and Assistant
    Secretaries.

        Question 11. Mr. Ueland, if confirmed, your office also will
    oversee foreign missions in the United States. Are there conditions
    under which the Russians could re-gain access to the facilities that
    they recently lost access to in the United States? Can I have your
    commitment that you will notify Congress and in particular, the Senate
    Foreign Relations Subcommittee on USAID and State Department
    Management, of any change in this regard?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to consulting with the
    Department's experts to consider options on strategy and solutions. I
    hope to move forward to achieve the stated goal of both of our
    countries: improved relations and increased cooperation on areas of
    mutual concern. If confirmed, I commit to informing Congress of any
    developments.

        Question 12. If confirmed, will you commit to working closely with
    the FBI to help notify them (in a timely fashion) of Russian officials
    seeking clearance to travel within the United States?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's commitment
    to interagency cooperation. I look forward to working very closely with
    the FBI on the travel of Russian officials within the United States.

        Question 13. If confirmed, will you work with the future Assistant
    Secretary of Europe and Eurasia, as well as the future U.S. Ambassador
    to the Russian Federation, to ensure that any limitations or
    restrictions U.S. diplomats experience in Russia will be met with
    parity for Russian diplomats in the U.S.?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues, including the
    Department's Office of Foreign Missions which I will oversee, to
    consider reciprocity prior to extending privileges and benefits to the
    foreign missions in the United States, including that of Russia. I look
    forward to fully supporting, encouraging, and enhancing the use of
    reciprocity to improve the secure and efficient operation of our
    missions abroad.

        Question 14. My office has received calls from career officials at
    the Department of State complaining that the Office of Civil Rights is
    often inappropriately used as a tool to discipline civil service
    employees who aren't engaged in discriminatory behavior. Harassment or
    discrimination based on age, sex, gender, race, religion, or ethnicity
    is a serious matter and should be dealt with immediately. Any deviation
    from this Office's core responsibilities to encourage a safe and
    diverse workforce is concerning. If confirmed, will you work with the
    Secretary of State to look into these complaints and ensure that the
    Office of Civil Rights is elevating cases involving employees who have
    been discriminated against for their age, sex, gender, race, religion,
    or ethnicity, rather than being used as an arbitrary disciplining tool?

        Answer. The Department of State's Office of Civil Rights (S/OCR)
    serves an integral role in propagating equity, fairness, and inclusion
    at the Department. S/OCR is charged with processing complaints of
    discrimination from U.S. citizen employees, former employees, and
    applicants for employment based on race, color, religion, sex
    (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation),
    national origin, age (40 or older), retaliation, disability, or genetic
    information. S/OCR also oversees the Department's compliance with anti-
    harassment laws and policies. In order to preserve the integrity of the
    workplace and ensure that the Department meets its obligations under
    the law, the attorneys in S/OCR conduct harassment training, manage
    harassment reporting, and conduct harassment investigations to ensure
    that all allegations of sexual and discriminatory harassment are
    properly addressed. S/OCR is a neutral office and does not make any
    discipline decisions with respect to complaints of discrimination or
    harassment complaints. Per Department policies (3 FAM 1525--Anti-Sexual
    Harassment Policy, 3 FAM 1526--Discriminatory Harassment Policy, 3 FAM
    4300--Disciplinary Action (Including Separation for Cause)), discipline
    decisions are made by the Bureau of Human Resources. S/OCR has no role
    in any discipline decisions for any employees. If confirmed, I will
    ensure that S/OCR continues to carry out its important mission in
    accordance with Department policies.

        Question 15. What are your views of the dissent channel at the
    Department of State, and if confirmed, how will you ensure the
    integrity of this channel?

        Answer. I am fully committed to the Dissent Channel as enshrined in
    the Department's Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). For over forty years,
    the Dissent Channel has served as a vehicle for U.S. citizen State
    Department employees to express dissenting or alternative views on
    substantive issues of policy to the Department's most senior leadership
    without fear of penalty. It exists because the State Department has a
    strong interest in facilitating open, creative, and uncensored dialogue
    on substantive foreign policy issues within the professional foreign
    affairs community and a responsibility to foster an atmosphere
    supportive of such dialogue. Pursuant to the FAM, Dissent Channel
    messages, including the identity of the authors, are a most sensitive
    element in the internal deliberative process and are to be protected
    accordingly.

        Question 16. As you consider ways to achieve efficiency as part of
    the Department's redesign, wouldn't it be more efficient to have a
    single budget shop that includes the Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance
    Resources (F) and the Bureau for Budget and Planning? What are the
    options under consideration for streamlining these two entities? Would
    they report to you?

        Answer. The redesign process has been employee led, including
    35,000 State and USAID employees in the United States and around the
    world who shared views in listening sessions; 200 State and USAID
    employees who participated in the working groups; and numerous ideas
    and suggestions submitted through online portals. As I understand it,
    the Secretary recently submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
    an Agency Reform Plan with specific recommendations for improving State
    and USAID. The Department will now pivot toward preparing for
    implementation of reforms as soon as they are approved by OMB, as well
    as reforms not requiring OMB approval. If confirmed, I look forward to
    being briefed on these reforms and engaging the Congress to discuss
    them.

        Question 17. The State Department has taken a number of steps in
    recent years to make U.S. foreign assistance more transparent and thus,
    more effective. One of these is the creation of a public website
    managed by the State Department--ForeignAssistance.gov--where the
    taxpayer can review how and where the U.S. is spending foreign aid
    dollars. Every federal agency that provides foreign assistance funding
    is required to share its information on this website. What is the
    agency participation rate for the site? What agencies lag behind in
    sharing their data, and what is the reason for the delay in sharing
    this information with U.S. taxpayers? What is the status of the State
    Department's own data on this site?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Office of Foreign
    Assistance to help the Department meet the requirement of the Foreign
    Aid Transparency and Accountability Act of 2016 that all implementing
    agencies report their foreign assistance to ForeignAssistance.gov by
    the end of FY 2018. I believe that the Department of State takes
    seriously its responsibility for making data on foreign assistance
    financial activities public, and I will work to continue to make
    progress on implementing its Foreign Assistance Data Review initiative.

        Question 18. I was pleased that the State Department issued an
    Evaluation Policy in January 2015 encouraging all bureaus and
    independent offices to undertake at least one evaluation per year ``to
    achieve the most effective U.S. foreign policy outcomes and greater
    accountability to our primary stakeholders, the American people.''
    However, the quality of State's evaluations varies and it's unclear how
    learning from these evaluations is used to guide the agency program and
    budget decisions. What are your plans to ensure that the evaluation
    policy is carried out, especially related to security assistance
    programs?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure that the Department
    follows an effective and useful evaluation policy. Accountability to
    the American taxpayer is a core priority for this administration, and
    evaluations are critical to holding ourselves accountable.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Johnny Isakson

        Question 1. The outcome of the ongoing discussion about the
    redesign of the State Department and USAID is very important to me.
    Will you commit to engaging with my staff and me as that process moves
    forward?

        Answer. Yes. As I said in my hearing, having been a congressional
    staffer for many years I appreciate the need and the value for a robust
    conversation and partnership with this committee and its members if I
    have the privilege of being confirmed.

        Question 2. In the event that the redesign requires Congressional
    authorization, will you commit to working with me to flesh out whatever
    reforms are proposed?

        Answer. Yes, and I look forward to engaging with you on this
    effort.

        Question 3. In April 2016, the U.S. State Department asked Emory
    University Hospital to accept and treat a patient, an American non-
    profit employee working abroad, with Lassa fever. Emory responded and
    successfully treated the patient. However, Emory has $356,000 in
    outstanding bills that the Government seems to be unwilling to
    reimburse. In May 2017, Emory sent a letter to Sec. Tillerson and has
    yet to receive a response. Can I have your commitment to work with me
    to resolve this issue and to ensure that in the event that any hospital
    is asked to treat a patient suffering from a highly infectious disease
    by the U.S. Department of State that they are then reimbursed for their
    treatment costs?

        Answer. If confirmed, you have my commitment to work with you on
    this issue. I understand that the U.S. Government has important
    partners in the private sector, such as Emory University Hospital, for
    treatment and care of patients with highly-infectious diseases. I will
    seek to maintain that partnership while ensuring that the Department
    assists to the extent of its statutory authority.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Jeff Merkley

        Question 1. There are wide-spread reports that are uncertainly
    about the reorganization, and budget and staffing cuts are creating low
    morale at the Department of State. If confirmed, how do you plan to
    address talent retention so that an attrition-based reduction does not
    result in State losing its best and brightest employees?

        Answer. The Department of State is fortunate to have a talented and
    highly motivated workforce. I agree with the Secretary, who has
    publicly stated that the State Department's employees are its most
    valuable resource. As I understand the goal of the redesign process, it
    is for an employee-led process that will lay a new foundation for our
    diplomacy and development professionals to define America's leadership
    in the world for generations to come. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that this process leads to an organization in which our people
    have the support and tools they need to achieve our foreign policy
    goals.

        Question 2. If confirmed, what specific steps will you take to work
    with Congress on any reorganization plans for the State Department and
    USAID?

        Answer. Yes. As I said in my hearing, having been a congressional
    staffer for many years I appreciate the need and the value for a robust
    conversation and partnership with this committee if I have the
    privilege of being confirmed.

        Question 3. If confirmed, in your role overseeing Human Resources,
    how to you plan to attract new talent, address talent retention and
    increase diversity recruitment?

        Answer. I agree with the Secretary's recent speech, in which he
    stated that a strong, talented, workforce representative of the
    American people is essential for the Department's success. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that the Department continues its active
    recruitment program to bring talented and diverse candidates to the
    Department. I look forward to continuing the Department's commitment to
    the Pickering and Rangel Fellowship programs. Ultimately, the
    Department's ability to recruit and retain a talented and diverse
    workforce will rest on ensuring the redesign process results in an
    organization in which our people have the support and tools they need
    to achieve our foreign policy goals.

        Question 4. If confirmed, do you commit to working with Congress to
    communicate the State Department's efforts to promote equal opportunity
    and inclusion for all American employees in direct hire and personal
    service contractor status to include equal opportunity for all races,
    ethnicities, ages, genders, and service-disabled veterans, with a focus
    on traditionally underrepresented minority groups?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to continuing the Department's
    efforts to promote equal opportunity and inclusion for all American
    employees and contractors, and to work with Congress to communicate
    these efforts. I believe that the Department takes seriously its
    obligation to be a ``model employer'' of individuals with disabilities,
    as required by U.S. law.

        Question 5. If confirmed, will you continue to support professional
    development programs, including details, educational programs, and
    fellowships?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to apply resources to appropriate
    training, details, and fellowship opportunities for the Department's
    workforce that provide invaluable professional development. These
    programs are an integral part of ensuring that employees have the
    skills necessary for current and future work assignments.

        Question 6. If confirmed, do you pledge to provide detailed
    information to Congress on diversity employment statistics that include
    data on ethnicity, race and gender by grade and occupational code for
    civil service personnel and Foreign Service promotion statistics by
    ethnicity, race and gender?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to provide information to Congress
    on diversity employment statistics to the extent permitted by law. I
    understand that the Department's website provides some diversity
    statistics as well as information on Foreign Service promotions.

        Question 7. If confirmed, will you provide information on how many
    positions are unfilled and how long they have been unfilled by Bureau
    and Office and the reasons why they haven't been filled?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to prioritizing the filling of
    vacant senior positions at the Department and ensuring the Department
    continues to work closely with the White House to identify qualified
    candidates for those vacant leadership positions. I commit to informing
    Congress on the Department's efforts to fill vacant positions.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to Eric M. Ueland by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. It was reported in a recent Wall Street Journal article
    that several State Department managed J-1 visa exchange programs--
    including Summer Work Travel, Au Pair, Intern, Trainee, and Camp
    Counselor--are under review by the Department and White House as part
    of the President's Buy Hire American, Hire American Executive Order. In
    New Jersey, we had 10,642 recipients of the J-1 visa exchange program,
    half of those went to work in Jersey's tourism industry that would have
    experienced shortages or negative impacts on their businesses without
    this resource. At the same time, these individuals go back to their
    home countries with a favorable view of the U.S. extending at a low
    cost, U.S. diplomacy and cultural ties.
        As Under Secretary of State for Management, you will oversee the
    agencies process and procedures. I understand that as part of the Buy
    American and Hire America Executive Order, changes which could
    substantially change the J-Visa programs are under consideration.

       I would like your assurance that if recommendations are made to
            eliminate or decrease the size of this program, that the
            Department notifies the appropriate Congressional committees
            and follows appropriate procedures and engages in a formal
            notice and comment in order to ensure stakeholder input and
            develop a fulsome record prior to making changes. Can you give
            me your assurances that this will be done?

        Answer. Educational and cultural exchange programs are undeniably
    an important part of the State Department's diplomatic mission. The
    Department knows that they increase American global competitiveness,
    forge relationships and understanding, and contribute to increased
    national security. I can assure you that if I am confirmed we will
    continue to support our educational and cultural exchange programs in
    ways that best serve the needs of the American people. Also, as I said
    in my hearing, having been a congressional staffer for many years I
    appreciate the need and the value for a robust conversation and
    partnership with this committee if I have the privilege of being
    confirmed.

        Question 2. Since traveling to embassies and meeting with our
    diplomats, I hear repeatedly that one of the greatest diplomatic tools
    they have people-to-people exchange that support global engagement that
    is critical to our country's prosperity and security. Exchange programs
    are not only an important State Department tool to promote American
    foreign policy, the programs also position our citizens to capitalize
    on an increasing globalized world.

       Do you have any personal experience with international exchange?

        Answer. I value the important role that dialogue and exchange can
    play. While I have not personally been involved in an international
    exchange program, if confirmed I look forward to being briefed on
    current exchange programs and how we are using them to advance U.S.
    foreign policy goals.

        Question 3. Can you commit that the State Department will advocate
    to keep as many tools at your disposal to reach different audiences,
    rather than cutting off some of your options?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the overall budget
    request concentrates resources where they offer the most value and
    impact to U.S. national security and foreign policy priorities.
    Maintaining flexibility and options will be an essential consideration
    in the budget and management process.

        Question 4. As you may know earlier this year Pickering and Rangel
    Fellows who completed their coursework and internships were told by the
    State Department that they would not be inducted into the Foreign
    Service as scheduled. These are the two premier programs that bring our
    nation's diversity in all its forms--ethnic, linguistic, socio-
    cultural, experiential, and many more--to bear in support of our
    foreign policy.
        After Congressional pushback, the Department relented and said that
    the classes would be issued a waiver and allowed to join the next
    Foreign Service class. In a recent speech, Secretary Tillerson said,
    ``Our current fellowships and internships are valuable pipelines of
    talent for our organization and necessary to achieving our diversity
    objectives,'' and that the Department ``will be keeping all of our
    fellowship and internship programs in place.''

       I am pleased to hear this though I find it hard to square what the
            Department's previous actions. Will the Department continue to
            induct future Rangel and Pickering Fellows in the Foreign
            Service as scheduled? If not, why not?
       Do you plan to make any changes to these Congressionally-authorized
            programs and do you pledge to consult with Congress before
            doing so?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the Department of
    State's commitment to the Pickering and Rangel programs as its premier
    diversity recruitment programs. The Department must continue to value
    these talented individuals and the skills they bring into the
    Department, and I anticipate no changes to the programs. As the
    Secretary recently stated, the Department has a long-standing and
    enduring commitment to shape and build a more diverse and inclusive
    organization.

        Question 5. For the State Department and USAID to carry out their
    missions, diversity is an urgent matter of national security
    implications. Our nation is blessed with an unparalleled strength in
    having people of all backgrounds and experiences. Thus having a Foreign
    Service that represents the full richness of the American people as we
    conduct our diplomacy and development efforts allows us to connect with
    a diverse world in unique and meaningful ways.
        However, the State Department has much work to do. Latino/Hispanic
    and Asian representation within the State Department's workforce are at
    6 percent each and while African Americans represent 15 percent of the
    workforce, they only represent 6 percent of the Foreign Service.

       What do you think the State Department can do to improve these
            numbers and how can we better retain and elevate diverse
            leaders into more senior positions in the Department?

        Answer. I agree with the Secretary's recent speech, in which he
    stated that a strong, talented, representative workforce is essential
    for the Department's success. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
    Department continues its active recruitment program to bring talented
    and diverse candidates to the Department, including the use of
    Diplomats-in-Residence hosted at universities across the country. I
    will also ensure that the Department continues its commitment to the
    Pickering and Rangel Fellowship programs. For retention purposes, I
    will encourage mentoring, career development counseling, and active
    engagement with the Department's various, diverse employee
    constituencies. If confirmed, I aim to ensure all our supervisors
    reflect the strengths of our nation and promote an inclusive merit-
    based culture that encourages collaboration, flexibility, and fairness.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to John R. Bass by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. Defeating the Afghan Taliban will continue to be
    difficult so long as it has a sanctuary on the other side of the border
    in Pakistan. Do you support drone strikes against the Afghan Taliban,
    regardless of what side of the border it occupies?

        Answer. The United States employs a full range of options--
    including military and diplomatic ones--to resolve this conflict.
    Military action is not the centerpiece of our strategy. Our efforts in
    Afghanistan are part of a larger regional strategy. That said, we will
    exert pressure against the Taliban, wherever they might be, using all
    elements of national power. If confirmed, I will support full
    implementation of the President's strategy, including its military
    components, to ensure the Taliban no longer believes it can wait us
    out.

        Question 2. How do you assess the National Unity Government? Is it
    stable? Do you see the structure--with both a President and CEO--as
    something that the U.S. should continue to encourage?

        Answer. President Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah share a common
    vision for a secure, stable, and prosperous Afghanistan and are working
    to bring the reforms needed to advance this vision.
        In recent months, both of Afghanistan's leaders have shown in their
    words and actions that their working relationship is more effective and
    increasingly producing results. Both expressed their determination to
    support one another's efforts to implement reforms and live up to their
    commitments.
        It is a government that largely defends itself and has a reformist
    president willing to work closely with international partners.
        It is up to the Afghan people to decide the future structure of
    their government, including whether or not to retain the President and
    CEO positions.

        Question 3. Do you believe that the Afghan Government should seek a
    negotiated settlement with the Taliban? If yes, what ``redlines''
    should the U.S. Government insist upon?

        Answer. A negotiated peace settlement between the Afghan Government
    and the Taliban is critical to ending the conflict and ensuring the
    long-term preservation of our national security interests. We have
    signaled to the Afghan Government and others our priority to launch a
    peace process, and we regularly engage Afghanistan's neighbors to press
    the Taliban to come to the negotiating table.
        The U.S. Government has clearly outlined the broad conditions of an
    acceptable agreement to end the conflict, which would require the
    Taliban to cease violence, break all ties to international terrorists,
    and accept the Afghan Constitution, including its protections for women
    and minorities. These end-conditions are necessary to protect the gains
    achieved over the last 16 years.
        I believe there is an opportunity to make a fresh push to start a
    peace process in light of the fact we are no longer announcing any
    artificial deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
    The primary obstacle to a peace process is the Taliban's confidence it
    can outlast us on the battlefield, and indeed, much of this confidence
    in years past came from the group's awareness of our withdrawal
    deadlines. We can therefore use the President's new South Asia strategy
    to make a stronger argument to the Taliban that we will never allow
    them to win militarily, and that a negotiated political settlement is
    the only viable path for them.
        I personally plan to be a firm advocate for setting the conditions
    to achieve a political settlement with my interlocutors across the
    Afghan political spectrum.

        Question 4. The State Department's 2017 Trafficking in Persons
    Report upgraded Afghanistan from the Tier 2 Watch List to Tier 2. Do
    you commit to discuss consistently with senior Afghan Government
    leaders the U.S. Government's concerns about trafficking in persons?

        Answer. We remain committed to working closely and consistently
    with the Government of Afghanistan to combat trafficking in persons in
    all its forms. The Afghan Government made marked progress over the past
    year, by enacting a new law on human trafficking that distinguishes
    between smuggling and trafficking, and that criminalizes various acts
    associated with bacha baazi, a practice in which men exploit boys for
    social and sexual entertainment. Since passage of the law, the Afghan
    Government has arrested and punished some officials found complicit in
    bacha baazi.
        However, there are still several areas of concern, including
    official complicity, accountability for abuses, and a shortage of
    protective services for victims of trafficking. If confirmed, I will
    lead the embassy's engagement with Afghan Government leaders on this
    issue, and we will continue to work with human rights organizations and
    civil society and to support the Afghan Government in its efforts.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                 to John R. Bass by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting democratic governance and adherence to core human
    rights have been priorities and core responsibilities for me throughout
    my career. Much of my work has focused on supporting a core national
    security goal of the United States, under administrations of both
    parties, for three generations: promoting a Europe that is whole, free
    and at peace. In that regard, several of my assignments at State
    Department headquarters in the 1990s focused on supporting efforts of
    countries that aspired to join the NATO alliance to build and
    strengthen the rule of law, democratic institutions, and competitive
    electoral environments.
        While serving in Embassy Rome, I worked closely with Italian trade
    unions and civil society organizations to encourage them to provide
    additional support to nascent counterparts in Cuba as part of a broader
    effort to strengthen Cuban civil society. As an advisor to Vice
    President Cheney in 2004-05, I concentrated on reinforcing diplomatic
    efforts to create a competitive campaign environment and impartial
    election administration for the November 2004 presidential election in
    Ukraine. After evidence of widespread fraud was revealed, I helped
    mobilize like-minded NATO and other partners to push the Ukrainian
    Government to address the fraud, which resulted in a revote, which
    produced a more free and fair election and a different outcome.
        While leading the Provincial Reconstruction program for Baghdad
    province 2008-09, I oversaw efforts to underwrite development of modern
    legal curricula for the Baghdad University law School, and professional
    development and training programs for the defense bar, strengthening
    legal protections and the rule of law for Iraqi citizens.
        As Ambassador to Georgia, I strongly supported and ensured funding
    for training programs to strengthen political party development,
    election administration, independent media and civil society
    organizations. I also worked closely with a wide range of government
    officials and political party leaders to ensure opposition parties and
    candidates were able to campaign without interference or pressure.
    These efforts contributed to 2012 parliamentary elections that led to
    the first peaceful official transfer of power between political parties
    in contemporary Georgia's history.
        In my current role as Ambassador to Turkey, I have encouraged
    adherence to constitutional norms and Turkey's international
    commitments under the U.N. Charter and Helsinki Final Act to address
    restrictions and erosion of freedoms of speech and assembly. I have
    criticized the Government's increased criminalization of speech and
    pressure on independent media and continued to strongly support
    religious minorities and protect their ability to worship freely.

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

        Answer. Our greatest human rights concern in Afghanistan today
    continues to be the actions and consequences of the ongoing insurgency:
    its effects on access to education, health, and justice, and the
    challenge of building and sustaining adherence to human rights norms by
    government security forces as they combat the insurgency.
        The Taliban and ISIS actively target schools, media outlets,
    government and aid workers, human rights activists, and ethnic and
    religious minorities. We also continue to receive credible reports of
    human rights abuses committed by government actors, including security
    forces.
        If confirmed, I will urge the Afghan Government to increase its
    efforts to address these abuses. We will assist the Afghan Government
    in upholding human rights and eventually ending abuses by partnering
    with our Afghan colleagues in the security and justice sectors to
    ensure they have the requisite capacity and expertise needed to prevent
    abuses, and to ensure accountability should they occur. As one
    component of this effort, we will continue to provide human rights
    training for government security forces and we will engage quickly with
    the Afghan Government when abuses do occur to ensure that there is full
    and transparent justice. We will also continue to work with Afghan
    civil society and with our allies and other partners to advocate for
    improvements in human rights. My hope is that our combined efforts over
    time will provide Afghans the opportunity to further strengthen
    democratic governance and human rights protections because they believe
    them to be in their national interest.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Afghanistan in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. There are significant obstacles to progress, including
    widespread violence, ethnic tension, weak application of the rule of
    law, government capacity challenges, a climate of official impunity,
    and the absence of government writ in many areas of the country. The
    challenges facing us are significant, but we work closely with the
    Afghan Government, and Afghanistan has made some important progress
    over the past 16 years. Perhaps most important at this juncture, the
    Afghan Government tells us these issues are important to their
    performance and legitimacy, and they are actively seeking our help to
    improve. If confirmed, I will lead our engagement and work to support
    the Afghan Government in its continued efforts.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will lead and direct the embassy's
    engagement with human rights, civil society, and other non-governmental
    organizations in the U.S. and with human rights organizations in
    Afghanistan, as I have in my prior appointments to Turkey and Georgia.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Afghanistan to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted in Afghanistan?

        Answer. If I am confirmed, we will continue to engage with the
    Afghan Government on such cases, and will continue to voice our strong
    support for the Afghan constitution, adherence to the rule of law, and
    due process.

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

        Answer. If I am confirmed, we will continue to thoroughly vet all
    individuals and units nominated for U.S.-funded security assistance, in
    accordance with the Leahy law. If we find credible information of a
    gross violation of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law, to ensure that responsible parties do not
    receive U.S. funded assistance, and will work with the Afghan
    Government to bring them to justice. We will also work with the Afghan
    Government to identify cases where individuals have been brought to
    justice in order to remediate units restricted from receiving
    assistance.

        Question 7. Will you engage with the Afghans on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will lead the embassy's continued
    engagement on a wide range of issues centered on human rights, civil
    rights, and governance. As a result of engagement by USG personnel
    serving in Embassy Kabul, the Afghan Government has made human rights
    training a key component of training for security force personnel. It
    also is making legal reforms to address issues facing vulnerable
    populations, such as the enactment of the Law to Combat Crimes of
    Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants in January 2017,
    which, for the first time, criminalizes various acts associated with
    bacha bazi, including sexual exploitation of a minor and forced
    dancing. Our continued engagement will support further progress by the
    Afghan Government.

        Question 8. What will you do to build people-to-people ties between
    Americans and Afghans and to support Afghan civil society, human rights
    activists, and independent media? What do you need from Washington-
    based U.S. officials on this?

        Answer. U.S. Embassy Kabul implements a robust array of public
    diplomacy initiatives that strengthen academic and professional
    relationships between Afghans and Americans. If confirmed, I will lead
    our Embassy's engagement with civil society, human rights activists,
    and independent media. One of my early priorities will be to assess and
    improve our engagement strategy to ensure it is supporting fully our
    efforts to achieve the objectives outlined in the President's new South
    Asia Strategy. We will look to many elements of the U.S. Government,
    including Congress, for continued support to ensure our exchange and
    other programs of this nature are effective and achieving the intended
    results.

        Question 9. What is your understanding for the conditions under
    which the U.S. could begin to diminish its military presence in the
    country?

        Answer. As President Trump explained in his August 21 address to
    the American people, a core pillar of the new South Asia Strategy is a
    shift from a time-based approach, to one based on conditions on the
    ground. He was clear about our objective in Afghanistan, which is to
    make Americans safer. A premature withdrawal risks creating a vacuum
    that terrorists would exploit, as they did on 9/11.
        The President was also clear that military power alone will not
    bring peace to Afghanistan. Rather, ``strategically applied force'' can
    ``create conditions for a political process to achieve a lasting
    peace.'' The mission of our troops in Afghanistan is to apply force in
    order to make clear to the Taliban that they cannot achieve their
    objectives on the battlefield and must instead enter negotiations with
    Afghan Government.
        President Trump has delegated to the Secretary of Defense the
    authority to determine the level of troops necessary to achieve this
    mission. I would refer you to the Department of Defense for a
    description of the military conditions under which those troops might
    be drawn down.

        Question 10. What ways do you see to ramp up U.S. engagement in the
    peace and reconciliation process? How will you personally involve
    yourself?

        Answer. A negotiated peace accord with the Taliban is critical to
    ending the conflict, stabilizing Afghanistan and protecting our core
    national security interests. We have signaled to the Afghan Government
    and others our priority is to launch a peace process. We regularly
    engage Afghanistan's neighbors to press the Taliban to come to the
    negotiating table.
        The broad outlines of an acceptable agreement to end the conflict
    would require the Taliban to cease violence, break all ties to
    international terrorists, and accept the Afghan Constitution, including
    its protections for women and minorities. These end-conditions are
    necessary to ensure the gains achieved over the last 16 years are
    protected.
        I believe there is an opportunity to make a fresh push to start a
    peace process in light of the fact we are no longer announcing any
    artificial deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
    Many observers have noted that the primary obstacle to a peace process
    is the Taliban's confidence it can outlast us on the battlefield, and
    indeed, much of this confidence in years past came from the group's
    awareness of our withdrawal deadlines. We can therefore use the
    President's new South Asia strategy to make a stronger argument to the
    Taliban that we will not allow them to win militarily, and that a
    negotiated political settlement provides them the best opportunity to
    achieve some of their objectives.
        I plan to firmly advocate for increased reliance on politics and
    negotiations, rather than violence, to address a range of challenges in
    Afghanistan. I intend to continually seek opportunities to lay the
    groundwork for a peace process with interlocutors across the Afghan
    political spectrum.

        Question 11. The U.S. has engaged in a series of efforts, dating
    back to the Tokyo commitments, to incentivize Afghan reforms through
    our assistance programming. How is the recently announced Kabul Compact
    any different from these past efforts? Why does the administration
    expect that the behavior of the Afghan Government will be any
    different?

        Answer. Unlike the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework and other
    donor-driven commitments of the past, the Kabul Compact is an Afghan-
    led initiative. President Ghani proposed the Compact in his April 2017
    meeting with General McMaster as a way to hold the Afghan Government
    accountable. In the words of President Ghani, the primary purpose of
    the Compact is to ``restore trust'' in the Afghan Government and
    demonstrate to the Afghan public, the American public, and the
    international community that the Afghan Government is ``serious about
    making lasting reforms.''
        The Compact consists of reform benchmarks in four areas:
    governance, security, the economy, and peace and reconciliation.
    Working groups co-chaired by American and Afghan officials developed
    these benchmarks to measure progress over the next three years, and
    President Ghani has signed an official decree instructing all relevant
    ministries to implement and comply with the Compact's directives. He
    has also urged the working groups to provide monthly progress reports
    and, as appropriate, make those reports public. This frequent
    coordination with our Afghan counterparts will allow us to monitor more
    closely what the Afghan Government is doing and calibrate our diplomacy
    and foreign assistance accordingly.

        Question 12. Please describe how you will diplomatically engage
    with Russia and the countries of Europe to urge more active
    participation in efforts to address poppy cultivation in Afghanistan.

        Answer. We share Congress's concern regarding Afghanistan's
    unacceptably high level of opium cultivation and lack of eradication.
    Opium poppy production in Afghanistan undercuts good governance, fuels
    corruption, provides revenue to terror and militant groups, and
    undermines our national interests in Afghanistan and more broadly in
    South and Central Asia. The two greatest impediments to successful
    opium poppy eradication are insecurity and a lack of political will on
    the part of the Afghan Government. Eradication is politically
    unpopular, given the absence of a range of high-value alternative crops
    as well-suited to Afghanistan's poor soils and transport networks.
    Eradication operations have turned violent, resulting in deaths of both
    the Afghan security forces conducting the eradication and local farmers
    opposing eradication.
        Most areas of high cultivation, such as Helmand province, are
    either under Taliban control or influence, complicating the Afghan
    Government's eradication efforts in areas where it does not effectively
    exercise control. Without improved security, eradication is likely to
    remain at unacceptably low levels.
        The State Department takes very seriously the challenge posed by
    narcotics production in and trafficking from Afghanistan and is working
    with DEA and DOD to finalize an updated U.S. Counternarcotics Strategy
    for Afghanistan. Measures to generate Afghan political will to increase
    eradication will be a key component of this review. We will also
    explore possible options for engaging with Russia, Canada, and
    countries of Europe, all major markets for Afghan heroin, on how to
    address the challenges of curbing the Afghan opium trade. This
    engagement can be both bilateral and through multilateral fora, such as
    the Paris Pact Initiative. Given constraints imposed by both the
    security situation and reduced funding for USG counternarcotics
    programs in Afghanistan, the group will look to target key districts in
    high poppy producing areas of Afghanistan for best effect. The
    Department shares deep concerns over the continued upward trend in
    opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan.

        Question 13. I am very concerned about accountability for funds
    provided through the World Bank's Afghan Reconstruction Trust Fund
    (ARTF). What specific measures will you put in place to ensure that the
    World Bank is providing the U.S. taxpayer with the necessary
    information to ensure that these funds meet U.S. accountability
    standards?

        Answer. The Department of State and USAID take very seriously the
    responsibility to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent wisely in
    support of U.S. national security objectives. We are working with the
    World Bank and other ARTF donors to identify ways to expand the scope
    and intensity of ARTF management and oversight mechanisms. This
    includes stronger results frameworks and more extensive use of third-
    party project and resource disbursement monitoring. We are also looking
    at ways to strengthen communication between the World Bank and ARTF
    donors through regular portfolio reviews and more detailed results
    scorecards. Furthermore, USAID is working closely with the United
    Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID) and other
    major ARTF donors on the fourth external evaluation review of the Fund.
    We will continue to conduct additional evaluations of the ARTF, as
    necessary, to ensure that U.S. taxpayer funds are used for the
    development purposes for which they are intended.

        Question 14. SIGAR recently found that U.S. programming to promote
    Afghanistan's revenue generation through customs collection has been
    significantly deficient. Given that Afghanistan's best prospects for
    revenue generation appear to come in this sector, how do you plan to
    address this significant shortcoming? How will you work to encourage
    the Afghan authorities to tangibly improve their ability to address
    corruption at the border crossings and increase domestic revenue?

        Answer. The Department of State, USAID, and the Afghan Government
    all agree that an electronic payment system would be an effective
    method for reducing corruption at customs checkpoints and collecting
    the additional revenue that the Government needs. President Ghani and
    CEO Abdullah are committed to increasing usage of the e-payment system,
    and since 2013 USAID's Afghanistan Trade and Revenue (ATAR) project has
    sought to improve the capacity of the Afghan Government to collect
    customs revenue through the system. The e-payment system is a module
    within the Automated System for Customs Data (ASYCUDA), a software
    system developed by the United Nations Conference on Trade and
    Development and used in many countries' customs facilities. ASYCUDA has
    significantly reduced customs clearance times (from several days to
    several hours) and increased customs revenue.
        Mission Afghanistan is addressing the issues with e-payment
    identified in the SIGAR report, including working with the Ministry of
    Communications on an E-Transaction Law and speeding the transfer of
    funds from Afghanistan's national bank, Da Afghanistan Bank (DAB), and
    commercial banks to government workers and other designated recipients.
    However, broader efforts to reduce customs corruption are likely to
    have the greatest impact on future revenue collection. For example,
    overly sensitive risk profiles are resulting in nearly all cargo being
    flagged at the borders--far too many to actually be inspected--
    providing opportunities for corruption to expedite clearance. The
    Afghanistan Customs Department is in the process of adjusting those
    profiles and procedures at the borders to improve system reliability
    and reduce corruption.
        If confirmed, I will continue to engage President Ghani, Chief
    Executive Abdullah and other senior Afghan Government officials to
    ensure they sustain their focus on reducing corruption and improving
    further revenue collection by the Government.
        Finally, it is worth noting that SIGAR's report examined only one
    of many focus areas that were part of the ATAR project. As of July
    2017, ATAR had spent an estimated $559,803 out of the $77.8 million
    project ceiling for ATAR (approximately 0.7 percent) to support the
    implementation of e-payment technology. Other facets of ATAR have
    achieved significant results, including helping the Afghan Customs
    Department improve its risk management system to align it with
    international standards, supporting Afghanistan's accession to the
    World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2016, and facilitating negotiations
    on trade and transit agreements with regional trading partners.

        Question 15. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service? What steps will you
    take to ensure each of the supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an
    environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. My experience has given me many opportunities to build
    high-functioning teams with diverse members. I remain committed to
    equal employment opportunity principles. If confirmed, I will foster a
    work environment that recognizes the contributions of all employees,
    and will make sure they have information available about the
    Department's Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, foreign affairs
    affinity organizations and opportunities specific to various groups.
        If confirmed, I will encourage all supervisors to take available
    courses on EEO principles, diversity, and related issues. I will urge
    them to include unconscious bias and similar topics when they mentor
    junior colleagues. I will direct supervisors to transparently and
    fairly provide opportunities to all entry- and mid-level professionals.
    By providing time for professional development discussions to address
    diversity, I will highlight that this is a priority for me as the
    Ambassador.

        Question 16. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 17. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 18. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Afghanistan?

        Answer. Neither I, nor any members of my immediate family have any
    financial interests in Afghanistan.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to John R. Bass by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
    Reconstruction continues to issue reports that regularly highlight
    ongoing serious challenges the United States faces in our efforts to
    support Afghans rebuild their country. What steps will you take to
    ensure accountability and transparency in U.S. programs that directly
    support the Afghan Government?

        Answer. The Department of State and USAID take seriously the
    responsibility to ensure accountability and transparency for U.S.
    taxpayer dollars. We provide the vast majority of our direct support to
    the Afghan Government through the World Bank's Afghanistan
    Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF). A large share of this assistance is
    conditions-based. Through the U.S.-Afghan New Development Partnership
    (NDP), the Afghan Government can receive up to $200 million each year
    for meeting mutually agreed-upon reform benchmarks. The World Bank also
    manages the ARTF Incentive Program, which conditions donor assistance
    to the Afghan Government on the achievement of public financial
    management and fiscal policy reforms.
        The World Bank uses a variety of monitoring tools, such as results
    frameworks and third-party monitors, to oversee the use of donor funds.
    U.S. Government officials meet regularly with World Bank staff in Kabul
    and Washington on the ARTF. We are working with the World Bank and
    other ARTF donors to identify ways to expand the scope and intensity of
    ARTF management and oversight mechanisms. Furthermore, USAID is working
    closely with the United Kingdom's Department for International
    Development (DFID) and other major ARTF donors on the fourth external
    evaluation review of the Fund. We will continue to conduct additional
    evaluations of the ARTF, as necessary, to ensure that U.S. taxpayer
    funds are used for the development purposes for which they are
    intended.
        Direct government-to-government assistance constitutes only a small
    percentage of the assistance we provide to Afghanistan. Before
    implementing such programs, USAID undertakes an extensive risk
    assessment, known as a Public Financial Management Risk Assessment
    Framework (PFMRAF), to determine whether the ministry or entity has the
    systems and controls necessary to effectively manage U.S. government
    funds. After completion of the risk assessment for a ministry, USAID
    also performs its own internal risk review. Ultimately, a system of
    safeguards is in place to ensure transparency and oversight of U.S.
    funds before USAID programs are implemented and funds are disbursed.

        Question 2. Given the extreme limitations on movement of State
    Department and USAID personnel due to security concerns, what steps
    will you take to ensure effective oversight of USG programs throughout
    the country?

        Answer. As the May 31 bombing just outside Kabul's international
    zone reminded us, Afghanistan is and will remain a dangerous place for
    U.S. diplomats and development specialists. At the same time, we
    recognize the importance of closely monitoring our programs in
    Afghanistan to ensure the appropriate and effective use of our
    assistance funding in this difficult operating environment. The
    Department of State and USAID have developed an innovative, multi-
    tiered monitoring approach for civilian assistance and public diplomacy
    programs in Afghanistan that utilizes multiple sources of information,
    including third-party monitors, reporting by implementing partners, and
    input from Afghan Government and civil society members, among others,
    to inform programmatic decision-making. This monitoring information
    allows the United States to expand programs that are working well and
    to terminate or adjust programs that are not achieving results. When
    appropriate, we have changed course to refocus resources on more
    productive programs that have a greater demonstrated impact on
    Afghanistan's development.

        Question 3. Over the past few years, we have seen Iran more boldly
    assert regional presence, including in Afghanistan. How do you evaluate
    the evolving relationship between Iran and the Taliban? What do you see
    as Iran's intended outcome with increased activity and operations in
    Afghanistan? Is Iran's goal to continue simply destabilizing
    Afghanistan?

        Answer. As Afghanistan's neighbor, Iran has an interest in Afghan
    security and stability. Iran is one of the top exporters of goods into
    Afghanistan, and is attempting to enhance its cultural and strategic
    connections with Afghan Shi'a in western and central Afghanistan. Iran
    has actively recruited thousands of Afghans to fight in Syria, both
    within the refugee population and inside the Shia population in
    Afghanistan, using a combination of religious, financial, or residency
    incentives.
        We encourage Iran, and all of Afghanistan's neighbors, to fully
    support the Afghan Government and to put pressure on the Taliban to
    enter peace talks. However, the drawdown of international forces,
    political instability in Afghanistan, and the transition of U.S.
    administrations have led Iran to continue its hedging activity with the
    Taliban--ostensibly to combat ISIS' presence in the country. Iran has
    also been vocal about its opposition to the U.S. military presence in
    Afghanistan.
        Despite reports that Tehran maintains links to the Taliban, Iran
    continues to profess support for an Afghan-led peace process and
    participates in regional fora on Afghanistan.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to John R. Bass by Senator Todd Young

        Question 1. In your prepared statement, you mention the ``Kabul
    Compact,'' also known as the ``Afghan Compact,'' a set of benchmarks
    for reforms developed by President Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah.
    These benchmarks reportedly address governance, security, peace and
    reconciliation, and economics. In an interview in late August, General
    Nicholson said, ``There are literally hundreds of milestones and
    benchmarks that the Afghans have agreed to meet.'' Both you and General
    Nicholson say that the Afghan Government has asked us to hold them
    accountable to these commitments. If confirmed, working with General
    Nicholson, do you commit to providing periodically to this committee
    and my office a detailed, specific, and written unclassified assessment
    of where the Afghan Government is falling short on these commitments
    and how Kabul plans to address these shortcomings?

        Answer. As I have done during my service as Ambassador to Georgia
    and now as Ambassador to Turkey, I look forward to engaging with
    Congress on questions regarding our assessment of host government
    actions to meet bilateral commitments made with the United States.
        I look forward to working with General Nicholson to encourage the
    Afghan Government to continue making progress on their stated
    obligations in the Kabul Compact, and intend to remain in close
    communication with Congress regarding the breadth of our relationship
    with Afghanistan.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
                Submitted to John R. Bass by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. To what extent do you agree with Afghan officials'
    assessment that Pakistan is one, if not the, crucial impediment to
    stability in Afghanistan?

       Has Pakistan played a constructive role in Afghanistan in your net
            assessment? If not, what are Pakistan's strategic
            considerations for its approach, and how, if at all, can U.S.
            action change that?

        Answer. The administration believes that stabilizing Afghanistan is
    in the interest of all countries in the region, including Pakistan. If
    confirmed as ambassador, I will work with Ambassador Hale in Islamabad
    to promote the efforts of the administration to encourage all of
    Afghanistan's neighbors to support an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned
    political reconciliation process, which is the most viable path to end
    the conflict in Afghanistan.
        Relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan have been particularly
    strained since early this year following a spate of terrorist attacks
    in both countries, with each blaming the other for harboring and
    supporting the attackers.
        To overcome these tensions, more engagement between Afghanistan and
    Pakistan on items of mutual interest is crucial. Recent high-level
    visits between both countries have been an important step. Pakistan's
    Foreign Secretary recently visited Kabul for a productive high-level
    diplomatic dialogue, with further senior level engagements planned in
    the months ahead. In addition, senior Pakistani and Afghan military
    officials recently met in Kabul and agreed to formulate an action plan
    to improve border security with coordinated actions. The administration
    welcomes these renewed efforts and supports intensification of
    dialogue.
        The Governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan should redouble their
    standing commitment to deepen counterterrorism cooperation against all
    groups that pose a long-term security threat to both countries.
    Pakistan has been an important partner in combating anti-State
    terrorist groups, such as the Pakistani Taliban, al-Qa'ida, and ISIS in
    South Asia. Pakistan needs to disavow, and deny safe haven to,
    terrorist organizations that target its neighbors. Pakistan has much to
    gain from partnering with our efforts in the region, including the
    facilitation of a peace process that will lead to a stable, peaceful
    Afghanistan, the defeat of ISIS in South Asia, and the elimination of
    terrorist groups that threaten both Pakistan and the United States.

        Question 2. Do you consider the reportedly growing role of Russia
    and Iran in Afghanistan a strategic threat to the U.S.? Why or why not?
    Why would these former Taliban opponents now support the group?

        Answer. Both Iran and Russia have mixed records in Afghanistan,
    which is a matter of concern. Especially in recent years, as the ISIS
    threat has grown, both countries have pursued hedging strategies that
    include modest support for the Taliban. We expect that our new South
    Asia strategy, with its clear commitment to Afghanistan, will temper
    this hedging behavior.
        As Afghanistan's neighbor, Iran has an interest in Afghan security
    and stability. Iran is one of the top exporters of goods to
    Afghanistan, and is attempting to enhance its cultural and strategic
    connections with Afghan Shi'a in western and central Afghanistan. Iran
    has actively recruited thousands of Afghans to fight in Syria, both
    within the refugee population and inside the Shi'a population in
    Afghanistan, using a combination of religious, financial, or residency
    incentives.
        We encourage Iran, and all of Afghanistan's neighbors, to fully
    support the Afghan Government and to put pressure on the Taliban to
    enter peace talks. Despite reports that Tehran maintains links to the
    Taliban, Iran continues to profess support for an Afghan-led peace
    process and participates in regional fora on Afghanistan.
        Similarly, Russia has expressed an interest in Afghan security and
    stability. While Russia maintains diplomatic ties with the Afghan
    Government it has also been vocal about its opposition to the U.S.
    military presence in Afghanistan. We have called on Russia to fully
    support the Afghanistan Government and efforts to ensure safety and
    stability within its borders. We continue to encourage Russia to expand
    discussions on how we might cooperate to support Afghanistan and to
    foster a peace process between the Afghan Government and the Taliban.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Justin Siberell by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. The 2011 Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry
    (BICI), an independent outside review commission, issued 26
    recommendations to hold the Government accountable for its suppression
    of the 2011 uprising. How many of those recommendations has the
    Government implemented? If confirmed, how do you plan to encourage the
    Government to fully implement all of the recommendations?

        Answer. For a thorough analysis of Bahrain's implementation of the
    BICI recommendations, please refer to the Department of State's report
    corresponding to the Bahrain section of Senate Report 114-79, delivered
    to the Senate on June 21, 2016. In the time since publishing that
    report, we have noted new and continued restrictions on the existence
    and operation of political societies, restrictions on free expression,
    assembly, and association; and lack of due process in the legal system.
    We have repeatedly voiced concern about these issues and urged the
    Government of Bahrain, at the highest levels, to reinvigorate its
    reform program, make the political system more inclusive, and rebuild
    trust between the Government and citizens. If confirmed, I will
    continue to urge the Government of Bahrain to take steps to ensure
    inclusive elections in 2018 and to advance reform efforts for the
    benefit of Bahrain's long-term security and our mutual interests in
    regional stability.

        Question 2. Over the past year, Bahrain has dramatically cracked
    down against human rights defenders, civil society, and peaceful
    leaders in the opposition. Specifically, they banned the country's
    largest opposition party, have not fulfilled the 26 recommendations of
    the Bahrain Independent Commission on Inquiry (BICI) report that the
    King publicly committed to implementing, and reversed the few BICI-
    related reforms they had implemented. If confirmed as U.S. Ambassador
    to Bahrain, how will you encourage the Government of Bahrain to respect
    the basic human rights of its citizens and implement genuine political
    reforms?

        Answer. These are Bahraini challenges that will require Bahraini
    solutions, but Bahrain's partners can also be supportive of the
    process. If confirmed, I will encourage reform, reconciliation, and
    respect for rights in Bahrain, and these issues will be at the center
    of my engagement with the Government and people of Bahrain.

        Question 3. Bahrain is ranked 164th out of 180 countries in
    Reporters sans Frontieres (RSF) 2017 World Press Freedom Index, falling
    into the ``black zone'' in the past year. RSF notes that there are
    currently 14 journalists in prison in Bahrain. The Bahraini Government
    has intensified its censorship efforts against foreign journalists
    deemed critical of the Government, including denying accreditation,
    restricting visas, and blocking news websites. If confirmed, what role
    can you and the U.S. Government play in ensuring the Government
    respects freedom of press and freedom of expression? Do you commit to
    raising press freedom violations with Bahraini authorities?

        Answer. We regularly raise concerns about restrictions on the
    press, freedom of expression, and other human rights issues with the
    Government of Bahrain. If confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to
    have an open and honest dialogue with Bahrain on the full range of
    issues affecting our bilateral relationship, including these. A free
    and independent press allowed to peacefully voice a wide spectrum of
    views plays a vital role in inclusive, pluralistic governments and
    societies.

        Question 4. Nabeel Rajab is a prominent human rights activists who
    is currently in prison on charges related to tweets and a television
    interview. On July 10, 2017, the State Department put out a statement
    expressing their disappointment for the sentencing of Mr. Rajab and
    urging the Government of Bahrain to ``abide by its international
    obligations and commitments to respect human rights and fundamental
    freedoms, including the freedom of expression.'' What is your plan for
    dealing with the Bahraini authorities when it comes to freedom of
    expression and politicized trials like those of Nabeel Rajab? If
    confirmed, do you commit to raising the case of Nabeel Rajab as well as
    other political prisoners and urge the Government to unconditionally
    release him and others? If confirmed, do you commit to providing my
    office with regular updates on Embassy Manama's efforts to press for
    Nabeel Rajab's release as well as other political prisoners?

        Answer. We were disappointed by the July 10 verdict sentencing
    Nabeel Rajab to two years in prison. I understand he could face an
    additional 15 years in prison for tweets he made that were critical of
    Bahrain's involvement in the war in Yemen. We have repeatedly expressed
    our concern about his cases at the highest levels and called for his
    release. If confirmed, I will be happy to provide your office updates
    on this and other types of engagement with the Government of Bahrain.
        Imprisonment and detention of individuals on politically motivated
    charges undermines the right of political expression and compromises
    the atmosphere for reconciliation. We have repeatedly voiced concern
    about these issues, both publicly and privately, at the highest levels,
    urged the Government of Bahrain to abide by its international legal
    obligations and to focus on issues such as judicial reform, making the
    political system more inclusive, and rebuilding trust between the
    Government and citizens. These are all issues that, if confirmed, I
    would continue to engage on.

        Question 5. The State Department's 2017 International Religious
    Freedom Report found that the Government of Bahrain continued to
    discriminate systematically against its Shia Muslim population. At the
    release of the report, Secretary of State Tillerson stated, ``The
    [Bahraini] Government continued to detain and arrest Shia clerics,
    community members, and opposition politicians. Members of the Shia
    community there continue to report ongoing discrimination in government
    employment, education, and the justice system. Bahrain must stop
    discrimination against the Shia communities.'' If confirmed, how will
    you persuade the Bahraini Government to respect religious freedom and
    stop the systematic discrimination against its Shia population?

        Answer. We will urge the Government to end discrimination against
    Shia in government employment and education; to pursue reconciliation
    between the Government and Shia communities; and to allow prisoners to
    practice their religions. We will also continue to condemn the unfair
    detention, harassment, and revocation of citizenship of nonviolent Shia
    religious figures and activists. Additionally, we will advocate for the
    Government to pursue political reforms, which would take into
    consideration the needs of all citizens regardless of religious
    affiliation.

        Question 6. Bahrain is on Tier 2 of the Trafficking in Persons
    Report of 2017. What can the U.S. do to help the Government improve its
    efforts to combat and eliminate human trafficking in all its forms?

        Answer. Bahrain has made progress in addressing human trafficking
    within its borders by developing a national referral mechanism,
    promoting a national anti-trafficking strategy, investigating potential
    trafficking cases, and taking steps to amend elements of the
    sponsorship system that increases workers' vulnerability to forced
    labor and debt bondage.
        There is more that can be done, as indicated in the State
    Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report. If confirmed, I will
    urge the Government to investigate, prosecute, and convict traffickers,
    particularly cases involving forced labor or allegedly complicit
    officials. I will also urge the Government of Bahrain to implement
    procedures to identify trafficking victims among vulnerable groups,
    such as domestic workers and women in prostitution, and make efforts to
    ensure identified trafficking victims are not punished for unlawful
    acts committed as a direct result of being subjected to trafficking,
    such as illegal migration or prostitution.

        Question 7. Bahrain remains geographically strategic to combating
    threats in the Middle East. Do you believe the U.S. 5th Fleet
    Headquarters should remain based in Bahrain? What efforts should be
    made to ensure the long-term viability of the U.S. military presence
    there?

        Answer. Yes, I believe the U.S. Fifth Fleet Headquarters should
    remain based in Bahrain. The operational and logistical support that
    the Kingdom provides our military is essential to the success of our
    campaign against ISIS and enables our Navy to lead a 31-country
    international coalition that counters piracy, drug trafficking, and
    terrorism across 2.5 million square miles of ocean and seas.
        Bahrain faces persistent threats from Iran, including Iran's
    training and supply of lethal aid to individuals and groups targeting
    the Government and security forces of Bahrain. This also represents a
    challenge to the long-term viability of our military presence there. I
    look forward to cooperating closely with colleagues across the
    Departments of State and Defense to continue to support Bahrain's armed
    forces to address these and other shared threats.
        In addition, our counterterrorism and military cooperation with
    Bahrain is paired with a clear understanding that Bahrain's own long-
    term stability and security depend on it achieving political
    reconciliation and upholding its commitments to universal human rights.
    If confirmed, I will continue to urge the Government of Bahrain to take
    steps to ensure inclusive elections in 2018 and to advance reform
    efforts for the benefit of Bahrain's long-term security and our mutual
    interests in regional stability.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Justin Siberell by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promotion of democracy and human rights has been an
    important priority for me throughout my 24-year Foreign Service career.
        As a first-tour Political Officer in Panama from 1993-1995 shortly
    after Operation Just Cause, I worked with political party
    representatives, including those linked to the former Noriega
    Government, to engage constructively in the general elections of 1994,
    and served as an accredited elections observer for that same election.
        As Desk Officer for Iran from 1998-2000, I drafted the State
    Department's Human Rights Report chapter on Iran and worked closely
    with opposition and dissident groups to call attention to the Iranian
    regime's systematic repression of political opponents and perceived
    enemies, for instance the Baha'i community.
        As Press Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Amman from 2002-2005, I
    worked with our diplomats, USAID professionals and civil society
    representatives to highlight U.S. efforts to strengthen democratic
    processes in Jordan, even as regional events put significant pressure
    on democratic reforms. I organized a series of training programs for
    Iraqi journalists in Amman on the role of a free press in a democratic
    system, and made use of speaker programs administered by the State
    Department's Bureau of International Information Programs to invite
    prominent U.S. academics and democracy experts to engage local
    audiences.
        As Acting Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the Department of
    State from 2016-2017, I advocated for international approaches to
    countering terrorism within a strong rule of law framework that ensures
    the protection of human rights and civil liberties. Through U.S.-led
    initiatives within the Global Counterterrorism Forum, as an example, we
    achieved the adoption of ``good practice'' documents that have
    influenced governments not to accept a false tradeoff between effective
    counterterrorism practice and protection of such liberties. I ensured
    also that all U.S.-funded counterterrorism programming for which the CT
    Bureau was responsible adhered to requirements under the Leahy Law, and
    promoted international attention upon and justice for the victims of
    terrorist violence, including minority communities.
        If confirmed, I will remain committed to the promotion of human
    rights and democracy in carrying out my responsibilities representing
    the United States in Bahrain.

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

        Answer. The most serious human rights problems in Bahrain include
    restrictions on the existence and operation of political societies,
    restrictions on free expression, assembly, and association; and lack of
    due process in the legal system, including arrests without warrants or
    charges and lengthy pretrial detentions--used especially in cases
    against opposition members and political or human rights activists.
        If confirmed, I will continue the Embassy's discussion with both
    government and opposition actors with the aim of their agreeing on a
    roadmap to an inclusive 2018 parliamentary election.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Bahrain in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. These are Bahraini challenges that will require Bahraini
    solutions, but Bahrain's partners can also be supportive of the
    process. I expect the broader regional political context to complicate
    and aggravate Bahrain's efforts to address its human rights challenges.

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

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed I am committed to meeting with a broad
    spectrum of stakeholders, including human rights, civil society and
    other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and in Bahrain.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Bahrain to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted Bahrain?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, the embassy team and I will continue to
    engage with the Bahraini Government to address cases of key detainees
    in Bahrain.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, we will continue to thoroughly vet all
    individuals and units nominated to participate in U.S.-funded security
    assistance activities or to receive equipment, in accordance with the
    Leahy law. If we find credible information of a gross violation of
    human rights, we will take the necessary steps in accordance with the
    law and Department policy, including working to ensure the responsible
    parties do not participate in U.S.-funded training.

        Question 7. Will you engage with the people of Bahrain on matters
    of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, human rights, civil rights, and
    governance issues will be a consistent and core component of my
    engagement with the people of Bahrain.

        Question 8. What will you do to build people-to-people ties between
    Americans and Bahrainis and to support Bahrain civil society, human
    rights activists, and independent media? What do you need from
    Washington-based U.S. officials on this?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to engage with a broad spectrum
    of Bahraini Government and society and encourage U.S. Government
    visitors to do the same, when appropriate. I encourage Congressional
    delegations to visit Bahrain and to meet with Bahraini groups in
    Washington.
        Hundreds of Bahraini students come to the United States each year
    to attend U.S. colleges and universities, providing Bahrainis with a
    deeper understanding of American society and the American people, and
    more than 2,500 Bahrainis have participated in official cultural and
    academic exchanges over several decades, including the Fulbright
    Program. Many Bahrainis have also benefited from participating in
    International Visitor Leadership Program visits to the U.S. If
    confirmed, I look forward to supporting programs like these.

        Question 9. During my review of the proposed sale of F-16 fighter
    aircraft to Bahrain, I sent a letter to Secretary Tillerson on May 11,
    2017 to raise my concerns regarding Bahraini Government policies. In
    reply, I received two letters. One from Acting Assistant Secretary of
    State for Legislative Affairs Joe McManus on May 24, 2017 and a second
    letter from Deputy Secretary Sullivan on June 29, 2017. Please confirm
    that you have reviewed this correspondence. Can you provide the same
    assurance as Deputy Secretary Sullivan, that you will encourage reform,
    reconciliation, and respect for rights in Bahrain, and that these
    issues will be the center of your diplomatic engagement with the
    Kingdom of Bahrain?

        Answer. I have reviewed the correspondence and affirm my commitment
    to advance the objectives identified therein. If confirmed, I will
    encourage reform, reconciliation, and respect for rights in Bahrain,
    and these issues will be at the center of my engagement with the
    Government and people of Bahrain.

        Question 10. I am concerned by developments since the beginning of
    2017 that indicate backsliding on implementation of recommendations
    from the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI), and even
    Bahraini Government decisions to reverse previous decisions. For
    example, on April 3 Bahrain's National Assembly and the King approved a
    Constitutional amendment authorizing military courts to try civilians
    in cases of terrorism. This move appears to reverse BICI Recommendation
    1720, which required the Government transfer all military court cases
    from 2011 to civil courts for review. In your assessment, does the
    Bahraini Government remain committed to implementing BICI
    recommendations? What steps will you take as Ambassador to motivate the
    Bahraini Government to commit to the reform program outlined in the
    BICI?

        Answer. We have repeatedly voiced concern about these issues and
    urged the Government of Bahrain, at the highest levels, to reinvigorate
    its reform program, make the political system more inclusive, and
    rebuild trust between the Government and citizens. If confirmed, I will
    continue to urge the Government of Bahrain to take steps to ensure
    inclusive elections in 2018 and to advance reform efforts for the
    benefit of Bahrain's long-term security and our mutual interests in
    regional stability.

        Question 11. How will you work with the Bahraini Government to
    address the gaps that still concern human trafficking?

        Answer. Bahrain has made progress in addressing human trafficking
    within its borders by developing a national referral mechanism,
    promoting a national anti-trafficking strategy, investigating potential
    trafficking cases, and taking steps to amend elements of the
    sponsorship system that increases workers' vulnerability to forced
    labor and debt bondage.
        There is more that can be done, as indicated in the State
    Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report. If confirmed, I will
    urge the Government to investigate, prosecute, and convict traffickers,
    particularly cases involving forced labor or allegedly complicit
    officials. I will also urge the Government of Bahrain to implement
    procedures to identify trafficking victims among vulnerable groups,
    such as domestic workers and women in prostitution, and make efforts to
    ensure identified trafficking victims are not punished for unlawful
    acts committed as a direct result of being subjected to trafficking,
    such as illegal migration or prostitution.

        Question 12. How do you plan to work with the Department of Labor,
    and non-government organizations, to assess Bahrain's compliance with
    the labor protection provisions of the U.S.-Bahrain Free Trade
    Agreement?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue working with the Department
    of Labor and U.S. Trade Representative on engaging the Government of
    Bahrain on its labor commitments under our Free Trade Agreement. I will
    welcome the contributions of civil society throughout this process.

        Question 13. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. My career in the Foreign Service has taught me the value of
    a diverse workforce. If confirmed, I will work to advance equal
    employment opportunity and ensure each member of our workforce,
    regardless of background, has the opportunity to grow professionally
    and pursue positions of leadership in the State Department and
    throughout the U.S. Government.

        Question 14. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that all supervisors take
    mandatory EEO training and strictly adhere to related laws and
    policies. I will emphasize the necessity of transparency, fairness, and
    inclusivity when making hiring decisions, my assessment of my
    subordinates' performance will include evaluation of their commitment
    to diversity, and I will take immediate corrective action if I learn of
    any incident that does not reflect the value the United States and the
    State Department place on diversity and respect for all.

        Question 15. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 16. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 17. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Bahrain?

        Answer. No.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Justin Siberell by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. Over the past year, the Bahraini Government has
    continued and escalated its crackdown on freedom of expression,
    particularly against human rights defenders and peaceful opposition
    leaders. This administration has seemed to indicate that human rights
    will not remain a priority for the United States, in Bahrain in
    particular. Will you actively engage with civil society leaders in
    Bahrain? Will you continue to stress the importance of respecting
    fundamental human rights and democratic values in Bahrain? Will you
    engage with the Bahraini Government about its ban of opposition parties
    and stress the importance of democratic institutions, particularly as
    Bahrain heads into parliamentary elections next year?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Embassy's engagement with
    government, civil society, and nonviolent opposition actors to
    encourage the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental
    freedoms, while working specifically towards inclusive 2018
    parliamentary elections. U.S. Government actions in support of these
    aims reflect our strong belief that political reform and promotion of
    human rights protections are in Bahrain's long-term security interest
    and consistent with our mutual interest in regional stability.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Justin Siberell by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. Bahrain has been one of our country's closest defense
    partners in the Gulf, home of the Fifth Fleet and thousands of American
    men and women in uniform. Yet Bahrain's response to the uprising in
    2011 and subsequent crackdown has complicated relations between our two
    nations.
        While the country began to make slow progress through
    implementation of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry,
    according to Amnesty International and others, the progress has
    severely reversed in the last year.
        Amnesty International's recent report documents in horrific detail
    the steps Bahraini authorities have taken to crush any independent
    voices, closing down political parties, jailing well-known human rights
    activists, and backtracking on promised reforms.

       How do you think we should balance our strategic priorities with
            our commitment to human rights?

        Answer. Enhancing our security cooperation with Bahrain does not
    diminish the consistent emphasis we place on human rights issues.
    Indeed, our counterterrorism and military cooperation with Bahrain is
    paired with a clear understanding that Bahrain's own long-term
    stability and security depend on the country achieving political
    reconciliation and upholding its commitments to universal human rights.
    We continue to be concerned with government actions against nonviolent
    political and human rights actors, and will continue to urge the
    Government of Bahrain to take steps to ensure inclusive elections in
    2018 and to advance reform efforts for the benefit of Bahrain's long-
    term security and our mutual interests in regional stability. If
    confirmed, I will work to ensure that we continue to have an open and
    honest dialogue with Bahrain on the full range of issues affecting our
    bilateral relationship, including human rights.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to J. Steven Dowd by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. In 2016, U.S. firms accounted for only .4 percent of
    African Development Bank procurement contracts. Would you commit to
    working with the U.S. business community and the African Development
    Bank to expand opportunities for U.S. firms?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, this will be one of my top priorities.

        Question 2. In 2016, the World Bank provided roughly four times as
    much financing in Africa as the African Development Bank. How can the
    African Development Bank differentiate itself from other multilateral
    lenders and donors in Africa?

        Answer. In recent years, the AfDB has developed a strong track
    record in infrastructure and fragile and conflict-affected states.
    Approximately half of the AfDB's financing has been to infrastructure,
    and the Bank has emerged as a leader in its approach to addressing the
    underlying drivers of instability in fragile states (e.g., weak
    governance, food insecurity). Given Africa's infrastructure gap and
    fragility challenges, the AfDB should continue to focus on and enhance
    its work in these areas.

        Question 3. What do you see as the most important challenges facing
    the African Development Bank? On which areas of the Bank's agenda would
    you like to concentrate your efforts during your term?

        Answer. I believe some of the AfDB's most important challenges
    surround President Adesina's ambitious institutional reforms. These
    include his ``High 5'' strategic priorities (energy, agriculture,
    industrialization, regional integration, and quality of life) and his
    significant organizational reforms. Reforms of this scale are difficult
    to execute but have the potential to markedly enhance efficiency and
    impact. If confirmed, my top priorities will include: ensuring
    effective implementation of the AfDB's reform agenda; further enhancing
    the AfDB's efforts to reduce instability and create jobs in fragile and
    conflict-affected states; and increasing opportunities for U.S.
    businesses at the AfDB and in Africa, including by strengthening the
    investment climate in African countries.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to J. Steven Dowd by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Having worked only in private industry, issues of human
    rights and democracy generally do not arise directly. However, I can
    say that, no matter where or with whom I conducted business, the
    ethical treatment of employees, contractors, and others was always the
    highest priority.

        Question 2. If confirmed, how will you take into account labor
    rights, land rights, and other relevant human rights considerations
    when financing and supporting ADF's development projects?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will also use my position on the Board of
    Executive Directors to try and ensure that all projects meet the AfDB's
    safeguards policies, which address labor rights, land rights, and other
    considerations. I will also work closely with the Treasury Department
    to follow all relevant legislative mandates.
    Diversity

        Question 3. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will promote, mentor and support my staff
    who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups,
    consistent with fair management practices and relevant AfDB policies.

        Question 4. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the ADF are fostering an environment that is diverse and
    inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will use my oversight role on the AfDB's
    Board of Executive Directors to try and ensure that AfDB management
    fosters an environment that is diverse and inclusive. I will also
    advocate for these issues to be considered, as appropriate, in the
    development and review of policies in the AfDB's human resources
    committee. The United States will sit on this committee in the coming
    year.
    Conflicts of Interest

        Question 5. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the Inspector General) any change in policy or U.S. actions that
    you suspect may be influenced by any of the President's business or
    financial interests, or the business or financial interests of any
    senior White House staff?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to carrying out my duties consistent
    with applicable conflict of interest laws and policies, and to
    reporting any potential misconduct of which I become aware to the
    appropriate authorities.

        Question 6. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to carrying out my duties consistent
    with applicable conflict of interest laws and policies, and to
    reporting any potential misconduct of which I become aware to the
    appropriate authorities.

        Question 7. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Africa?

        Answer. Neither I nor any member of my family has any financial
    interests in Africa.
    Growing New Markets
        Question 8. What is your evaluation of the capital needs of the
    region?

        Answer. Africa indeed faces significant capital needs. According to
    a recent World Bank report, the region's annual infrastructure needs
    are around $90 billion, of which only half is currently being met.
    African businesses also need capital if they are to serve as engines of
    growth and job creation for the continent. Foreign investment and donor
    resources are an important source of capital, but Africans are also
    working to mobilize domestic resources more effectively. Improved
    domestic resource mobilization by governments and deeper, stronger
    capital markets will be important to address the continent's investment
    gaps.

        Question 9. When we look at these rapidly growing economies, what
    role do you see for U.S. foreign assistance in opening new markets for
    American businesses?

        Answer. I believe that U.S. foreign assistance can play a critical
    role in opening markets for American businesses. The AfDB can increase
    opportunities for American businesses in Africa in a number of ways,
    including by: strengthening government transparency and procurement
    procedures, pro-business policies, and rule of law; helping develop
    critical infrastructure; and supporting the development of a robust
    African private sector, thereby boosting potential demand for U.S.
    goods and services.

        Question 10. Please evaluate the differences in the AfDB's
    approaches in North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa, and in oil-exporting
    and oil-importing countries.

        Answer. In the last few years, the AfDB's approach in North Africa
    has focused on strengthening governance, developing infrastructure, and
    supporting private sector growth. The AfDB has taken a broader approach
    in Sub-Saharan Africa, supporting various types of projects across the
    AfDB's ``High 5'' strategic priority areas (energy, agriculture,
    industrialization, regional integration, and quality of life), and
    placing a particular emphasis on addressing the underlying drivers of
    fragility.
        Recent economic developments since the downturn in commodity
    prices, including oil, have shown that more diversified African
    economies have withstood these shocks better and seen stronger,
    sustained growth. The AfDB's approach in oil-exporting and oil-
    importing countries in Sub-Saharan African differs mostly in the
    starting point of each country. The AfDB is working to support private
    sector growth and diversification in all its countries of operation. In
    countries that have relied solely on oil exports to generate growth and
    government revenue, this may require the AfDB to support more
    fundamental reforms to the general business climate and other policies.

        Question 11. What is your evaluation of China's development finance
    efforts in Africa and increased engagement in the AfDB? Should this be
    a source of concern to U.S. policymakers?

        Answer. While China has ramped up its investment in Africa, this
    has not been matched by a significant increase in its contribution to
    the AfDB. China will provide less than three percent of donor
    contributions to the fourteenth replenishment of the African
    Development Fund. This should be a source of concern. AfDB financing
    meets high standards in areas such as environmental and social
    safeguards and procurement, while Chinese financing through other means
    may not achieve these standards.
        I am also concerned that Chinese financing may contribute to or
    exacerbate debt sustainability issues in certain African countries. The
    AfDB has a number of mechanisms to ensure its projects do not
    contribute to debt distress--most notably, countries that are at high-
    risk of debt distress are only eligible to receive grants, while
    countries at moderate risk are only eligible for a mix of grants and
    zero-interest loans. Chinese financing may not take these risks into
    account.

        Question 12. What is your assessment of President Adesina's ``high
    5'' agenda and his presidency to date?

        Answer. I believe that President Adesina has an ambitious vision
    for the AfDB that has significant potential. His ``High 5'' priorities
    help narrow the AfDB's strategic focus, and his ongoing institutional
    reforms are designed to improve its efficiency and effectiveness. The
    key is effective implementation of this agenda. Among other things,
    this requires focusing on the AfDB's comparative advantages in areas
    such as infrastructure and fragile states, as well as the achievement
    of development results.

        Question 13. How do you see the division of labor between the World
    Bank and the African Development Bank? What further measures, if any,
    could be undertaken to increase coordination and reduce redundancies?

        Answer. While the World Bank has expertise across a broad range of
    areas, the AfDB is smaller, with specific areas of expertise and
    comparative advantage. The AfDB should narrowly focus on its High 5
    strategic priorities (energy, agriculture, industrialization, regional
    integration, and quality of life). It should place particular emphasis
    on infrastructure and fragile and conflict-affected states, two areas
    where it has a strong track record. I understand that the World Bank
    and AfDB coordinate closely on their engagement in many African
    countries, though the exact level of coordination varies by country. If
    confirmed, I will seek to further enhance and systematize this
    coordination.
    Post Conflict Role of the African Development Bank
        Question 14. What role do you see for the African Development Back
    to play in post conflict reconstruction and peace building?

        Answer. I see the AfDB playing a significant role. Twenty of the
    AfDB's client countries are fragile and conflict-affected states, and
    the AfDB has been a leader in addressing the underlying drivers of
    instability in these countries (e.g., weak governance, food
    insecurity). I believe that the AfDB should continue its efforts to
    strengthen the public and private sectors in fragile and conflict-
    affected states.
    Corruption
        Question 15. What will you do to continue the progress towards
    combatting corruption both within the Bank and in member countries?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will use my oversight role on the AfDB's
    Board of Executive Directors to ensure that AfDB projects meet high
    procurement and anti-corruption standards. I will also seek to further
    strengthen the AfDB's anti-corruption investigation unit and
    independent accountability mechanism, so that any potential misuse of
    AfDB funding is promptly investigated. The AfDB has a number of
    programs to strengthen governance and reduce corruption in its member
    countries, and I will be a strong supporter of these efforts.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to J. Steven Dowd bySenator John Barrasso

        Question 1. When reviewing projects at the African Development
    Bank, what criterion will you use in determining whether the United
    States will support energy development projects?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Treasury
    Department to review energy projects against the new, broader,
    objectives recently set forth by Treasury. This includes supporting
    energy projects that go to the core of supporting a country's
    development. This can and should include helping countries access and
    use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently. By pursuing projects
    that employ a mix of energy sources, the AfDB can support the
    development of robust, efficient, competitive, and integrated global
    markets for energy.
        Support for a project will also depend on its consistency with
    legislative mandates and administration policies.

        Question 2. Do you believe the African Development Bank should
    support all types of energy resources in order to provide Sub-Saharan
    Africa with the electricity it needs to grow their way out of poverty?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will consider a broad range of power
    projects that help African countries have a diversified mix of energy
    sources. I believe that Treasury's new energy guidance provides the
    flexibility to approve projects designed to meet developing economies'
    energy needs, ensure energy security, and promote economic growth.

        Question 3. Will you vote in support of energy development projects
    that include oil, coal and natural gas at the African Development Bank?

        Answer. My understanding is that Treasury's newly revised energy
    guidance provides U.S. Executive Directors with the flexibility to
    approve a broad range of power projects, including those that support
    countries to use fossil fuels. If confirmed, I will consider a broad
    range of power projects to promote access to affordable and reliable
    energy that will contribute to raising living standards across Africa.

        Question 4. Coal provides an affordable and reliable energy source
    which is important to countries looking for assistance in poverty
    alleviation and economic development. Do you agree with this statement?
    If not, why not?

        Answer. I believe that it is important for countries to have
    affordable and reliable access to energy. If confirmed, I will evaluate
    each AfDB energy project on an individual basis, weighing various
    factors including the project's potential poverty alleviation and
    economic development benefits. Helping countries access and use fossil
    fuels more cleanly and efficiently is a key objective of Treasury's
    revised energy guidance. It is my expectation that this includes
    support for coal-fired power projects.

        Question 5. Do you believe economic feasibility and the potential
    to provide maximum access to energy with maximum efficiency must be the
    biggest factors when evaluating projects?

        Answer. If confirmed, I'm committed to using the U.S. voice and
    vote at AfDB to grow economies on the African continent, which
    ultimately will reduce poverty and raise living standards. A key
    consideration for each project should be the economic and development
    impact likely to be realized, including for energy projects. Treasury's
    revised energy guidance allows the U.S. additional flexibility in
    pursuing those projects at the AfDB that make the most sense for the
    country of operation.

        Question 6. What proportion of procurement contracts at the African
    Development Bank and the African Development Fund is awarded to U.S.
    businesses? What proportion of these contracts is awarded to Chinese
    businesses? What specific steps would you advocate for at the African
    Development Bank and the African Development Fund to increase the
    percentage of contracts awarded to U.S. companies?

        Answer. The AfDB estimates that in 2016, 0.4 percent of AfDB and
    AfDF contracts were awarded to U.S. firms, and 22.1 percent were
    awarded to Chinese firms. It is my understanding that there are serious
    difficulties in tracking procurement awards by country of origin,
    including accounting for intermediate jurisdictions or contracts that
    are implemented through sub-contractors, so the data may underreport
    U.S. procurement. In 2016, with strong U.S. support, the AfDB
    introduced a revised procurement policy that better takes into account
    the principles of ``value-for-money'' and ``fit-for-purpose.'' This
    policy should increase opportunities for U.S. firms, which have a
    competitive advantage in higher-value, long-term procurement contracts,
    as opposed to those that focus on the lowest cost. If confirmed, one of
    my top priorities will be ensuring this revised policy is effectively
    implemented.

        Question 7. What do you believe is an appropriate role for China to
    play at the African Development Bank and African Development Fund?

        Answer. I believe it is appropriate for China to co-finance AfDB
    projects and increase its contribution to the AfDF to a level that is
    more consistent with its economic status. China will provide less than
    three percent of donor contributions to the fourteenth replenishment of
    the African Development Fund. Chinese financing that occurs through the
    AfDB or in the form of co-financing is held to high standards in areas
    such as environmental and social safeguards and procurement, and takes
    into account the recipient country's risk of debt distress. Chinese
    financing through other means may not achieve these standards.

        Question 8. What is your view of China's Asian Infrastructure
    Investment Bank and the Chinese investment efforts in Africa? How do
    these efforts compliment or duplicate efforts at the African
    Development Bank?

        Answer. Africa has a significant infrastructure gap, and the AIIB
    and Chinese investment in Africa can play an important role in
    infrastructure finance. It is important, however, that this finance
    meets high standards in areas such as environmental and social
    safeguards and procurement, and takes into account the recipient
    country's risk of debt distress. Given Africa's infrastructure needs I
    believe Chinese investment can certainly complement the AfDB's efforts,
    especially if done through co-financing and close partnership with the
    AfDB on individual projects.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
               Submitted to J. Steven Dowd by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. One of the Obama administration's main initiatives on
    the continent was Power Africa, an effort led by USAID to help
    significantly increase power generation across Africa. I would point
    out that this initiative has not only helped to bring thousands of
    megawatts of electricity online in countries across Africa but has also
    led to hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. exports.
        In a speech last year, the AfDB's Senior Vice-President stated that
    Africa's most important challenge was the lack of electricity, with
    some 645 million people without access. As a result, the AfDB is
    investing $12 billion in the energy sector over the next five years and
    hopes to leverage tens of billions more.

       Can you speak about where you think the lack of electricity ranks
            among the continent's biggest development challenges and how
            you think the AfDB and Power Africa can collaborate to address
            this critical problem?

        Answer. I believe that electricity is one of the continent's
    largest development challenges and offers significant opportunities for
    U.S. businesses. Lack of electricity is cited frequently as a top
    constraint for businesses in Africa, and Congress emphasized the
    importance of this issue in the bipartisan Electrify Africa Act of
    2015. It is appropriate for energy to be one of the AfDB's ``High 5''
    strategic priorities. I understand that the AfDB is a Power Africa
    partner, and the two parties are collaborating closely on specific
    investments and policy reforms. If confirmed, I will work to support
    this joint effort to address one of the continent's greatest needs in
    ways that leverage the expertise and financing of U.S. businesses.

        Question 2. Africa today contains 7 out of 13 of the world's
    fastest growing economies including the Ivory Coast, Tanzania, Senegal,
    Rwanda, and Kenya, which are all growing at or above 6 percent of their
    GDP. As you no doubt know well, China has been increasing its
    investments and diplomatic engagement across Africa at a ferocious
    speed. While it is a member and has a smaller share than us in the
    African Development Bank, its own financing mechanisms and initiatives
    have made it a top partner of many governments on the continent and
    recently the continent's largest trading partner. I am concerned that
    we are unwittingly ceding strategic partnerships and opportunities in
    Africa to China.

       How do you view the United States' engagement through the AfDB as
            part of our economic statecraft with Africa and how do you plan
            to work with colleagues at OPIC, the Millennium Challenge
            Corporation, the World Bank, and elsewhere in pursuit of a
            coordinated U.S. strategy?

        Answer. I believe U.S. engagement at the AfDB plays an important
    role in our economic approach to Africa. Working through the AfDB, we
    create opportunities for U.S. businesses by strengthening the
    investment climate in African countries. We also ensure that projects
    meet international best practices in areas such as environmental and
    social safeguards and procurement, and take into account the recipient
    country's risk of debt distress. If confirmed, I will work closely with
    my interagency colleagues to coordinate closely, with each party, as
    appropriate, focusing on its areas of comparative advantage. This will
    allow us to maximize our effectiveness.

        Question 3. Africa's youth population has been increasing faster
    than in any other part of the world. A young population can be a
    resource that leads to innovation and supports governance and political
    reforms. However, a large youth population that is not gainfully
    employed can also be a liability, further undermining growth prospects.
    Africa's youth present a formidable challenge that requires careful
    interventions.

       How do you think that the African Development Bank can contribute
            to stability and economic growth by tapping into the youth
            bulge in Africa?

        Answer. I agree that Africa's youth bulge represents both a
    significant opportunity and potential risk, and I believe the AfDB can
    play a key role in ensuring it has a positive impact. By strengthening
    the investment climate in African countries and supporting private
    sector growth, the AfDB can help to ensure there are job opportunities.
    At the same time, it can help provide the youth with the skills to
    match these opportunities through its education and training programs.
    I note that creating jobs for youth is a core focus of one of the
    AfDB's ``High 5'' strategic priority areas.

                                   __________

      Letter to President Donald J. Trump from the Wyoming Congressional
        Delegation Opposing the Return of the Bells of Balangiga to the
                                  Philippines

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Rubio,
    Johnson, Flake, Gardner, Young, Barrasso, Isakson, Cardin,
    Shaheen, Coons, Udall, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, Merkley, and
    Booker.
        Also Present: Senators Cornyn, Manchin, and Lee.

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

        The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        We have an unusual procedure today. As usual, we will defer
    to the outstanding Senators who are here to introduce others.
    And we thank them for being here. It is an honor to have you
    here in our committee. But we will let them go first, so that
    they can go on to their other business.
        We will then adjourn and convene the business meeting for
    just a moment, and hopefully pass some nominees out and pass
    some bills out. Then we will resume with the great testimony
    that we know we will hear from our nominees.
        So with that, again, we welcome you. If I remember the
    seniority order, I know that Senator Cornyn is first in
    seniority. We thank you for being back here again with another
    great Texan. I do not know whether it is Senator Lee or Senator
    Manchin who came next. I think I will let you guys arm wrestle
    over that while Senator Cornyn gives his comments.
        But, again, thank you so much for being willing to come and
    make good comments about outstanding nominees. We thank you.

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

        Senator Cornyn. Thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking
    Member Cardin. Thanks for holding this hearing.
        I am here primarily to introduce Wess Mitchell, but I have
    to comment on the great willingness of Jon Huntsman to serve
    his country once again, this time in another peaceful, placid
    sort of setting, in Moscow this time. [Laughter.]
        Senator Cornyn. But Wess Mitchell has been nominated to
    serve as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian
    Affairs, and it is an honor to introduce him. He was born in
    Lubbock, Texas. He is a sixth generation Texan, and I am
    confident that he will bring his Texas can-do attitude to the
    State Department.
        He is joined here today by his wife, Elizabeth, and their
    two children, Wesley and Charlotte, as well as other relatives.
        Outside from being a Texan, Wess has made a name for
    himself as the cofounder of the Center for European Policy
    Analysis, or CEPA, which he created with Larry Hirsch for the
    purpose of strengthening the economic and military ties between
    the United States and Europe.
        His nomination cannot come at a more critical time. Russia,
    as we know, is using both military and cyber capabilities to
    intimidate and pressure Western nations while terrorist groups
    infiltrate their people. As we sit here today, Russia, of
    course, is conducting its largest military exercise in the
    years in the Baltics.
        Also troubling is the news that Russia sold sophisticated
    antiaircraft weaponry to Turkey in a clear attempt to try to
    drive a wedge in our NATO alliance.
        Through his work at CEPA, Wess has advocated a strong U.S.
    position in Europe to include U.S. leadership and participation
    in NATO. Along with Ambassador Nikki Haley, Wess will bring
    deep institutional background and leadership to a region
    threatened by both conventional and nonconventional forces.
        I recently had the chance to travel with some of our
    colleagues to the Balkans and met with their leaders who
    unanimously expressed their growing concern over Russian
    influence and the destabilizing effect of the refugee crisis in
    Europe. As recent additions to the NATO family, these countries
    look to the West for leadership, security, and trade. And I
    cannot think of a better place for them to look, rather than to
    fall into the tender mercies of Vladimir Putin and the Russian
    Federation.
        Wess has created one of the largest NATO brain trusts in
    the United States and I think is just the kind of person we
    need to send to Europe to reassert U.S. leadership following
    years of neglect.
        That is why I wholeheartedly support his nomination and
    encourage the committee to do the same. I look forward to
    working with him, Secretary Tillerson, and the rest of the
    administration as we work to reestablish U.S. global leadership
    in the promotion of the democratic values in the region.
        So thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking Member Cardin,
    for having me here today, and to the entire committee. And I
    commend this nominee for your support.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        It is going to be Senator Manchin, it looks like. Go ahead.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

        Senator Manchin. I have 1-month seniority on Senator Lee.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Manchin. Let me just say what a pleasure it is to
    be here before you, Mr. Chairman, allowing me to come and truly
    in a bipartisan way, because the person that we are here to
    speak on behalf of is truly a bipartisan person wanting to get
    things done. So I want to thank Senator Lee for being here
    also, because I know they have been great friends. But Governor
    Huntsman is a dear friend of mine, a personal friend of mine.
        And Governors have a bond unlike most other bonds in
    political life. We all have the same problems. We have the same
    concerns for our constituents. And we try to share our
    successes that we have, and help each other not to repeat the
    same mistakes that we have made. So it is a really unusual
    bond.
        But Mary Kaye, his wife, and Gayle and I and Jon have done
    things together, and we have enjoyed being with each other and
    have become fast friends.
        They have six of their seven children here with them today.
    They have two grandchildren and many more on the way, I am
    sure, as we talk.
        But with that being said, Jon has a resume that is
    unbelievable. And when you think about what Jon has done in the
    past--Ambassador to both China and Singapore, Deputy United
    States Trade Representative, Deputy Assistant Secretary of
    Commerce for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, and Deputy
    Assistant Secretary of Commerce for trade development. But Jon
    is known most for his two terms as Governor for Utah. And the
    people overwhelmingly have supported Jon and voted for him.
        But Jon left the State in such great shape financially. And
    we had a lot in common during the difficult times when the
    crash happened in 2007-2008.
        What I know about Jon Huntsman is this, the compassion he
    has. And I have said this before. We have both gone through
    mining tragedies. The mining tragedies we had in our States
    were devastating to not just the families involved but to all
    of us. And I watched Jon rise up. And the compassion he had for
    each and every one of them, making sure it never repeated
    itself again, I have seen that.
        I have worked with Jon in a group called No Labels. He and
    I were the first cochairs of No Labels, trying to bring people
    together in a bipartisan way, looking for a solution, not
    trying to exacerbate the problems and identify the weaknesses
    of both sides. I have watched Jon.
        We have a troubled world that we live in. And at this time,
    we are the greatest superpower, the only superpower in the
    world. But superpower means more than having super-military
    might. It means having super-diplomatic might also. That is
    going to take a person with skills unlike anything we have ever
    seen before.
        Russia is a challenge to us, but it is one that we have to
    face and we have to work with and try to find a pathway
    forward. There is only one person that I know of, and truly I
    mean this from the bottom of my heart, that I believe can go to
    Russia, try to find a pathway, open up a dialogue, find a
    pathway forward, and find agreements that we may have,
    disagreements where we respect each other and move forward in a
    troubled world, trying to keep it less violent.
        I come here with great pleasure for the opportunity to say
    to my friend thank you for wanting to step up and serve again.
    Jon is a tremendous patriot and a tremendous American, but he
    is also a great friend, and I appreciate him very much.
        So I would encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of
    the aisle to vote unanimously for this outstanding nominee that
    we have before us.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much for being here. We
    appreciate the comments.
        Senator Lee.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH

        Senator Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I am not going to repeat all of the resume items mentioned
    by Senator Manchin, but I am definitely going to echo Senator
    Manchin's conclusion: I cannot imagine anyone as well-qualified
    to take this post as U.S. Ambassador to Russia as my friend and
    former boss, Governor Jon Huntsman. [Laughter.]
        Senator Lee. I served as his general counsel while he was
    Governor of the State of Utah. So needless to say, I saw him in
    every imaginable circumstance as he worked through decisions.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Lee. Not every imaginable circumstance. That one
    could plausibly deal with as Governor.
        And in every circumstance, he had one objective, which was
    to serve the people, to find the right outcome, and to make
    sure that families throughout Utah, particularly the poor and
    middle class, were left in a better position than he found
    them. And he succeeded.
        It is no coincidence that this man to my right became the
    most popular Governor in America at the time. His approval
    ratings soared to a record 90 percent. Now I never met a member
    of that 10 percent group that apparently did not approve of
    him. I am not sure they exist.
        But the fact that he was able to do all that he did as a
    policy reformer, as a change agent for government in Utah,
    while still remaining as the most popular Governor in America,
    is itself remarkable.
        Also, what is remarkable is the fact that this is someone
    who has served in every Republican administration since the
    Reagan administration. In addition to that, he was tapped, of
    course, by President Obama to serve as the Ambassador to China.
    One interesting side note here is the fact that I think it is
    worth mentioning separately that he will have served as the
    U.S. Ambassador both for the world's most populous Nation,
    China, and, if confirmed to this position, the Nation bearing
    the world's largest footprint. I think that is significant.
        In addition to this, he has served in a variety of
    capacities in corporate America as an executive in the Huntsman
    Corporation. He serves on the board of Ford Motor Corporation.
        Then there is, of course, his most cherished and important
    position, that of being chairman of the board, I believe it is,
    or perhaps chief operating officer, with Mary Kaye serving as
    the chief executive officer, of the Huntsman family. Jon and
    his lovely wife Mary Kaye have seven amazing children. That is
    no exaggeration here. I would encourage each of you to get to
    know them.
        In short, this is someone who will represent the interests
    of the United States in every moment and in every circumstance.
    Regardless of where you fall on the ideological spectrum, you
    will be pleased with the service this man will perform, if he
    is confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Russia.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lee.
        Thank you all for your comments and for taking the time to
    be here. We appreciate that very much.
        You all are welcome to leave. We are going to move into a
    very boring business meeting. It would indicate that you do not
    have anything else to do, if you stayed. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. So the committee hearing is adjourned
    briefly, and we will move to the business meeting. [Recess.]
        The Chairman. We will reconvene our hearing.
        I want to thank everybody for their cooperation in moving
    through that. It is very much appreciated.
        I will give a very brief opening statement. I am sure
    Senator Cardin will do the same.
        Europe and Eurasia are home to some of the closest
    partners, and also some of our greatest challenges. Formed in
    1949 to defend the free people of the West from Soviet threat,
    NATO remains vital to the security of Europe and the United
    States. The European Union is also a critical partner in trade,
    politics, and global humanitarian efforts. Additionally, the
    United States' oldest and best allies, France and the United
    Kingdom, are European countries.
        We look to the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs to
    manage these relationships as the United States reasserts
    itself all the world stage. Yet Russia's bad acts complicate
    much of the good that the United States tries to do.
        The Russian Federation possesses not only the second most
    powerful military in the world but also a seat on the United
    Nations Security Council, where its veto protects war
    criminals, such as Bashar Assad.
        In the last several years, Russia has twice invaded
    Ukraine, where it continues to illegally occupy Crimea and
    aggravate the war in Donbass.
        Vladimir Putin entered the Syrian war on the side of the
    regime and has repeatedly used chemical weapons on civilians.
    Last year, Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. election
    fundamentally damaged our bilateral relationship.
        If that were not enough, Russia is in violation of the
    Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. It is in violation
    and it is failing to meet its obligations under the Treaty on
    Open Skies.
        On the other hand, we have many issues of common interest,
    and figuring out a way to move between these issues
    successfully is going to be a great challenge for our next
    Ambassador.
        Today's nominees will need to perform some of the most
    important diplomatic work that our country could require to
    preserve our interests throughout Europe and guard against
    further Russian aggression. We thank them for their willingness
    to serve, and welcome them to the committee today.
        Senator Cardin.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Let me welcome both of our witnesses. It
    really is a pleasure to have the two nominees before us.
        I cannot think of two more important positions that this
    committee will consider than the two positions that we are
    considering today. They are that consequential.
        I had a chance to meet with both of our nominees, and I
    found the discussions to be extremely helpful and very
    encouraging as to the amount of agreement, as to the importance
    of the assignment and the manner in which our nominees will
    carry out that responsibility, if confirmed.
        Governor Huntsman, it is a pleasure to have you back. You
    just cannot seem to avoid the desire to serve the community.
    And we thank you for that. You are entitled to a little time
    off, but you seem not to want a lot of time off from public
    service.
        But we thank you for your willingness. I particularly want
    to thank your family, because this is a family commitment.
        It will be interesting, your observations as to whether
    Russia was more challenging or less challenging than China. I
    mean, you really have taken on some of the most difficult
    challenges in our country.
        You started with Singapore. You put Utah in there
    someplace, and then decided to go on. So we thank you for that.
        As the chairman pointed out, Russia is really a challenged
    relationship that we have. They attacked us and our democracy
    in 2016. They invaded Ukraine, and they still illegally occupy
    Crimea. They are supporting the Assad regime in Syria.
        So that is why Congress passed the sanctions act against
    Russia, to make it clear that that type of behavior will not go
    unchallenged. We will look forward to you in implementing that
    legislation.
        Our goal is to change Russia's behavior, particularly as it
    reflects U.S. interests. It is not to have a chummy
    relationship with Russia without a change in behavior. Yes, we
    always want to have constructive relationships with all
    countries. But for us to have that bond, we need to have a
    country that respects our independence and respects universal
    values. Today, Russia has done neither.
        I hope that for Russians fighting for freedom in their
    country, that Spaso House will continue to be welcomed for
    civil society, which has been the tradition of the U.S.
    representation and mission. I appreciate your commitment to
    continue that tradition, and I hope there will be regular
    dialogues sponsored by the United States on human rights.
        Boris Nemtsov, the slain opposition leader, called the
    Magnitsky Act the most pro-Russian legislation ever enacted. So
    we will be looking to you to help us implement that pro-Russian
    people legislation known as the Magnitsky Act.
        So we look forward to a good discussion today. Again, we
    thank you for your willingness to serve.
        To Mr. Mitchell, thank you for your willingness to serve.
        I also acknowledge your family. It is a family sacrifice.
        I cannot think of a more important region of the world. The
    transatlantic partnership is critically important to the United
    States and our security. And the defense of our democratic
    values are stronger when we are United with Europe.
        We saw that with Iran. When the sanctions were applied with
    Europe's support, we were able to get Iran's attention. Before
    that, we really were not able to do that.
        The same thing is going to be true with Russia. We had been
    any unity with Europe on Russia. We now believe we have to take
    it to the next plateau. Your responsibility will be to meet
    with our European partners to maintain that unity.
        We need to build resiliency in our democratic institutions
    across Europe. Russia's aggression is not, obviously, aimed
    just at the United States. Its principal targets are in Europe.
    We welcome working with our European partners to strengthen
    that resiliency and to work with regional organizations, such
    as the OSCE. Another hat I wear is the ranking Democrat on the
    OSCE Helsinki Commission.
        There are many challenges. In addition to Russia, you have
    Brexit. You have Turkey and how we are dealing with Turkey. You
    have the migration issues. You have unity against ISIL. You
    have concerns of erosion in the democratic process of some of
    our European countries that are members of EU and NATO.
        So you have a full plate, and we look forward to that
    discussion. And we thank you for your willingness to be here
    and to take on this responsibility.
        The Chairman. Governor, we thank you so much for being
    here. I want to join in with Senator Cardin in thanking you for
    many years of service, both in your State but on behalf of us
    here in our country, but in China and in other places also.
        I had a great meeting with you yesterday and strongly
    support your nomination. I am glad that your family is willing
    to do this. We had some conversations about your wonderful
    spouse and why she would do this. Maybe you will speak to that
    in a moment.
        But we do hope you will introduce them. We thank you for
    bringing them with you. We know that it is a partnership.
        We are anxious to hear your testimony. If you could
    summarize in about 5 minutes any other materials that you want
    to enter into the record, we are glad to do so. But again,
    thank you for your distinguished past service, and thank you
    for your willingness to serve our country in this way.
        With that, if you would begin, we would appreciate it.

        STATEMENT OF HON. JON M. HUNTSMAN, JR., OF UTAH, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
           STATES OF AMERICA TO THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION STATE

        Governor Huntsman. Thank you, Chairman Corker.
        Ranking Member Cardin, thank you for your comments as well,
    for your kind and encouraging words about our return to public
    service, and also fitting in my time as Governor of the great
    State of Utah.
        In reflecting on those years, I have to say that I never
    once invaded one of my surrounding States. [Laughter.]
        Governor Huntsman. Came very close in the case of Nevada
    from time to time, but all was well.
        And I want to thank all members of this committee. It is
    truly an honor to appear before you today as President Trump's
    nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Russian
    Federation.
        I want to thank the President for his confidence in me and
    for this opportunity, with your approval, to represent the
    American people during what is, we all know, a critical period
    in U.S.-Russian relations.
        Additionally, I want to express my gratitude to Secretary
    of State Rex Tillerson for his support as well.
        Most important to all of this are the people who are
    sitting behind me.
        Senator Corker, thank you for pointing that out.
        A wonderful family, and I want to start by thanking my
    wife, Mary Kaye, without whom, we would not be here today, and
    all our children. Six of seven are here: Daughter Mary Anne,
    who is here with husband Evan Morgan; daughter Abby, who is
    here with Jeff Livingston. I never called them deadbeat sons-
    in-law, mind you. They are all the best in the world.
        Our daughter Liddy, who is here with Eduardo Hernandez.
        Our son John, otherwise known as Lieutenant J.G. Huntsman
    at Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, who is part of VAQ-129, a
    Growler pilot in the Growler squadron, is here with lovely wife
    Morgan.
        Our son Will, who is also a naval officer in the EOD
    training pipeline, is not with us, unfortunately. The training,
    apparently, is so strict he could not get a few hours off. So
    we will have to consult with the Armed Services Committee on
    that one next time.
        And our daughters Gracie, who has served the last couple
    months as my foreign policy adviser, and daughter Asha, is here
    as well.
        Their love and support has absolutely sustained me through
    many phases of my life and the different hats that I have had
    the pleasure of wearing, both in the public and the private
    sectors. Obviously, we could not undertake this new challenge,
    with your support, without the complete endorsement of our
    family.
        I have had the privilege of serving as Ambassador three
    times, including to China and to Singapore. I am fully
    cognizant of the profound responsibilities a Chief of Mission
    must assume.
        During my previous service, including as Governor of the
    great State of Utah, and in the private sector, I have always
    prided myself on leading dynamic teams and achieving important
    goals by bringing individuals together from different
    backgrounds and different points of view.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with colleagues
    from the State Department and all other U.S. Government
    agencies to advance the interests of the American people.
        While I am confident that my previous experiences does
    prepare me for this sensitive diplomatic mission, I am under no
    illusion that serving as the U.S. Ambassador to the Russian
    Federation will be easy or simple.
        Our relationship with Russia is among the most
    consequential and complex foreign policy challenges we face. As
    a nuclear superpower, a permanent member of the U.N. Security
    Council, we have no choice but to deal with Russia on a range
    of issues touching on global stability and security.
        Yet we also need to recognize that today, contrary to
    Helsinki Final Act principles and international law, Russia
    continues to threaten stability in Europe, including by
    violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its
    neighbors. Russia also restricts the human rights of its own
    people.
        There is no question--underline ``no question''--that the
    Russian Government interfered in the U.S. election last year,
    and Moscow continues to meddle in the democratic processes of
    our friends and allies.
        Finally, Russia is disregarding its arms-control
    obligations and commitments. As we work to balance these
    multiple challenges, I appreciate the leadership and insight
    that this committee has demonstrated on Russia. And, if
    confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to collaborate with all of
    you in the months and years ahead.
        In short, if confirmed, I will focus on four primary
    approaches.
        First, I will engage Russian Government officials, from the
    highest tiers to the local level, to advance American
    interests. Key among our goals are defeating ISIS, countering
    terrorism, upholding arms control and non-proliferation
    obligations and commitments, finding a political solution to
    the conflict in Syria, and resolving the crisis in Ukraine in a
    way that respects Ukraine's sovereignty and restores its
    territorial integrity.
        I will also not hesitate to remind Government officials
    that they are accountable for their actions. Exhibit A is the
    fact that interference in the U.S. election has led directly to
    the current low level of trust in the relationship.
        The views of Congress were heard loud and clear on this
    point with the near-unanimous passage, as Senator Cardin
    mentioned, of the Countering America's Adversaries Through
    Sanctions Act.
        Second, I will work to protect the interests of the
    American people, to include U.S. business, scholars, tourists,
    and other American visitors who spend time in Russia and engage
    its good citizens. I believe people-to-people exchanges and
    private interactions are an important way to show that our
    disagreements are with the Government of Russia, not with its
    people.
        Third, I will seek out Russian people from across all walks
    of life to share perspectives, to relay American values, and to
    deepen my long-held appreciation for Russia's rich and
    fascinating history and culture. As I have done in previous
    assignments, I look forward to meeting with civil society
    leaders, including those in the religious and human rights
    communities.
        While the Russian Government has sought to limit U.S.
    public diplomacy, our diplomatic mission in Russia continues to
    engage ordinary Russians and thought leaders, and maintains a
    diverse outreach program. I plan to take part in that effort,
    as I strongly believe cultural understanding is enriched by an
    open and respectful exchange of ideas and thoughts. I look
    forward to meeting as many Russian citizens as possible during
    my travels throughout the great country.
        Fourth, but certainly not last in importance, I will work
    to ensure the safety and security of my team, America's team,
    who work tirelessly on behalf of our Nation. Despite Russia's
    actions against U.S. mission diplomatic staffing, the team,
    both the American and the Russian staff, continues to serve
    with professionalism and an unwavering commitment under
    difficult conditions.
        In particular, I want to pay tribute to outgoing Ambassador
    John Teft, one of the Foreign Service's finest, for his
    dedicated leadership and courage under challenging times.
        I will be honored to work side by side with the mission
    team to ensure the continued critical work of the U.S.
    diplomatic and consular mission.
        I also want to extend my personal appreciation for those
    Americans and Russians who serve at the U.S. mission and have
    since left because our staff has been cut short by the Russian
    Government's unfortunate decision.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you.
    I welcome your comments and your questions.
        [Governor Huntsman's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Jon Huntsman

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
    committee, It is an honor to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Russian
    Federation. I want to thank the President for his confidence in me and
    for the opportunity--with your approval--to represent the American
    people during a critical period in U.S.-Russian relations. In addition,
    I want to express my gratitude to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for
    supporting my nomination.
        I also want to take a moment to thank my family--my wife, Mary
    Kaye, and my children Mary Anne, Abby, Liddy, Jon, Will, Gracie and
    Asha. Their love and support has sustained me through the many phases
    of my life and the different hats I have worn in both the public and
    the private sector. I could not undertake this journey without them. At
    our family's core lies the belief that service is the price we pay for
    citizenship in this great country.
        I have had the privilege of serving as Ambassador before--to China
    and to Singapore. I am fully cognizant of the profound responsibilities
    a Chief of Mission must assume. During my previous service, including
    as Governor of the great state of Utah, and in the private sector, I
    have prided myself on leading dynamic teams and achieving important
    goals by bringing together individuals from different backgrounds and
    different viewpoints. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    colleagues from the State Department and all other U.S. Government
    agencies to advance the interests of the American people.
        While I am confident my previous experiences prepare me for this
    sensitive diplomatic mission, I am under no illusion that serving as
    the U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation will be easy or simple.
    Our relationship with Russia is among the most consequential and
    complex foreign-policy challenges we face. As a nuclear superpower and
    permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, we have no choice but to
    deal with Russia on a range of issues touching on global stability and
    security. Yet we also need to recognize that today, contrary to
    Helsinki Final Act principles and international law, Russia continues
    to threaten stability in Europe, including by violating the sovereignty
    and territorial integrity of its neighbors. Russia also restricts the
    human rights of its people. There is no question that the Russian
    Government interfered in the U.S. election last year and Moscow
    continues to meddle in the democratic processes of our friends and
    allies. Finally, Russia is disregarding its arms-control obligations
    and commitments.
        As we work to balance these multiple challenges, I appreciate the
    leadership and insight that this committee has demonstrated on Russia
    and, if confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to collaborate with all of
    you in the months and years ahead.
        If confirmed, I will focus on four primary approaches.
        First, I will engage Russian Government officials, from the highest
    tiers to the local level, to advance American interests. Key among our
    goals are defeating ISIS, countering terrorism, upholding arms control
    and non-proliferation obligations and commitments, finding a political
    solution to the conflict in Syria, and resolving the crisis in Ukraine
    in a way that respects Ukraine's sovereignty and restores its
    territorial integrity.
        I will also not hesitate to remind government officials that they
    are accountable for their actions. Exhibit A is the fact that
    interference in the U.S. election has led directly to the current low
    level of trust in the relationship. The views of Congress were heard
    clearly on this point in the near-unanimous passage of the Countering
    America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.
        Second, I will work to protect the interests of the American
    people, to include the U.S. business community, scholars, tourists and
    other American visitors who spend time in Russia and engage its
    citizens. I believe people-to-people exchanges and private interactions
    are an important way to show that our disagreements are with the
    Government of Russia, not with its people.
        Third, I will seek out Russian people from across all walks of life
    to share perspectives, to relay American values, and to deepen my
    already growing appreciation for Russia's rich and fascinating history
    and culture. As I have done in previous assignments, I look forward to
    meeting with civil society leaders, including those in the religious
    and human rights community.
        While the Russian Government has sought to limit U.S. public
    diplomacy, our diplomatic mission in Russia continues to engage
    ordinary Russians and thought leaders and maintains a diverse outreach
    program. I plan to take part in that effort, as I strongly believe
    cultural understanding is enriched by an open and respectful exchange
    of thoughts and ideas. I look forward to meeting as many Russian
    citizens as possible during my travels throughout the country.
        Fourth, but certainly not last in importance, I will work to ensure
    the safety and security of my team, who work tirelessly on behalf of
    the American people.
        Despite Russia's actions against U.S. mission diplomatic staffing,
    the team--both the American and the Russian staff--continues to serve
    with professionalism and an unwavering commitment under difficult
    conditions.
        I will be honored to work side by side with the mission team to
    ensure the continued stellar work of the U.S. diplomatic and consular
    mission. I also want to extend my personal appreciation for those
    Americans and Russians whose service at the U.S. Mission in Russia have
    been cut short by the Russian Government's unfortunate decision.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I welcome
    your comments and questions.

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Senator Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Governor Huntsman, I must tell you, I have
    listened to a lot of statements made by nominees. I thought
    your statement was as clear and as direct on the major issues,
    and I applaud you for that. And I appreciate your candor with
    the committee, and the manner in which you have presented the
    challenges that you would have, if confirmed as Ambassador.
        I will tell you, our staffs always give us a series of
    areas that they want us to question on, to make sure that there
    is clarity. In each of those cases, you have already provided
    clarity in your opening statement. But that will not prevent me
    from asking a couple questions anyway.
        Let me just move on to the human rights issues that you and
    I talked about that you mentioned in your statement.
        Our concern is not with the Russian people. The Russian
    people are good people that want basic freedom. Our issue is
    with the Russian Government that has denied basic rights to its
    own citizens and has interfered with the sovereignty of other
    countries. You mentioned that you will be meeting with leaders
    in the civil society and be a platform for that type of
    discussion.
        How do you intend to use people-to-people contact between
    Russians and Americans, and using our Embassy, in order to
    further the hopes?
        In answering that question, let me just tell you that I am
    impressed when I meet with Russians, and I have met with a lot
    of Russians, where they really do look at the United States as
    their hope for their future, and giving them an avenue in order
    to be able to keep hope alive in Russia.
        How do you intend to use the position as Ambassador and our
    Embassy in Moscow to further those objectives?
        Governor Huntsman. Thank you for that question, Senator
    Cardin. And I very much enjoyed the conversation that we were
    able to have together in your office.
        For me, the United States mission, whether the Embassy or
    consulates--in this case, three throughout Russia--should be
    seen as beacons of hope, aspirational for the Russian people,
    as I know they were for the Chinese people when I served there.
        The term or title of Ambassador, although it might get you
    in a couple doors that otherwise you might not get in, should
    also be seen as aspirational and tied to U.S. values.
        I have worn this title before. I have seen when you
    actually express those values and go to the aid of those who
    are under assault from their governments, they find that there
    is hope in what America does.
        And I found that to be, Senator, our most powerful weapon
    at the end of the day. I hope to use it effectively. I hope to
    use it tactically. I hope to use it tastefully.
        But there is one certainty. And I will be out, and I will
    be active in promoting America's values. It is part of who I
    am. It is part of my family. It is part of my upbringing. And I
    think it is part of the American tradition.
        And I will never forget visiting one case in China, if you
    would allow me the reflection, a young woman who had been
    beaten because her home had been torn down by the Chinese
    authorities. There was no petitioning of government. There was
    no appeal process. It was just gone. She took up the issue
    herself, and was beaten for it, and paid a price.
        I went to visit her one day and her humble little
    apartment, the Ambassador's car driving through the back
    alleyways where an ambassador's car should not be. And I walked
    into her little room. She had been cut off from the Internet
    and a lot of other things, and she had a tear in her eye. And I
    know it was not because Mr. Huntsman arrived, but rather
    because the United States had arrived.
        I could tell just by being with her that that meant the
    world, where nobody else would show up, nobody else would stand
    behind people who do not have that kind of support locally. And
    it meant the world.
        It is reflections like that that I carry with me every day
    of my life. And I am reminded of the values that we stand for,
    whether Republican or Democrat. And I will ensure that our
    Embassy and our missions shine that light in a way that is
    aspirational, that is positive, and that does represent the
    best of the United States.
        Senator Cardin. And I can assure you have this committee
    that stands with you in these struggles. Please feel
    comfortable in working directly with us on advancing those
    issues.
        I want to raise just one more issue to let you know that we
    are deeply concerned about the security of our mission in
    Russia. We know that there have been efforts made to deal with
    the safety of our personnel in an appropriate way. There have
    been, of course, incursions and listening devices in different
    places to try to compromise the U.S. mission.
        So we invite your assessment. You mentioned the safety of
    your personnel. We want you to know that we hope that you will
    be very candid with Congress as to needs, so that we can work
    together to make sure those who are on the frontline of
    diplomacy have the protections that they need.
        Governor Huntsman. Thank you, Senator. The unfortunate
    decision by the Russian Government to cut our staff
    significantly will impact our ability to carry on anything
    representing a normal relationship. Although I have every
    confidence that those who remain, the 455, now that we have met
    what the Russians have demanded to be a sense of parity, that
    they, being among the best and brightest in the Foreign Service
    and other departments and agencies, will carry out the mission
    in a flawless way. I have no doubt about that. I have seen it
    happen before.
        For me, as chief of mission, mission security and mission
    integrity will be top of the list. With your support and
    endorsement, once I arrive at mission, the first order of
    business really is to assess what the cutbacks in personnel
    have meant in terms of overall security, because security has
    an impact on our ability to do the work, which has an impact on
    overall operating morale of any Embassy.
        And I have seen, over the years, when missions can operate
    at a high level of morale, things get done, and the work of the
    American people gets accomplished.
        So mission safety will be top of mind for me. It always has
    been. I know we have some challenges, particularly as it
    relates to the harassment of some of our diplomats, which,
    unfortunately, continues.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Very good.
        Senator Flake.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Ambassador Huntsman, for being here. And thank
    you to the family as well. We have had the privilege to know
    the Huntsmans for quite a while. We lived near them in Vienna,
    Virginia, back in 1992, or 1990 to 1992, I believe. My wife,
    Cheryl, even taught one of the girls piano.
        So anyway, it is just a pleasure to be here and a pleasure
    to have you, and I just want to thank you for your willingness
    to serve, and thank the family for their willingness to
    sacrifice not just this time but many times in the past as well
    for your public service. It is a family sacrifice, certainly,
    and that is appreciated.
        Let me just ask one question. What can Congress do to help
    you succeed in your mission on behalf of the United States in
    Russia?
        Governor Huntsman. Thank you, Senator Flake. It is a
    pleasure to see you again. And thank you for the musical legacy
    that your family left with my own family, which continues to
    live on, as our daughter Mary Anne just returned from
    performing Rachmaninoff's Concerto No. 2 in China.
        Senator Flake. I think she did that in the second lesson.
    [Laughter.]
        Governor Huntsman. It is a far cry from what her dad used
    to play.
        You know, I think allowing me the opportunity to return and
    report on the key issues, whether they be Ukraine, Syria, DPRK,
    arms control, human rights, the Magnitsky Act, because I think
    we are all going to have to be together, this is executive and
    legislative, with respect to the last round of sanctions,
    because you will have a significant role in how that goes.
        You are then going to have to base your decisions on input
    from the ground, from somebody onsite. You will get all the
    information you need to read, but having somebody at post who
    can maybe help provide a different perspective will be
    important.
        So just the very thought, Senator, that we could work
    together going forward and maintain an open dialogue with you
    and your staffs on whether there is progress on these issues,
    because if there is progress, we need to move the relationship
    to a bit of a higher altitude. Right now, we are at a low
    point.
        It reminds me a little bit of 1986, and I remember that
    year. We cannot stay at the 1986 level forever. It does not
    serve the purposes of the region or the world well, nor does it
    serve the purposes of people in both countries.
        So working on those issues together, allowing me a fair
    hearing when I return to report on progress so that we can see
    if, in fact, there is reason to move the relationship to a
    different level, I think that has to be done as a joint effort
    between executive and legislative branches.
        Senator Flake. In terms of congressional travel to Russia,
    delegations from the Senate and the House, is that helpful?
        Governor Huntsman. I will just share one experience I had
    in China, where very few codels travel, because it was a tough
    gig, a tough assignment. And it was not easy always to explain
    to your constituents why you had gone to China.
        I brought forward to some of your colleagues the idea that
    maybe we could organize a large bipartisan, Republicans and
    Democrats, codel. And they spent 3 days.
        Senator Johnny Isakson was part of that. I just discussed
    it with him the other day. He still remembers that trip. In 3
    days, they were able to articulate at the highest elected
    levels of the United States some of our concerns around these
    issues in ways that the Chinese really understood in new and
    profoundly important ways. And it left a lasting impression on
    both sides.
        I would say that maybe if we could organize some such
    mission, bipartisan, we have some very important messages to
    send and to receive. I would very much welcome that opportunity
    as well.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. [Presiding.] Thank you so much.
        Nobody has to convince me of your ability to serve. You and
    I worked together when you were in China, and you helped us in
    Idaho considerably.
        Let me say that probably one of the most confounding things
    for the American people to understand is that, in the position
    that you are in with Russia, we have some issues with Russia,
    which would be an understatement, to say the least. Having said
    that, we also have to deal with Russia.
        I think probably the biggest challenge that you are going
    to be facing, that we are all going to be facing, is to muster
    them to assist with the North Korean situation. The world has
    to turn against North Korea in a very united fashion, and it is
    going to take both Russia and China. They have already
    indicated at least willingness to help. But there are a lot of
    people who think this cannot end well on the trajectory it is
    on, so we are going to need everybody together.
        Do you have some thoughts on that, as you move into this
    position?
        Governor Huntsman. Specific to DPRK?
        Senator Risch. Specifically to DPRK.
        Governor Huntsman. This falls into the side of the balance
    sheet that represents issues where we have some overlapping and
    common interests, and I think we should always take the time to
    explore where we have overlapping and common interests.
        I think one is DPRK. We take different approaches, and we
    have different attitudes about denuclearizing the Korean
    Peninsula, but I think, ultimately, we want greater safety in
    that region. And I think both countries share real concerns
    around proliferation. So that brings us together with Russia
    for purposes of addressing DPRK.
        I think the last round of sanctions was an expression of
    the United Nations Security Council coming together with the
    most aggressive approach to North Korea I think in history, and
    that included Russia and it included China. It is targeting
    areas of North Korea's economy that I think are most lucrative
    for them. And if the sanctions are actually implemented, and
    that will be part of our work once we are on the ground, it
    will take a toll on things like trade in textiles, which is
    maybe an $800 million category for North Korea; trade in raw
    materials of gas and oil, which is a large money category as
    well; and the remittances from workers, in the case of Russia
    maybe 50,000 or 60,000, which is another large cash flow item
    for North Korea.
        So I am heartened by the support on the last round of
    sanctions just September 11th, just a few weeks ago. We will
    see if that is not a start where we can really come together
    more and more in addressing this significant threat not just in
    Northeast Asia but, indeed, to the world.
        Senator Risch. Thank you. I appreciate your thoughts on
    that. We are all hopeful that the sanctions will be helpful in
    that regard.
        Certainly, they are as about as strict sanctions as you can
    get. The difficulty is, of course, you have a regime that
    really does not care much about the people that they govern. So
    the question is, how effective are the sanctions going to be on
    leadership versus on the people?
        Unfortunately, they have shown in the past that the
    sanctions have not been a good conduct-changer, as it would be
    in other civilized nations. So although we are hopeful, I think
    we have to think about what the next step is going to be. And
    that is not going to be pretty. There is no question about
    that.
        Thank you very much for coming.
        Are there any further questions? Well, I see none.
        Governor Huntsman. I hope we didn't scare everyone away.
        Senator Risch. We are just starting a vote on the floor of
    the Senate, so I am going to adjourn this hearing, excuse you
    and your beautiful family and those who have come here to hear
    this.
        Again, we sincerely appreciate your willingness to serve,
    Jon. Thank you so much.
        With that, the committee be at ease, subject to the call of
    the chair. [Recess.]
        Senator Risch. The committee will come back to order, and
    we will finish up with the Honorable Jon Huntsman's hearing.
        And I understand, Senator Shaheen, you have a comment, a
    question?
        Senator Shaheen. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        First of all, I would like to thank Governor Huntsman for
    his willingness to continue to serve the country, and also for
    taking a few minutes to meet with me. I very much appreciated
    our conversation.
        I know that one of the things that we discussed a little
    bit was the challenges given Russia's attempts to influence our
    elections in 2016, their occupation of Ukraine, the annexation
    of Crimea, some of the other challenges facing Russian
    aggression in the Baltics and Eastern Europe, and the need to
    counter those efforts, and, at the same time, the need to look
    at places where we can work with Russia because we have mutual
    interests.
        So can you talk about how, as Ambassador, you will try and
    balance those two needs and the kinds of efforts that you think
    are helpful in responding to Russian aggression versus the
    kinds of efforts that you would employ to try to engage with
    them on areas of mutual interest?
        Governor Huntsman. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. It was a
    pleasure most recently to see you.
        I think we have to convince Russia, both bilaterally and
    multilaterally through our friends and allies, particularly
    NATO, that aggression does not pay, and there will be a
    response. We have already seen that in the case of Crimea in
    2014; in the case of Ukraine in the eastern provinces of
    Donbass; and, of course, we do not need to go back too far
    previous to that, 2008, in the case of Georgia with South
    Ossetia.
        So we have the challenges of the constant pushing that is
    taking place in Europe. We have friends and allies who we
    support and whose sovereignty we stand behind, from a security
    standpoint. And I think we have to live up and respect those
    commitments, which I think is the case.
        So we have that going on. At the same time, we have areas
    of overlapping and common interests. I think, as with any
    challenging relationship--and I would say that, in the case of
    Russia, it is a challenging but necessary relationship. We have
    to be at the table together. We have to find common ground. We
    have to solve problems. We have to move to a higher altitude.
    No question about it.
        But part of that effort is to show that we can succeed in
    what we do together. And there may be some early signs of
    success, for example, in Syria with the attempt to disarm and
    quiet the southwestern region just south of Damascus. It is
    still early days, but there may be some successes from there.
        I think DPRK is another area where we can find that there
    are successes.
        In the case of Ukraine, we are nowhere. And I would have to
    say that the main highway that leads to an improvement in U.S.-
    Russia relations I think goes right through Ukraine, and that
    is living up and respecting the Minsk accord through the
    Normandy process that right now is being actively worked by
    Ambassador Volker, our Special Representative for Ukraine
    Affairs.
        It is a critically important issue not just for Ukraine,
    for the region, but for people here in the United States. So
    that will be an important area.
        Then we have issues such as space, which, for example, it
    must be the level of oxygen when you are at that level, maybe
    no oxygen at all, that keeps us together in a collaborative
    fashion. That has been a great success between the United
    States and Russia.
        The Arctic, for example, lies out there as another issue
    that I think we are going to have to come together on, and
    maybe in ways that are positive.
        So I see the balance sheet. I see the need to come up with
    a very clear and crisp list of priorities that we can meet on,
    we can hopefully make some progress on, and I can return to you
    and report on.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Ambassador, can you talk about whether you are going to be
    willing to continue to meet with opposition figures in Russia
    and dissidents who may not agree with the Putin reign?
        Governor Huntsman. That has always been my practice at
    every other post I have managed, and it will continue to be my
    practice. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Jeanne.
        Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you.
        Ambassador, Governor, I really just wanted to come back to
    this restarted hearing to compliment you as one of the very
    highest quality nominees for an ambassadorial post I have seen
    in my 7 years on the Foreign Relations Committee.
        In our personal meeting and then in your opening statement,
    I think you represent the very best of public service and of
    leadership at home and abroad. And you have answered clearly,
    forcefully, and directly a whole series of questions I had for
    you about your willingness to continue meeting with opposition
    figures, standing up for human rights, the value of our Western
    European allies, and many others.
        So to you and to Mary Kaye, to your beautiful family, thank
    you for your dedication to public service.
        Let me ask two or three questions, but I look forward to
    supporting your nomination, in any event.
        How do you think we could more successfully counter Russian
    disinformation campaigns in Western Europe? As we talked about
    in my office, our core challenge here is raising the costs for
    Russia of their continued inference and of their continued
    illegal actions in Ukraine and in other places in the world.
        And do you think it is critical that we maintain sanctions
    on Russia until they end their destabilizing actions in Ukraine
    and end meddling in European elections? Or could you imagine a
    path where we would lighten some sanctions and not others?
        Obviously, given the actions of this committee, we would
    have a hand in any decision on that front.
        Governor Huntsman. My sense, Senator--and thank you so very
    much for those warm comments that you previously made.
        I think Ukraine becomes very much a centerpiece here when
    we look at sanctions. We have maybe five rungs of sanctions
    when you count the Magnitsky Act as well.
        I think a lot of the barometer on where the relationship
    goes will be based on Ukraine and the kind of success we have
    in the Donbass area, living up to the Minsk accord.
        So when I think about the different sanctions that are
    there, some from Crimea, some from Eastern Ukraine, some a
    result of meddling in our election, some tied to Magnitsky and
    more human rights-focused, I really do see the Ukraine issue as
    being critically important as a barometer of whether or not we
    can make progress in our bilateral relationship.
        With respect to the kind of hybrid warfare that we are
    seeing, which includes malign activity, goes well beyond
    conventional warfare that my generation was accustomed to, as
    was yours growing up, where you put equipment on the field and
    you practice, you train, and you hopefully never have to go to
    war, to what we see today, which is very different, and it
    includes disinformation campaigns, networks that are dedicated
    to the dissemination of news of different sources, where we see
    the support of political movements on the extreme end, for
    example, all kind of in the category of malign activities that
    are now focused on Europe and, specifically, the periphery just
    adjacent to Russia's western border.
        I think the first order of business, Senator, is to
    recognize that it does exist and not to be delusional about it.
    And then to say, what is the nature of this hybrid campaign?
    What toll or what cost is it taking on the very survivability
    of maybe a nascent democracy?
        I think that is the target, to undercut the credibility of
    the political system, which is the most nefarious approach that
    one can take to another nation-state.
        Then I think we have to say, what are the options in terms
    of the tools that one might have? There may be some options on
    the technology side with the private sector that would be worth
    looking at, and I think that we always ought to be exploring
    private-sector technology approaches.
        But then I think the work that you are doing with others,
    including Senator Murphy, on really funding some efforts that
    would maybe produce a counternarrative is really important. And
    I know it may seem to be a drop in the bucket or a start as
    compared to what we are up against, but it is a start. And I
    think that is important, to begin to work our way through what
    ultimately a longer term solution might look like.
        Senator Coons. I appreciate in your written statement, in
    your opening statement, and in our private conversation, the
    clarity and forcefulness of your view about Russia's malign
    actions in our election, in the region against our alliances in
    Western Europe, the ongoing threat they pose to human rights
    both at home and around the world, and your commitment to join
    with us in working to advance American values in this context.
        So I very much look forward to working with you. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I always
    appreciate my name being name-dropped in answer to another
    Senator's question. I appreciate that.
        Senator Risch. That is called pandering in politics. It
    will get you everywhere. [Laughter.]
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Governor, for taking
    on this responsibility. I really enjoyed the conversation that
    we had.
        And I do appreciate your commitment to the Global
    Engagement Center. Senator Portman and I are very pleased that
    the administration, after some question, has now transferred
    $40 million to help set up that capacity to help young nations
    build independent and objective media. I think that you will be
    instrumental in helping figure out how that plays out going
    forward.
        With that being said, let me ask a little thornier question
    here.
        I really appreciated your clear statement regarding Russian
    interference in the U.S. election, but I want to put the sort
    of elephant out on the table here. You are going to be working
    for a President who has done the opposite, who has very
    intentionally over and over again cast doubt on whether the
    Russians interfered in this election. He said, ``It's all a big
    Dem hoax.'' ``It's all a big Dem scam.''
        When he was in Poland earlier this year, he said it could
    have been Russia, but it could have been a lot of other people.
        And the results are real. The latest poll suggests that 43
    percent of Americans do not believe that Russia interfered in
    the U.S. election. Importantly, only about 9 percent of
    Republicans believe that Russia interfered.
        So just let me ask you that, because everybody is
    wondering, how do you represent to the Russians your belief,
    and all of our belief, that they unquestionably interfered in
    the U.S. election when your boss, the President of the United
    States, is engaged in a fairly intentional campaign to, at the
    very least, cloud the issue? How do you manage that?
        Governor Huntsman. I think it is a fair question, Senator.
        I think it is important to note that the ODNI has spoken,
    the Director of National Intelligence. It is a powerful symbol
    when you get the Director of National Intelligence, the
    Director of the CIA, the head of the NSA, the head of the FBI,
    who come together in unison behind their findings.
        As a consumer of their material for some years, I very
    rarely see them come together in such a coordinated fashion of
    one mind and one conclusion. So I think that expresses where
    the facts are with respect to Russia's involvement in our
    election.
        But I have to say that, for me as a former Governor, as
    Governor Kaine was, you are tasked with the integrity of your
    election system, sometimes as Lieutenant Governor, sometimes as
    Secretary of State. You have nothing more important than the
    integrity of your election process at the localist of levels.
    And to work to undercut or subvert or sow seeds of doubt or
    distrust about that system is the highest level of injury that
    I think can be laid on any local election system.
        So I will speak to it not just as a U.S. Ambassador to
    Russia but also as a somebody who had responsibility for the
    integrity of elections in my State.
        Senator Murphy. I thank you for that answer. I just do not
    want us to normalize this moment. I think your job will be made
    very difficult by the fact that you will put pressure on the
    Russians to stop interfering in our elections and others while
    you have a President of the United States who is actively--
    actively--trying to cloud this question and often uses his
    personal communication device to call it a hoax.
        I just do not want us to normalize what is happening today,
    where our diplomats are toeing one line and the President is
    toeing a completely different one on his Twitter feed.
        And I greatly appreciate that people of your capacity are
    willing to do these jobs, but your job is made uniquely hard in
    a very unprecedented way.
        In my last 30 seconds, if I can just get a commitment from
    you to follow up on something we talked about in my office.
    Senator Shaheen and I, Senator Cardin, Senator Risch, and
    others, we talk about the Balkans a lot here, but not a lot of
    other people do, globally.
        This is where wars have started. It is a place that remains
    very unstable. And in the last 6 months since this President
    took office and signaled that we were sort of exiting the
    diplomatic playing field, Russia has gone into the Balkans with
    gangbusters. They have started buying up all sorts of media
    sources. They have started paying off new and interesting
    people.
        I just wanted to have you reiterate your commitment amongst
    all the things you are going to be paying attention to in
    Moscow to make sure to keep an eye on, for us, increased
    Russian interference in the Balkans. It is a very destabilized
    place that could be made much more unstable if we do not check
    that interference.
        Governor Huntsman. You have my commitment, Senator. The
    Balkans is an example of what we have described earlier,
    specifically when you point to Serbia and Kosovo.
        When we leave a vacuum behind, things happen. And I think
    this is an example of what has happened in that vacuum. I will
    watch it. I have taken note of it, and it will certainly be
    part of my discussions.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Governor, welcome. You are superbly qualified for this
    position. I look forward to supporting your nomination. It is a
    very tough job. I am glad the President asked you to do it.
        So I was involved in some of the circumstances that Senator
    Murphy was asking you about. I will switch and tell you an
    interesting irony.
        While I was a candidate in an election that has been much
    discussed for these reasons, my son was deployed in the
    European Reassurance Initiative. His entire Marine battalion
    was deployed between the Black and the Baltic to try to help
    reassure our allies on the border with Russia that the United
    States was still there for them and would help protect them
    against Russia. I want to ask you about that, because I am
    going to be following up with the next nominee on similar
    questions.
        In your capacity as Ambassador to Russia, should you be
    confirmed, you will also have the opportunity to dialogue with
    other European nations' ambassadors in Russia. And I think an
    important part of your job is going to be working as you can
    with the Russian Government to make sure that we advance and
    protect nations on their border that are currently under
    serious assault in many domains by Russia.
        I wonder if you could just address that aspect, how you
    might approach that aspect of your job.
        Governor Huntsman. My approach, Senator, will be to work
    with our friends and allies in Europe, specifically the G5, who
    I think are very dedicated to the issues that are prominently
    on our security agenda.
        We all know the vulnerable states. They are right on the
    periphery. And they need the help and support that NATO and,
    specifically, the United States can provide.
        I think we are better and stronger when we are coordinating
    with those who are regionally focused and on the ground and
    maybe have a slightly different perspective. And I learned this
    while serving in China and working with the G5 in other
    contexts, including North Korea, including the South China Sea.
        And I would fully expect to consult on a regular basis with
    my G5 colleagues to make sure that we are plugged into the work
    of the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Scaparrotti,
    along with NATO command as well. I very much want to make
    visits to both those areas to ensure that we are all of one
    mind as it relates to, for example, understanding the last
    training exercise that is playing out in Belarus even as we sit
    here that will go on through September 20th.
        I am not sure that they have invoked the Vienna documents
    that are required, as far as transparency is concerned. But it
    may be that they should have. Nobody quite knows exactly the
    numbers of troops involved, or exactly how this is likely to
    play out.
        That is not good. That does not serve the interests of
    security and stability in Europe.
        So I think that we are together on the issues that will
    matter most, and I look forward to working with our friends and
    allies on these very issues.
        Senator Kaine. You also will have a very unique
    perspective, having been Ambassador to China, China and Russia
    both being such critical nations, and both nations where we
    have many points of disagreement, but there are areas where we
    need to work together.
        For example, we had a briefing recently. Though it was
    classified, this portion of it was not. It was about North
    Korea. And the Trump administration national security officials
    said over and over again: We are pursuing diplomacy, if we can.
    If it is a 10 percent chance or 5 percent chance or 3 percent
    chance, we need to pursue diplomacy and a diplomatic resolution
    of the situation with North Korea.
        I assume you share that view. Would you also share my view
    that pursuing a diplomatic resolution with North Korea would
    likely involve having Russia and China involved in those
    discussions?
        Governor Huntsman. Russia and China were both, of course,
    original members of the six-party talks, discussions that I
    participated in while in Beijing. They are both critical
    members of that process.
        China, of course, is absolutely indispensable, in terms of
    delivering messages and controlling the flow of goods in and
    out of North Korea. They have influence and clout that no other
    nation-state has in Pyongyang.
        I think second to that would be Moscow. And, therefore, the
    dialogue with Russia on DPRK, on denuclearization, on calming
    the region down, is absolutely critical.
        And to think that we were able to get a United Nations
    Security Council resolution on September 11.
        Senator Kaine. Without a veto.
        Governor Huntsman. Without a veto. That speaks to textiles
    and apparel, an $800 million category; gas and oil; remittances
    of 50,000 to 60,000 North Koreas in Russia, which is worth
    hundreds of millions of dollars. These are big deals.
        So for us, it really comes down to, are the sanctions going
    to be implemented? That is where we have had difficulties in
    the past. Will China do what they signed up to do? Will Russia
    do what they have signed up to do?
        That is where you roll up your sleeves and you get to work.
        Senator Kaine. Might I ask one more question, Mr. Chair? Or
    do I need to wait for second round?
        Senator Risch. Well, please be brief, because we do have
    another nominee that we have to wrap up.
        Senator Kaine. I will be very brief.
        Senator Risch. We are going to have questions for the
    record.
        Senator Kaine. I will be very brief.
        Having acknowledged that China and Russia would be
    critical, if there was an ability to find a nuclear deal of
    some kind with North Korea, you would also agree, would you
    not, that their belief about whether or not the U.S. would
    follow a deal, if we reached it, that could be important to
    them in determining how much they wanted to work with us to
    press for a deal?
        Governor Huntsman. Well, obviously, there are trust issues
    all around.
        Senator Kaine. Right.
        Governor Huntsman. And they constantly have to be worked on
    to shore up that trust deficit. The deployment of THAAD, for
    example, most recently, among other things, is causing
    consternation with both China and Russia.
        But we have worked together successfully in the six-party
    context, so I have seen examples of where three of us can, in
    fact, take on an issue, share information, work from a common
    sheet, a common playbook, and try to get things done.
        Senator Kaine. Right. Thanks for your continued willingness
    to serve.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Governor, Ambassador, thank you so much for taking this big
    responsibility on.
        Thank you to your family, who is also willing to undertake
    those sacrifices.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the
    Governor also.
        On one thing that Senator Kaine said, enforcement of the
    sanctions on North Korea, very important; enforcement of the
    sanctions against Russia, very important. So we are going to
    need your help in enforcing the sanctions. We are already
    seeing, in regard to a sale with Turkey, that the sanctions may
    be, in fact, being violated.
        So we are going to need your attention, if we are going to
    be effective in the messaging and action against Russia.
        Senator Risch. Tough balancing act.
        For members of the committee, we will keep the record open
    until the close of business on Thursday. That includes members'
    ability to submit questions for the record.
        So again, thank you so much. You and your family are free
    to go. Thank you.
        Mr. Mitchell, would you care to join us?
        Mr. Mitchell, thank you so much for joining us. The
    position that you have been nominated for is certainly an
    important position. I apologize for our time today. We are
    going to be on a bit of a short string, since we have a vote
    that starts shortly this afternoon.
        So instead of making an opening statement--I do not want to
    preach on about Europe and how important it is to us. I am
    going to pass on that and get to your opening statement.
        Senator Cardin. I have already commented a little bit
    earlier, so we can get right to the witness.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        So, Mr. Mitchell, the floor is yours.

     STATEMENT OF A. WESS MITCHELL OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AN ASSISTANT
           SECRETARY OF STATE, EUROPEAN AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS

        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you, Senator Risch. Let me also say how
    much I appreciated earlier Senator Cornyn from my home State of
    Texas giving me a very warm introduction, and I am honored to
    have his backing.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the
    committee, it is a real privilege to appear before you today as
    nominee for the position of Assistant Secretary of State for
    European and Eurasian Affairs. I am thankful to President Trump
    and also Secretary Tillerson for the confidence that they have
    placed in me to undertake this important role.
        I am proud to have here with me today a support battalion
    of my family members: my wife, Elizabeth; our children Wesley
    and Charlotte, who I think are terrorizing folks in the
    hallway, so I apologize to anyone who has experienced that
    today; my mom, Dessa Mitchell; my aunt, Cindy Harris; and my
    father- and mother-in-law, Ed and Linda Leon.
        As Senator Cornyn said, I am a sixth-generation Texan. I am
    the first person in my family in more than 150 years to pursue
    a career north of the Red River. Like my wife, who is a 13-year
    veteran of the Department of Defense, I came to Washington to
    serve my country.
        Twelve years ago, I co-founded the Center for European
    Policy Analysis, a think-tank that is now widely recognized for
    the quality its research and analysis on Central Europe. As
    president and CEO, I have overseen CEPA's growth into a truly
    transatlantic organization, with offices in Washington and
    Warsaw, and personnel in several European countries.
        In this role, I have built close and effective
    relationships with senior leaders across the NATO Alliance. I
    have had the honor of working with previous Assistant
    Secretaries and seeing the skill, dedication, and patriotism of
    the men and women of the Bureau of European and Eurasian
    Affairs.
        And I have worked closely with many of you and your staffs
    on this committee on some of the most important recent pieces
    of legislation affecting America's relations with Europe and
    Russia.
        What animates my work is the belief that America's
    alliances are the backbone of our strength and influence as a
    great power. Seventy years ago, Americans helped to create a
    new Western order, grounded in Atlantic cooperation. They did
    so because they understood that America has an enduring
    strategic interest in removing what an earlier generation of
    U.S. policymakers called the ``firetrap'' of geopolitics in the
    western Rimland of Eurasia. This region was the birthplace of
    three global wars in the 20th Century, two hot and one cold.
        The alliance that we built after 1945 and expanded after
    1989 laid the foundation for unprecedented freedom, stability,
    and prosperity in much of the world.
        As President Trump said in Warsaw, ``There is nothing like
    this community of nations. We must have the courage and desire
    to preserve'' it.
        If confirmed, I will view as my central task the
    preservation and strengthening of the Western alliance to
    ensure that my young children are able to enjoy the benefits of
    peace and abundance that we have known in our lifetimes.
        If confirmed, my first priority will be to give weight and
    substance to the administration's affirmation of America's
    commitment to Article 5 of NATO. Our allies, especially
    frontline states between the Baltic and Black Seas, must know
    that the defense of the West rests on an unwavering commitment
    and covenant.
        To be credible, it requires a strong forward posture and a
    willingness by all allies, including the largest and wealthiest
    European states, to bear their full share in defense spending.
        The fight against ISIS must also be an urgent priority. We
    need all allies to assist robustly in defeating ISIS, to share
    information on terrorist threats, and address the sources of
    migration and extremism in North Africa. We must work closely
    with Europe on Syria, Iran, and North Korea, and rally support
    for the new U.S. strategy for Afghanistan.
        And we must work to keep Turkey, long the linchpin of
    NATO's southern flank, firmly anchored in the transatlantic
    community.
        In both the east and south, we must be sober-minded about
    Russia. It is in the interests of the American and Russian
    peoples to lower tensions between the world's two largest
    nuclear powers. At the same time, the Russian Government must
    understand that a return to normal relations will be impossible
    as long as it attacks its neighbors, abuses its people, and
    attempts to undermine confidence in America's institutions and
    those of our allies.
        If confirmed, I will urge Moscow to cease its destabilizing
    activities in Ukraine, and to end its support for hostile
    regimes in Syria and Iran.
        America is greatest when our alliances are strong and our
    trade is vibrant. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen the
    trillion-dollar transatlantic economy that gives jobs to
    millions of Americans. I will build on the administration's
    efforts to help Europe enhance its energy security through
    diversification of energy sources and routes, and highlight the
    viability of American LNG as an option for these efforts.
        In all of these areas, we must be clear about what we stand
    for as an alliance. The glue that holds us together is greater
    than a treaty or a set of institutional rules. It is the glue
    of a common civilization, the West, grounded in freedom,
    democracy, and rule-of-law, and united by bonds of culture and
    shared sacrifice.
        As Secretary Tillerson said, ``American leadership requires
    moral clarity.'' We are strongest when our values and those of
    our allies are aligned, and when we hold our rivals accountable
    for human rights abuses at home.
        If confirmed, I will use the relationships I have forged in
    Europe, among the talented staff of the State Department and
    here on the Hill to advance U.S. interests, values, and
    prosperity in Europe. And I will use the leadership skills
    gained at CEPA to help realize Secretary Tillerson's vision of
    making every State Department dollar count for the American
    taxpayer.
        I am humbled to be considered for this position. Mr.
    Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to be here. I welcome your
    comments and questions.
        [Mr. Mitchell's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of A. Wess Mitchell

        Thank you for your kind introduction, Senator Cornyn. I am honored
    to have the backing of the Senator from my home state of Texas.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the committee,
    it is a privilege to appear before you today as nominee for the
    position of Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian
    Affairs. I am thankful to President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for
    the confidence they have placed in me to undertake this important role.
        I am proud to have sitting behind me today my wife Elizabeth
    Mitchell, my mother Dessa Mitchell, my aunt Cindy Harris, and my
    father- and mother-in-law Ed and Linda Leon.
        I am a sixth-generation Texan--the first person in my family in
    more than 150 years to leave the state of Texas and pursue a career
    north of the Red River. Like my wife, who is a 13-year veteran of the
    Department of Defense, I came to Washington for one reason: to serve my
    country.
        My experience in Europe goes back two decades. I have lived in
    Europe, studied its languages, history and geopolitics, and completed
    my doctorate at a German university. Twelve years ago, I co-founded the
    Center for European Policy Analysis, a leading think-tank widely
    recognized for the quality and breadth of its research on Central
    Europe. As President and CEO, I have overseen CEPA's growth into a
    truly transatlantic organization, with offices in Washington and Warsaw
    and personnel in several European countries. In this role, I have built
    close and effective relationships with senior leaders across the NATO
    Alliance. I have had the honor of working with three previous Assistant
    Secretaries and seeing the skill, dedication and patriotism of the men
    and women of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs in action,
    both here and in our embassies abroad. And I have worked closely with
    many of you and your staffs on this committee on some of the most
    important recent pieces of legislation affecting America's relations
    with Europe and Russia.
        What animates my work is the belief that America's alliances are
    the backbone of our strength and influence as a Great Power. Seventy
    years ago, Americans helped to create a new Western order, grounded in
    Atlantic cooperation. They did so not out of charity, but because they
    understood that America has an enduring strategic interest in removing
    what an earlier generation of U.S. policymakers called the ``firetrap''
    of geopolitics in the western rimlands of Eurasia. This region was the
    birthplace of three global wars in the 20th Century-two hot and one
    cold. The alliance that we built together after 1945 and expanded after
    1989 has been a guarantee against the return of that old cycle of
    bloodshed. It has laid the foundation for unprecedented freedom,
    stability and prosperity in much of the world. As President Trump said
    in Warsaw, ``there is nothing like this community of nations. The world
    has never known anything like it . . .  [and] we must have the courage
    and desire to preserve'' it.
        If confirmed, I will do exactly that. I will view as my central
    task the preservation and strengthening of the Western alliance to
    ensure that my young children are able to enjoy the benefits of peace
    and abundance that we have known in our lifetimes.
        Succeeding in that task will require us to confront the pressures
    bearing down upon Europe from the east and south, as well as the crisis
    of confidence inside Western societies.
        If confirmed, my first priority will be to give weight and
    substance to the statements that the President, Vice President and
    Secretaries of State and Defense have made affirming America's
    commitment to NATO Article 5. Our allies, especially frontline states
    between the Baltic and Black Seas, must know that the defense of the
    West rests on an unwavering covenant. To be credible, it requires a
    strong forward posture. And a willingness by all allies, including the
    largest and wealthiest European states, to bear their full share in
    defense spending.The fight against ISIS must also be an urgent priority
    for U.S. diplomacy in Europe. Since 2014, there have been more than 150
    attacks plotted or carried out on European soil. We must do more to
    stop this insidious threat. We need all allies to assist robustly in
    defeating ISIS, share information on terrorist threats, and address the
    sources of migration and extremism in North Africa. We must maintain a
    common approach with the European Union as a global partner, work
    closely with allies on Syria, Iran and North Korea, and rally support
    for the new U.S. strategy for Afghanistan. And we must work to keep
    Turkey, long the linchpin of NATO's southern flank, firmly anchored in
    the transatlantic community.
        In both the east and south, we must be sober-minded about Russia.
    It is in the interests of the American and Russian peoples to lower
    tensions between the world's two largest nuclear powers. At the same
    time, the Russian government must understand that a return to normal
    relations will be impossible as long as it attacks its neighbors,
    abuses its people and attempts to undermine confidence in America's
    institutions and those of our allies. If confirmed, I will urge Moscow
    to cease its destabilizing activities in Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and
    the Balkans and to end its support for hostile regimes in Syria and
    Iran. I will also support efforts to reduce the vulnerabilities of our
    allies and partners to corruption, disinformation, and other forms of
    malign influence that Russia uses to weaken their institutions and
    civil societies.
        America is greatest when our alliances are strong and our trade is
    vibrant. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen the trillion-dollar
    transatlantic economy that gives jobs to millions of Americans. I will
    build on the administration's efforts to help Europe enhance its energy
    security through diversification of energy sources and routes. And I
    will highlight the viability of American LNG as an option for these
    diversification efforts.
        In all of these areas, we must be clear about what we stand for as
    an alliance. The glue that holds us together is greater than a treaty
    or set of institutional ``rules.'' It is the glue of a common
    civilization--the West--grounded in freedom, democracy, and rule-of-
    law, and united by bonds of memory, culture and shared sacrifice. As
    Secretary Tillerson has said, ``American leadership requires moral
    clarity.'' We are open and free societies, and we welcome those who
    wish to join our alliance. We are strongest when our values and those
    of our allies are aligned, and when we hold our rivals accountable for
    human rights abuses at home.
        Whatever America seeks to do in the world, we are more apt to
    succeed when the West acts together. If confirmed, I will use the
    relationships I have forged over the past decade throughout Europe,
    among the talented staff of the State Department and here on the Hill
    to advance U.S. interests, values and prosperity in Europe. And I will
    use the executive leadership skills I have gained at CEPA to help
    realizeSecretary Tillerson's vision of making every State Department
    dollar count for the American taxpayer.
        I am humbled to be considered for this position. Mr. Chairman, Mr.
    Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to be here today. I welcome your comments and questions.

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Mitchell.
        Senator Cardin.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Mitchell, welcome. Again, as I told
    you, I very much appreciate your willingness to serve our
    country.
        The Obama administration takes pride that they were able to
    get Europe to have consistent sanctions against Iran that the
    United States initially brought forward. And they have a right
    to have that pride, because that was the effective leverage on
    Iran to get them to sit down and negotiate. No question about
    it.
        But I want to take you back a little bit in history in this
    committee, when Congress passed the enhanced sanctions against
    Iran. The administration was not quite as excited as we were
    taking up that sanction legislation, because it took away some
    of the flexibility that any administration likes to have.
        After it passed, they recognized that it gave them
    additional strength in dealing with our European partners to
    get tough sections against Iran that ultimately led to
    negotiations.
        My point is, with Russia, we are in a very similar
    situation. This Congress has spoken with a very, very strong
    voice, 98-2 in the United States Senate.
        These are tough sanctions. And it gives the President a
    much stronger hand. But he has to play the hand.
        You are going to be the key person in the administration
    working with our European partners to get consistency in the
    sanctions imposed by the United States and Europe against
    Russia, so they know that the impact on their economy will be
    much stronger if they do not change course in their behavior
    against Europe and the United States.
        Do we have your commitment that you are going to carry out
    not only the law but carry out with enthusiasm these tools that
    are available to get Europe consistent with the United States
    in imposing additional sanctions against Russia?
        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you for that question, Senator. And I
    enjoyed the time that we had together. I want to thank you for
    your leadership, particularly on human rights issues and
    Helsinki Commission.
        The Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act,
    as you say, this was a 98-2 vote and reflected the will of the
    American people. I think the Secretary has been clear that he
    views it in that light, and President Trump said in Warsaw of
    Russia that this is a country that tests our will, undermines
    our confidence, and challenges our interests.
        If I am confirmed, you have my commitment to executing and
    implementing the terms of this legislation as it was intended,
    obviously in close coordination with the Secretary.
        Senator Cardin. I thank you for that answer, but I want you
    to go further than that. I want you to work with European
    allies so that they have consistent sanctions. One of the
    things that we frequently hear about is that, the same thing
    with North Korea, if we do not get consistency on sanctions,
    you can drive a truck through the economic penalties.
        So we need Europe, which is closer with Russia on economic
    activity, to follow U.S. leadership. That is where I need your
    help. I should not say that I need your help. It is the country
    that needs your commitment.
        Mr. Mitchell. Let me say that I agree fundamentally that
    our sanctions are most effective when we have unity with the
    Europeans.
        I think, in recent years, we have seen, through both
    Republican and Democratic administrations, a recognition that
    the utility of our sanctions increases in direct proportion to
    the scale of our diplomatic engagement with European allies.
    The tools that Congress has made available are very important
    tools for raising the costs vis-a-vis the Russian Government.
    And I think a clear message has been sent through that
    legislation.
        I take your point, and I particularly want to emphasize the
    role that U.S. diplomacy will play with our allies in
    addressing the concerns that have been raised specifically
    about Section 232 involving European energy infrastructure, and
    also Section 231 on defense contracts.
        I think these are immediate sources of concern where U.S.
    diplomacy will need to be very focused on working closely with
    our European allies to help them understand the nature of
    legislation. And as the legislation explicitly states, to be
    effective, we want this to be coordinated with our allies.
        If confirmed, that will be my approach.
        Senator Cardin. Of course, we made concessions in both of
    those areas to deal with European concerns. The European
    ministers were in our office, Senator Corker's and my office,
    asking for modifications, which we put into the bill to take
    care of their concerns. They may very well be saying something
    differently to a different audience, but there was clearly an
    effort made for that to happen.
        In reviewing the legislation, we found areas where Europe,
    in some cases, had stronger sanctions than the United States.
    We have toughened our sanctions to equal what Europe has done.
        I still tell you that you are going to hear accounts that,
    ``We cannot do this. We cannot do this.'' And then after we all
    do it, they take credit for saying that we finally got unity
    and we are making a difference.
        It takes leadership. It takes leadership to make this work.
    The stakes could never be higher, in what Russia is doing
    today.
        You are going to be the key person, because you are going
    to be the conduit through to all of the different embassies in
    Europe. And you are going to have ambassadors who are not going
    to want to be bothered with another thing on their plate. And
    yet, I do not know of a higher priority than what Russia is
    doing against our interests and getting an effective way for
    sanctions to work.
        My last point would be, we expect you to work very closely
    with this committee on this issue. This is not a partisan
    issue. As you know, this is clearly and overwhelming support.
        We need your commitment that you will work with us and keep
    us informed as to the progress that we are making with Europe
    and the sanctions against Russia.
        The last point I would ask is that you mentioned the
    Helsinki Commission. On behalf of Senator Wicker, it is the
    regional commission that is directly involved in your
    portfolio. We would ask that you cooperate with the Helsinki
    Commission, you actually have representation there, but that
    you would work with the Helsinki Commission on these issues.
        I would ask, in both of those cases, that you would work
    with our committee and work with the Helsinki Commission.
        Mr. Mitchell. Well, I take that to heart. Let me say that I
    have worked a lot with folks on this committee in the past and
    their staff. I have also spent time with some of my
    predecessors in this post, understanding how they have
    approached Congress. And you can expect to see, if I am
    confirmed, my full engagement.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Mitchell, congratulations on your nomination. And thank
    you for your willingness to consider service in this post.
        And I appreciate the time that you spent with me talking
    about the challenges facing our international diplomatic
    efforts, and the State Department itself.
        You will have a large public diplomacy shop, and the office
    is charged with implementing Russian policies, as you have
    testified to, including our efforts to counter Russian
    disinformation.
        How do you expect the European Bureau to work with the
    newly constituted Global Engagement Center to address the
    disinformation that is coming from Russia?
        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you, Senator, for that question. And I
    appreciated having the opportunity to spend time with you
    recently. I want to thank you for the leadership that you have
    shown on so many of the issues that are close to CEPA's heart
    and the work that we have done, and also for your work on the
    subcommittee, specifically on the State Department.
        I think we have to start by recognizing that, in the field
    of disinformation, the Russian Government takes a whole-of-
    government approach. It is overt and covert activities, malign
    influence, both among European allies and also in the United
    States.
        CEPA, in our work, I would like to say that we were a
    pioneer in calling attention both to the types of methods,
    strategies for addressing them, and the scale of the detriment
    that this can do to the fundament of the West.
        We also helped with engaging with some of the offices here.
    As the legislation on the GEC process was being crafted, we
    provided briefings from our analysts and fellows from both here
    and those we have in the region. And we have worked very
    closely with NATO StratCom to understand the approach that they
    are taking, and obviously with the new Hybrid Fusion Cell that
    the European Union is setting up.
        I would simply say that for us to be effective in the
    disinformation space, we have to have a whole-of-government
    approach. And I think what the legislation provides, that
    Senators Portman and Murphy have put forward, is a basis for
    that, for synchronizing our efforts.
        And if I am confirmed, I will work very closely to ensure
    that the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs coordinates
    closely with the GEC as it turns its focus more toward Russia.
        Senator Shaheen. And do you think we have a whole-of-
    government approach at this point?
        Mr. Mitchell. I think we have an awareness that we did not
    have in the past. I think we have also learned a lot in the
    last couple years, including from our European allies, who have
    pioneered areas that we can explore for combating this.
        I think we are moving toward a whole-of-government
    approach, but I think there is no shortage for that tool and
    capacity that prompts coordination. And I think that my
    understanding of the mandate given to the GEC and its resources
    is that it provides that instrument.
        Senator Shaheen. And do you think that it is currently
    doing that?
        Mr. Mitchell. Well, my understanding of the GEC in its
    current role, until this mandate was put forward and the
    resources were put forward, is that it is doing very good work,
    including on areas other than Russia. I think it looks at ISIS
    and other parts of the globe. But I think the new direction and
    the new resources will increase its capacity to do that more
    effectively.
        Senator Shaheen. We had a hearing last week in the Helsinki
    Commission on this very issue, on disinformation. It focused
    mostly on Russia but also on the challenge that that presents
    to America, the fact that we have a lot of people who really do
    not question the accuracy of media reports, who get news from
    social media that may not provide a filter for how accurate
    that news is.
        And we talked about the issue of who is in charge. And the
    consensus of the people who testified there is that we do not
    currently have someone in charge of heading up these efforts.
        So not only do we not have a whole-of-government approach,
    we do not have somebody charged with doing this, and we do not
    have somebody currently named to do that.
        So I guess I would ask, do you agree with that? And who
    should take that role?
        I have had a chance to ask in the Armed Services Committee
    members of our military whether this is something that they
    should have a hand in. They used to. Russia has just set up a
    new unit in their military that is responsible for information
    and cyber information. So what I was told is that that is not
    the role of the military.
        As you know, after the Cold War, we disbanded the U.S.
    Information Agency and so much of the apparatus that was
    designed to counter disinformation.
        So from your perspective, what is the role of the State
    Department? Who should lead this effort? And how do we get to
    that whole-of-government approach?
        Mr. Mitchell. Well, I think that is a very important
    question. I think we have allies both at the NATO level, at the
    nation-state level, and at the EU level, who are grappling with
    similar questions, in part because, as pluralistic societies
    who value an open media discussion, we have to balance security
    and privacy. So I do not think that we are unique or alone in
    realizing the magnitude of this problem and seeking to
    understand how we use our tools.
        Even before the new direction and legislation on GEC, the
    Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs has been active on this
    issue, providing resources for media training in countries of
    Central and Eastern Europe, working to increase cyber defenses
    in the period since the interference in the elections.
        I would say that, moving forward, what is important is
    that, now that it has been made clear that the Global
    Engagement Center will have this as an invigorated mandate,
    that as the resources come into place and leadership comes into
    place for GEC, I think coordination within the department,
    obviously with the bureau because of the vast reservoir of
    expertise on the situation on the ground--which I think will be
    indispensable for the GEC to be able to do its job will, but
    also in the interagency process.
        Beyond that, not being privy to where the administration
    wants to take that specific set of issues, I would not want to
    speculate further. But I will say that I strongly support the
    new direction of the GEC and would be committed, if I am
    confirmed, to ensuring its close coordination with the Bureau.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Thank you.
        Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Mitchell, for your
    willingness to serve.
        I thank your family as well for your willingness to support
    Mr. Mitchell in his service.
        Let me ask you two questions, if I might.
        First, I have not had a chance to review all of President
    Trump's remarks today at the United Nations, but I understand
    he continued to express opposition to the Iran deal, the JCPOA,
    something that took a great deal of work and coordination to
    pull together, both our European allies and our partners in
    that deal, but adversaries in other means, Russia and China,
    and to provide some constraint for Iran's nuclear ambitions.
        Are you concerned that, if President Trump fails to certify
    Iranian compliance with the nuclear deal, absent any credible
    evidence of Iranian cheating within the four corners of the
    deal, that that will deeply strain our relations with our
    European partners? And if we do so, they will then refuse to
    agree to the snapback sanctions provided for in the JCPOA, and
    it will be even harder for us to craft a meaningful sanctions
    regime to force North Korea to back off its nuclear ambitions?
        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you for that question, Senator. I think
    it is an absolutely crucial question and issue.
        The administration is currently undertaking a review of not
    only JCPOA but our broader approach to Iran. I have not seen
    the latest comments that were made in New York, but I do know
    that Secretary Tillerson has been clear that what we want to
    take account of is the broader array of Iranian activities,
    including its ballistic missile programs, its support for
    terrorists in the region. And I think that bigger picture gives
    us a better sense of where the Iranians are at than just the
    terms of the JCPOA.
        My understanding is that a review is underway that, while
    that review is underway, we are emphasizing the strict
    implementation of JCPOA.
        Obviously, whatever direction things take with Iran, unity
    with our European allies will be absolutely crucial. And I do
    know that there are possible points of daylight between the
    United States and some of our allies and some of our allies in
    Europe on the future of JCPOA.
        I cannot speculate on the direction that the
    administration's review of this is going to take, but I can
    assure you that, if I am confirmed, it will be a very high
    priority to ensure that we have a high degree of coordination
    with our European allies and with the European Union in
    ensuring the effectiveness both of JCPOA and the broader
    Iranian strategy.
        Senator Coons. You said in your opening statement that we
    must work to keep Turkey, long the linchpin of NATO's southern
    flank, firmly anchored in the transatlantic community. That
    will be a challenging task.
        How would you recommend we proceed in retaining some
    relationship with Turkey, given all the different tensions that
    have really led to significant degradation in our relationship
    with Turkey?
        Mr. Mitchell. Well, it is an important question. Thank you
    for that.
        I will start by saying Turkey is an absolutely
    indispensable NATO ally of the United States. I do not think
    there is a country in the region or in NATO that could provide
    for U.S. national security what Turkey is currently providing
    not only in supporting our efforts, in the efforts to defeat
    ISIS, but in the broader regional strategic equation vis-a-vis
    Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, the Black Sea littorals, the
    relationship with Russia.
        So at the strategic level, I think it is absolutely
    critical that we sustain engagement with the Turkish
    Government. At the same time, in the period since the attempted
    coup, the department has raised very sincere concerns about the
    state of rule of law, human rights, and religious minority
    issues inside Turkey. And there have been developments that are
    very concerning.
        I think we have to balance our approach in continuing to
    work closely with the Turks as a strategic partner in the
    region. But I do not think that we should be shy about raising
    our concerns in these areas. And I think, if I am confirmed, in
    coordination with the Secretary, my approach would be to
    emphasize the common interests that we have in expanding our
    strategic engagement, but in an appropriate manner to continue
    to raise those concerns, to look for ways to work closely with
    Turkish civil society, to expand our people-to-people contacts.
    I think there is a lot more that could be done in those areas.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. Mr. Mitchell, I believe that we
    are safest and strongest when we lead with our values. Our
    values do not always make our allies happy, because they often
    do not share them. But I think an analysis of our interests has
    to include our values, particularly with regards to human
    rights and open society.
        So I thank you for that answer. I look forward to working
    with you. Thank you.
        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        It is good to see you, Mr. Mitchell. Thank you for stepping
    up and being willing to serve. I look forward to supporting
    your nomination when it comes before the United States Senate,
    and working very closely with you as the ranking member on the
    Subcommittee on Europe.
        But as I did with Governor Huntsman, I want to just
    acknowledge some underlying realities with you for a moment,
    and get your take on them.
        This administration has opened up a pretty open war with
    the idea, concept, and funding for diplomacy. The budget
    proposed a 40 percent reduction in funding for the State
    Department. The hiring freeze seems to apply to only one agency
    today, which is the State Department. There has been a ban or
    at least a slowdown on promotions and lateral transfers within
    the agency.
        You are going to be asked for your counsel by the Secretary
    and perhaps by the President as to whether to, once again, reup
    a request for a 40 percent reduction in funding, whether to
    continue the hiring freeze, and whether to slow down transfers
    and promotions.
        Can you just share with us what your advice will be when
    asked whether to continue these policies that many of us see as
    leading to an evisceration of diplomacy abroad?
        Mr. Mitchell. Thank you for that question, Senator Murphy.
    And I also want to express my gratitude for the meeting that we
    had, and the years of cooperation that we have had with your
    office, and your leadership on so many issues that are close to
    our heart at CEPA.
        The Secretary has been clear that he wants to see a better
    alignment of American priorities and resources at the State
    Department. My understanding of the redesign is that it
    recently completed its second phase. This was an employee-led
    process.
        Secretary Tillerson has experience in the private sector
    with large-scale redesign of organizations. And my
    understanding is that the targeted areas in this process are
    areas where the Secretary would like to see greater efficiency.
        I have not been privy to those discussions. I do know that
    the Secretary has said, as it relates to the Bureau of European
    and Eurasian Affairs, that he would like to see a priority in
    our work on those parts of Europe that have been under pressure
    or duress or malign influence from the Russian Federation, and
    those parts of Europe that we are working most closely with to
    defeat ISIS.
        I think those priorities are correct. I do not know what
    direction or final form the budget discussion will take. If I
    am confirmed, I will make best and highest use of the resources
    at my disposal. I certainly agree with the priorities the
    Secretary has outlined. And I think, in some of these areas, it
    is not a moment when we want to decelerate.
        So I have a lot of respect for the talented people in the
    bureau. I would like to, if confirmed, get my feet on the
    ground, have a listening tour, talk to people in the bureau,
    understand their priorities and concerns. And until I have done
    that, I would not be willing to really speculate.
        Senator Murphy. You know how much respect I have for you,
    and how enthusiastic I am for your willingness to take this
    position. But just, with all due respect, it is not an
    employee-driven redesign. It is a top-down-driven redesign. I
    would be challenged to find a single employee who thinks that
    many of these policies are in the best interest of the State
    Department.
        But you will have something to do with that. You will be
    able, once you are in this position, to be able to make sure
    that the people who work under you have something to say about
    this. But that is not what is happening right now.
        One last question on trade policy. We spent a lot of time
    in this committee over the past 4 years talking about a
    bilateral trade agreement with the European Union. I heard the
    Trade Representative say the other day that that is essentially
    on hold, as we all knew. But the danger is that it is going to
    be substituted by replacement bilateral trade agreements, in
    particular, one that the President has floated with England,
    with the United Kingdom.
        As you know, that would help the fragmentation of Europe.
    That would be a big win for those who want Europe to fall
    apart, the idea that the U.S. will not do a deal with the EU
    and instead will pursue deals with countries that withdraw from
    the EU.
        What is our current position? Are you going to be asked to
    negotiate a bilateral trade agreement with Great Britain,
    should they withdraw? Or are you going to be asked to negotiate
    a bilateral trade agreement with the European Union?
        Mr. Mitchell. Well, this is obviously a very important
    issue. I have been on the record in the past strongly in
    support of robust transatlantic trade agenda, of T-TIP.
        The relationship that we have with the United Kingdom is a
    very old and very special relationship. This is a relationship
    that, in strategic terms, is vital to us. But also,
    economically, the United Kingdom is our largest single source
    of foreign direct investment, a conduit for a major swath of
    our trade with Europe.
        And I think our priority is to ensure an amicable divorce.
    And our goal is to see that we end the process of Brexit both
    with a strong strategic and economic relationship with the EU
    and a strong strategic and economic relationship with the U.K.
        President Trump has been clear that he wants to see a
    vibrant bilateral trade agreement with the United Kingdom. My
    understanding is that we are in informal talks, the scoping
    exercises that are underway with the U.S.-U.K. trade and
    investment working group.
        I think we have to strike a balance here between allowing
    the EU and U.K. to flesh out the substance of their own deal,
    not least because whatever arrangements we come to the British
    will be contingent on the deal, but also sending a signal to
    American businesses and to the British as our allies that there
    is a process underway for establishing some groundwork or some
    principles for the deal that will eventually be done between
    the United States and the U.K.
        The lead on this is obviously USTR. If I am confirmed, I
    look forward to working closely with the folks at USTR and
    other relevant agencies to ensure that we end this process with
    a strong trade relationship both with the EU and with the U.K.
        Senator Murphy. I just want to go on the record one more
    time saying I think that would be an enormous strategic
    mistake. If Europe is to disintegrate, the responsibility for
    it will lie at the feet of this administration, if it pursues a
    bilateral trade agreement with Great Britain at the expense of
    a trade agreement with the European Union. And I would hope
    that you would counsel against it.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Senator.
        Mr. Mitchell, thank you, again, for your willingness to
    serve. And thank you to your family for the sacrifice I know
    that they are going to undertake with this.
        With that, we are going to close the hearing.
        I would state for the record that the record will be open
    until Thursday, to close of business on Thursday. That will
    include questions for the record.
        Senator Risch. With that, again, thank you, Mr. Mitchell.
        The meeting is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:23 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
         to Governor Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have a strong commitment to promoting human rights and
    democracy, which reflect long-standing American values, and values I
    have worked and lived by my whole life.
        As Governor of Utah, I have worked tirelessly on the behalf of all
    the state's residents to ensure their protections and rights. As
    Ambassador to Singapore and to China, I met with individuals from all
    walks of life, particularly those from the human rights community, to
    exchange views and to share America's values. Additionally, I have
    chaired the Atlantic Council, which has been a leading NGO/think tank
    noted for its active and innovative promotion of democracy and
    democratic values.
        As I noted in my testimony, my visit with a young woman whose home
    had been torn down by the Chinese authorities, and who was beaten when
    she advocated on her own behalf, is but one example of how important I
    believe it is for the United States to shine a light on human rights
    issues. This experience has stayed with me and is a daily reminder of
    the values that the American people hold dear.
        I believe that the Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve
    a government that supports an open marketplace of ideas, provides
    transparent and accountable governance, guarantees equal treatment
    under the law, and secures for all citizens the ability to exercise
    their rights without fear of persecution or retribution.
        If confirmed, I will lead the United States mission to Russia in
    continuing to support our longstanding efforts to ensure the rights of
    all Russians are protected, and promote values of freedom, democracy,
    individual liberty, and human dignity.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with allies and partners to
    continue to call on the U.S. Government of Russia to uphold its
    international obligations and commitments to promote and protect human
    rights and fundamental freedoms. Despite its promises, the U.S.
    Government has failed to take adequate steps to prosecute or punish the
    majority of officials who commit human rights abuses, resulting in a
    climate of impunity, especially for those who attack journalists,
    activists, and members of the political opposition.
        Currently, the most acute human rights situation in Russia is in
    Chechnya, where under republic head Ramzan Kadyrov, torture,
    extrajudicial killings, and enforced disappearances have been the norm
    for many years. Media have reported that on January 26, 2017, Chechen
    authorities summarily executed several dozen men without charging them
    of any crime. Since March 2017, local Chechen authorities have been
    involved in an ``anti-gay purge.'' According to credible NGO and media
    reports, at least 100 men suspected of being gay have been detained and
    tortured. Several of those detained were reportedly killed, sparking
    widespread international outrage.
        In addition, the U.S. Government has passed repressive laws and
    selectively employed existing ones to harass, discredit, prosecute,
    imprison, detain, fine, and suppress individuals and organizations
    critical of the government. Authorities stymie the work of NGOs through
    the ``foreign agents'' and ``undesirable foreign organization'' laws.
    Authorities use the new ``Yarovaya'' anti-terrorism law to harass,
    prohibit the activities, and even prosecute members of civil society,
    independent media, the political opposition, and religious and ethnic
    minorities. These laws are also used to restrict ``missionary
    activity,'' including preaching, proselytizing, disseminating religious
    materials, or engaging in inter-faith discussion; authorities regularly
    use it to harass religious minorities. As an example, the government
    used these laws to ban Jehovah's Witnesses this year. Authorities wield
    the law prohibiting ``propaganda'' of nontraditional sexual relations
    to minors to harass the LGBTI community.
        Russian authorities restricted citizens' ability to choose their
    government through free and fair elections and increasingly instituted
    a range of measures to suppress dissent. State Duma elections during
    2016 and the presidential election in 2012, in particular, were marked
    by accusations of government interference and manipulation of the
    electoral process.
        Authorities conduct politically motivated arrests, detentions, and
    trials of those who dissent from government policies or perspectives.
    Dozens of Ukrainian citizens have also been targeted for baseless
    prosecution.
        Other grave problems reported in the press include allegations of
    torture and excessive force by law enforcement officials that sometimes
    led to deaths; prison overcrowding, substandard/life-threatening prison
    conditions; executive branch pressure on the judiciary; lack of due
    process in politically motivated cases; electoral irregularities;
    extensive official corruption; violence against women; limits on
    women's rights; trafficking in persons; discrimination against persons
    with disabilities; social stigma against persons with HIV/AIDS; and
    limitations on workers' rights.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Russia in advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Since Putin's return to the presidency in 2012, he has
    initiated a crackdown on dissenting voices that many have characterized
    as a return to Soviet-era repressive practices. His government has
    gutted independent institutions, turned the parliament into a rubber
    stamp, eliminated judicial independence, and taken control of all
    television media. The government has subjected hundreds of dissenters
    to politically-motivated prosecution, launched a crackdown on
    independent civil society through laws that label NGOs ``undesirable
    foreign organizations'' and ``foreign agents,'' prevented the political
    opposition from appearing on the ballot, and targeted unpopular
    minorities for harassment and discrimination. Recent new laws and
    prosecutions designed to clamp down on internet freedom threaten the
    one remaining bastion of free speech.
        Authorities routinely deprive LGBTI individuals and their
    supporters of free assembly rights. A 2013 law prohibiting so-called
    propaganda of homosexuality to minors has provided grounds to deny
    LGBTI activists and their supporters the right of assembly and has been
    used on multiple occasions to interrupt public demonstrations by LGBTI
    activists. Hate crimes against LGBTI persons are common and rarely
    investigated. State-controlled propaganda is openly homophobic,
    contributing to heightened societal stigma and discrimination.
        Authorities have used extremism charges to suppress many forms of
    dissent and difference, including to revoke the legal status of some
    minority religious organizations and individuals. The ``Yarovaya''
    amendments to antiterrorism legislation further undermined freedoms of
    religion, expression, and assembly by banning the sharing of religion
    outside of officially sanctioned religious buildings, banning in
    practice prayer in private homes, private conversations between co-
    religionists, dissemination of religious materials, preaching, and
    inter-faith discussion.
        Nevertheless, if confirmed, I promise to work with allies and
    partners to continue to call on the U.S. Government, in both public
    statements and private discussions, to uphold its international
    obligations and OSCE commitments to promote and protect human rights
    and fundamental freedoms.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting regularly with human
    rights activists, civil society and other non-governmental
    organizations in Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to meet regularly with a broad
    spectrum of Russian society, including human rights activists, civil
    society, and religious minorities.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    U.S. Government to address cases of notable political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly detained in Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will urge Russian authorities to take steps
    to ensure the release of victims of politically-motivated prosecution,
    conduct independent and credible investigations into reported human
    rights violations, and hold any perpetrators responsible.
        I will lead Mission Russia in continuing to support longstanding
    efforts to ensure the rights of all Russians are protected, and to
    promote values of freedom, democracy, individual liberty, and human
    dignity.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the U.S. Government on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and accountable governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Although the bilateral relationship has been strained by
    other issues, I believe it is important to continue to express our
    concerns about our longstanding American values of freedom, democracy,
    individual liberty, and human dignity. As Secretary Tillerson has said,
    ``promoting human rights and democratic governance is a core element of
    U.S. foreign policy.'' The Russian people deserve a government which
    supports an open marketplace of ideas, transparent and accountable
    governance, equal treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise
    their rights without fear of retribution.
        I agree it is important to raise issues of civil society and human
    rights with the Russian authorities at all levels on a regular basis.
    If confirmed, I will lead Mission Russia in continuing to call on the
    U.S. Government, in both public statements and private discussions, to
    uphold its international obligations and commitments to promote and
    protect human rights and fundamental freedoms.

        Question 7. What will you do to build people-to-people ties between
    Americans and Russians and to support Russian civil society, human
    rights activists, and independent media? What do you need from
    Washington-based U.S. officials on this?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support throughout the country public
    diplomacy and other programs which allow for exchanges of ideas through
    press briefings, dialogue with reporters, social media, and face to
    face interaction with the Russian people. Mission Russia runs a wide-
    ranging public diplomacy operation, including exchange programs, under
    difficult circumstances
        Despite less than optimal circumstances, Russians still seek
    professional and academic exchanges with U.S. counterparts. English-
    language and speakers programs, which provide an entree into
    communities outside of Moscow, continue to be popular. Embassy Moscow's
    American Center continues to attract a significant audience for its
    events despite its having to be relocated onto the Embassy compound.
        Although the space for civil society and free media in Russia has
    become increasingly restricted, Russian organizations and individuals
    continue to express a desire to engage with the United States. As long
    as this continues to be the case, we will continue to support
    opportunities for direct interactions between Russians and Americans,
    including through peer-to-peer, educational, cultural, and other
    regional programs that provide exchanges of best practices and ideas on
    themes of mutual interest.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will aim to foster a diverse and inclusive
    team. I will ensure the U.S. Mission in the Russian Federation
    continually strives to promote equal opportunity for our officers,
    including women and those from historically disadvantaged groups.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, U.S. Mission Russia under my leadership will
    reflect our whole-of-mission commitment to promoting diversity and
    inclusion. I will make certain each of the supervisors at the U.S.
    Mission has the opportunity to receive proper formal training and
    regular guidance to ensure that he or she is helping to foster a work
    environment that is diverse and inclusive.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Russian Federation?

        Answer. Neither I, nor any member of my immediate family (spouse,
    children or their families), has any financial interests in the Russian
    Federation.

        Question 13. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report.

        Question 14. The decline in the U.S.-Russia relationship could
    generate pressure on you to smooth over bilateral relations wherever
    possible. But the reasons for this decline lie squarely with the
    Kremlin, because of its aggression in Ukraine, Syria, and against the
    United States and our allies. What will be your diplomatic posture in
    Russia, given these factors? How will you approach the implementation
    of Russia sanctions, including the Magnitsky Act?

        Answer. The United States is open to pragmatic cooperation with
    Russia in areas that benefit the American people. At the same time, we
    will hold Russia accountable for meeting its international obligations
    and commitments and will deter Russia from actions that would undermine
    international security.
        I am committed to upholding the rights of individuals in Russia and
    elsewhere, and if confirmed, I will support and uphold laws enacted by
    Congress such as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act to
    hold human rights abusers in Russia accountable. I am committed
    contributing to the implementation of all Russia sanctions, including
    the Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which
    Congress recently passed. These sanctions have been carefully
    coordinated with our allies, and I will maintain this collaborative
    approach. The goal of the sanctions, however, remains the same: to
    impose costs on Russia, sufficient to change the U.S. Government's
    behavior.
    Chechnya/LGBTQ Rights
        Question 15. Global attention was focused this year on Chechnya,
    where hundreds of gay and bisexual men were rounded up and detained.
    Many were tortured and some were killed, either as a result of torture
    or in so-called honor killings. Reports indicate that new detentions
    continue to happen and that the Chechen authorities are using new
    tactics to try to keep these cases out of the public eye. What would
    you do to address this situation, and the broader human rights crisis
    in Chechnya?

        Answer. I also share your concern about the violence against the
    LGBTQ community in Chechnya that was brought to light by brave
    journalists at Novaya Gazeta and researchers at Human Rights Watch.
    There have been multiple reports of mass illegal detentions, systematic
    torture of hundreds of LGBTQ persons, and extrajudicial killings.
        Through public statements and a letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Foreign Minister Lavrov, the State Department has requested from the
    U.S. Government a full investigation of the reports of abuse against
    LGBTQ persons in Chechnya and accountability for those found to be
    responsible.
        If confirmed, I will support the use of various fora and mechanisms
    to shed light on the situation for LGBTQ persons in Russia, and will
    stand in solidarity with civil society organizations and journalists
    working to respond to the crisis.

        Question 16. The anti-LGBT violence in Chechnya takes place against
    a backdrop of homophobic laws and homophobic violence throughout
    Russia. How do you plan to raise the human rights concerns of Russia's
    LGBTQ community with U.S. Government counterparts?

        Answer. I believe the Department of State's mission is at all times
    guided by longstanding American values of freedom, democracy,
    individual liberty, and human dignity. I also believe the Russian
    people, like people everywhere, deserve a government that supports an
    open marketplace of ideas, transparent and accountable governance,
    equal treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise their rights
    without fear of retribution. I am concerned the space for civil society
    and free expression in Russia has become increasingly restricted, in
    particular for LGBTQ individuals.
        I am also committed to upholding the rights of individuals,
    including LGBTQ persons, in Russia and elsewhere and will support and
    uphold laws enacted by Congress such as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of
    Law Accountability Act to hold human rights abusers in Russia
    accountable.
        If confirmed, I will work with Allies and partners to continue to
    call on the Government of Russia, in both public statements and private
    discussions, to uphold its international obligations and OSCE
    commitments to promote and protect human rights and fundamental
    freedoms.

        Question 17. Countering U.S. Government aggression will be more
    effective when it is done in a coordinated fashion with our allies. How
    will you coordinate closely with European counterparts and other
    partners in Moscow to deter the Kremlin's aggressive foreign policy and
    support human rights and democratic values?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign to undermine core
    institutions of the West and to weaken faith in the democratic and
    free-market systems. This campaign is aggressive, coordinated, and
    involves the entire U.S. Government. The United States should continue
    to work closely with its Allies and partners to enhance collective
    resilience against these threats. Given the nature and breadth of
    Russia's campaign, it is important for the United States to pursue a
    whole-of-government approach and work closely with Allies to expose and
    counter these campaigns.
        At the Warsaw Summit, NATO Heads of State and Government committed,
    in keeping with the intent of Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty,
    to enhancing individual and collective resilience against a full
    spectrum of threats, including cyber-attacks and hybrid threats, from
    any direction.
        In Europe, the United States is seeking to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies. The effects of Russian pressure continue to be
    greatest in the neighboring states of Ukraine and Georgia, where Russia
    undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of those
    countries. The Western Balkans are also increasingly a target, as
    Russia is trying to block the Euro-Atlantic integration of the region.
    It is important our assistance deter Russian aggression against these
    countries as well as encourage reforms in them to eliminate fraud and
    abuse and reorient their economies away from Russian economic pressure.
        If confirmed, I will promote cooperation with our Allies to build
    resilience in all NATO countries and in others around the world as
    well. I will push for the continuation of programs that promote the
    protection of human rights, build and reinforce the rule of law,
    support democratic institutions, and promote economic development in
    vulnerable countries in Europe. Furthermore, I will work closely with
    our Allies on implementation of the Countering America's Adversaries
    Through Sanctions Act to maintain unity on implementation of sanctions
    in order to further exert economic pressure on Russia to modify their
    aggressive behavior.

        Question 18. What steps will you take to ensure the safety of
    embassy personnel who conduct their work under frequent harassment by
    the U.S. Government?

        Answer. As I said in my testimony, the safety of Mission Russia and
    its personnel will always be at the top of my priority list. If
    confirmed, I will work tirelessly to ensure the protection, safety, and
    wellbeing of our staff in Russia.
        The pattern of harassment conducted against our staff in Russia is
    unacceptable, and I will not hesitate to raise concerns directly with
    senior Russian officials and stress that the United States will not
    tolerate actions that put American citizen security or the United
    States' national security at risk.

        Question 19. If confirmed, what are your thoughts on how to best
    deal with Moscow on North Korea? Are there any lessons from your time
    in Beijing that you think might be useful?

        Answer. The international community is united in condemning North
    Korea's continued violations of its international obligations and
    commitments and demanding that North Korea give up its prohibited
    nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The administration's goal is to
    seek Russian agreement to increase pressure on North Korea through the
    full implementation of DPRK related UN sanctions, employing all
    economic and diplomatic levers available in order to press the Kim
    Jong-Un regime to change its course. Russia has repeatedly called for
    restraint and dialogue with North Korea, but has resisted strengthening
    sanctions against the Kim Jong-Un regime.
        The Russian Government, however, must be made to realize that North
    Korea shows no interest in multilateral discussions to halt or reduce
    their nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Furthermore, the regime
    rejected the Russian and Chinese dialogue proposal known as ``freeze-
    for-freeze,'' where the U.S. would suspend U.S.-ROK joint exercises in
    exchange for a suspension of DPRK missile and nuclear testing.
        This administration remains steadfast in working with our allies to
    sanction individuals and entities, including those in Russia, who
    violate standing United Nations or United States sanctions by
    participating in proscribed activities with North Korea. We continue to
    press Russia to recognize that any existing economic relationship with
    the DPRK enables Kim Jong-Un's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile
    program in defiance of international law. This administration will
    continue to increase pressure on North Korea, including by pressing the
    Russians to reduce their economic relationship with North Korea, until
    Kim Jong-Un halts his destabilizing weapons programs and returns to
    international dialogue.
        From my time as Ambassador to China, I understand the pivotal role
    of China in any effort to halt North Korea's prohibited nuclear and
    ballistic missile programs. Both Russia and China have publically
    committed to the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
    China, Russia, and the United States participated in the six-party
    format; this example proves the three nations are capable of working
    from a common playbook to get things done.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
           to Governor Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. bySenator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. This month, the Russian Government poured tens of
    thousands of troops into its Zapad military exercises. What do you
    think the significance of these exercises with these kinds of troop
    levels means for American security posture in Europe?

        Answer. The ZAPAD 2017 exercise has raised regional tensions within
    Europe. Russia's disregard for the territorial integrity of its
    neighbors has caused significant concern among NATO Allies and partners
    about potential threats to their security.
        Russia has the right to exercise its forces; the United States and
    its NATO Allies conduct military exercises as well. However, we adhere
    scrupulously to all of our commitments with regard to military
    transparency under the OSCE's Vienna Document and have been careful to
    meet all relevant arms control obligations. Russia's lack of
    transparency regarding some of its large military activities has
    heightened tension and increased the risk of misunderstanding or
    miscalculation. Russia's neighbors are particularly concerned about
    Russia's so-called ``snap'' military exercises where Russia fails to
    inform its neighbors in advance.
        It is important the U.S. and our NATO Allies continually review our
    military posture and military activities and exercises in Europe. If
    confirmed, I am committed to working with State Department Leadership,
    other agencies, and our Allies to ensure our posture is capable of
    meeting the full range of threats that we face.
        In the face of continued Russian aggression in Ukraine and
    provocative behavior elsewhere, we are taking prudent, concrete
    measures to support the security of NATO Allies and partners. The U.S.
    and NATO posture in the region is defensive, proportionate, and in line
    with international commitments. NATO's unity is critical to an
    effective deterrent.

        Question 2. How much of a military threat does Russia pose to our
    European neighbors?

        Answer. Russia has demonstrated a willingness to use military force
    against its neighbors, most recently in Ukraine, and to employ active
    measures of various forms including hybrid warfare, disinformation
    campaigns, and malign influence activities. The United States should
    continue to work closely with its allies and partners to enhance
    collective resilience against these threats. It is important for the
    United States to pursue a whole-of-government approach to address this
    problem set.
        In Europe, the United States is seeking to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies. The effects of Russian pressure continue to be
    greatest in the frontline states of Ukraine and Georgia, where Russia
    undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of these
    neighbors. In response to Russian aggression in Ukraine, the
    Departments of State and Defense have committed over $750 million in
    training and equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and
    territorial integrity. The Balkans are also increasingly a target of
    Russian malign influence. It is important that our assistance seek to
    deter Russian aggression as well as encourage reforms in these
    countries that eliminate fraud and abuse and reorient their economies
    away from Russian economic pressure.

        Question 3. What are the administration's plans to continue to
    reassure our European allies that the United States remains committed
    to transatlantic security?

        Answer. NATO's unity and U.S. leadership are both critical to an
    effective deterrent against aggression. In the face of continued
    Russian aggression in Ukraine and provocative behavior elsewhere, we
    are taking prudent, concrete measures to support the security of NATO
    Allies. The U.S. and NATO posture in the region is defensive,
    proportionate, and in line with international commitments. It
    represents a significant commitment by Allies and is a tangible
    reminder that an attack on one is an attack on all.
        It's important that the U.S and our NATO Allies continually review
    our military posture and military activities and exercises in Europe.
    I'm committed to working with Allies to ensure our posture is capable
    of meeting the full range of threats we face today.
        One of the steps the administration has taken to bolster our
    military presence in Europe is the European Defense Initiative (EDI),
    which includes $4.8 billion requested for FY 2018. EDI provides funding
    to increase U.S. presence across Europe, expand U.S. participation in
    exercises and training activities with NATO Allies and partners,
    enhance prepositioning of U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve
    infrastructure at military installations, and provide assistance to
    build the capacity of our allies and partners to defend themselves and
    enable their full participation as operational partners in responding
    to crises.
        As part of Operation Atlantic Resolve (OAR)--the United States'
    contribution to the Alliance's persistent, rotational air, land, and
    sea presence in NATO's East--the U.S. has also deployed a rotational
    armored brigade combat team (ABCT) to European soil to concretely
    demonstrate action to back up our commitments.
        If confirmed, I will continue to reaffirm the unshakeable U.S.
    commitment to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, while calling upon all
    Allies to fulfill their commitments on defense spending and
    capabilities so that we can together meet all future threats
    effectively.

        Question 4. The Russian military continues its illegal occupation
    of Ukraine and continues to violate the Minsk agreement and take
    further destabilizing steps including recognizing passports issued by
    Ukrainian separatists. What steps will you take to pressure Russia to
    comply with the terms of the agreement?

        Answer. By maintaining Trans-Atlantic unity on sanctions,
    transforming Ukraine's military into a capable fighting force, and
    backing Ukraine's reform agenda, we have made clear to Moscow that the
    invasion of eastern Ukraine is an increasingly losing proposition. We
    must keep up the pressure, and if confirmed, I will make it one of my
    highest priorities.
        As Secretary Tillerson has said, U.S. sanctions will stay in place
    until Russia fulfills its Minsk commitments. The separate Crimea-
    related sanctions will remain until Moscow returns the peninsula to
    Ukraine. I believe the existing sanctions regimes, in coordination with
    G7 and EU sanctions, provide us with leverage to compel Moscow to
    fulfill its commitments. The administration has also been clear with
    Russia that its aggression in Ukraine is the key obstacle to the
    improvement of our bilateral relationship.
        In response to Russian aggression, the United States has committed
    more than $750 million in security assistance to provide training and
    equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and territorial
    integrity, better monitor and secure its borders, and deploy its forces
    more safely and effectively. The Department is closely examining how to
    best use security assistance funding going forward to bolster Ukraine's
    ability to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
        In addition to support for Ukraine's territorial integrity, the
    United States is implementing a robust assistance program to build
    democratic institutions, promote economic development, combat
    corruption, and strengthen Euro-Atlantic integration. The more Ukraine
    builds its economy and strengthens its democratic institutions, the
    more Russia fails in its effort to destabilize the country by
    continuing the conflict in the Donbas.

        Question 5. How will you engage with Russia and Ukraine to push
    back further efforts by Russia to increase its occupation and influence
    of Ukraine?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson reenergized our engagement to end
    Russia's aggression in eastern Ukraine by appointing Kurt Volker as
    Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations--the U.S. Government's
    point person on Ukraine negotiations. Volker has clearly delineated our
    key goals: the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity and the
    safety and security of all Ukrainians, regardless of language,
    nationality, religion, or ethnicity. Since his appointment in early
    July, Volker has closely coordinated with the Normandy Quartet
    (including France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine) and has engaged with
    other allies and stakeholders in an effort to break the logjam in the
    Minsk process. I have every confidence in Special Representative
    Volker's ability to succeed and, if confirmed, I will ensure the Bureau
    fully supports his efforts.
        The United States has been clear with Russia that its aggression in
    Ukraine is the key obstacle to improving our bilateral relationship.
    Russian aggression is not limited to eastern Ukraine. If confirmed, I
    will work to counter Russian aggression more broadly, including in
    Crimea, and elsewhere in Europe.

        Question 6. Congress recently authorized lethal assistance to
    Ukraine, do you support that effort? What steps do you believe we
    should take to more effectively support Ukraine as it battles Russian
    hybrid warfare?

        Answer. The United States has neither provided defensive weapons
    nor ruled out the option of doing so, but the administration will
    continue to examine how best to use U.S. security assistance going
    forward to bolster Ukraine's ability to defend its sovereignty and
    territorial integrity. As Secretary Tillerson stated previously,
    Ukraine has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression. The
    United States continues to focus on finding a diplomatic solution to
    the crisis in eastern Ukraine through the full implementation of the
    Minsk agreements.
        Russian aggression in Ukraine includes the use of hybrid warfare to
    include disinformation and malign influence. Ukraine was the target of
    cyber-attacks in December 2015 and 2016, and in June 2017. On September
    29, an interagency team will visit Kyiv for meetings with Ukrainian
    officials to discuss policy and incident response to cyber-attacks.
    Countering hybrid warfare requires a broad whole of government approach
    in order to build national resiliency.
        In response to Russian aggression, the United States has committed
    more than $750 million in security assistance to provide training and
    equipment to help Ukraine better monitor and secure its borders while
    deploying its forces more safely and effectively. The United States and
    allies established a Multinational Joint Commission and training group
    to coordinate international efforts and build Ukraine's defense
    capacity to deter further Russian aggression. Sanctions, too, remain a
    valuable tool in this effort. As Secretary Tillerson told his Russian
    counterpart directly, Minsk-related sanctions will remain in place
    until Russia fully implements its commitments, and separate Crimea-
    related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns the
    peninsula to Ukraine.
        More broadly, the United States, along with our European Allies and
    partners, has assisted and encouraged Ukraine to pursue broad reforms
    that will reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen democratic institutions,
    and reduce corruption. Reform across sectors such as energy, the
    economy, land, pension, education, healthcare, defense, and most
    importantly judicial, will help to build a stronger and more resilient
    Ukraine. Continuing Kyiv's democratic and economic transformation,
    coupled with more capable Ukrainian Armed Forces, contributes directly
    to Ukraine's resilience in the face of continued Russian aggression,
    and in particular, Moscow's hybrid warfare tactics.

        Question 7. While we must focus on Russia's ongoing military
    aggression, as you stated in your hearing, Russia is increasingly
    engaged in hybrid warfare including effective strategic communications.
    Do you believe the United States should maintain investments into
    public diplomacy efforts in Eastern Europe?

        Answer. Yes. Public diplomacy efforts that invest in people through
    exchanges, media literacy programs, and English-language trainings are
    indispensable as the United States seeks to advance its national
    interests in the face of a rising tide of Russian disinformation.
    Initiatives such as the International Visitor Leadership Program
    (IVLP), the Fulbright Program, and other people-to-people exchanges
    build enduring relationships that cannot be perfectly measured but rank
    among our most effective investments. This is particularly true in
    countries such as Ukraine and Moldova, where Russian disinformation
    threatens to turn citizens away from the Euro-Atlantic community. Many
    U.S. exchange program alumni become leaders in their home countries; by
    investing in a country's most promising youth through short exchanges,
    we invest in a shared vision for the future. Media-focused exchanges,
    such as Ukraine's Media Partnership Program that pairs independent
    Ukrainian media outlets with U.S. media outlets in a long-term
    mentorship relationship, are equally impactful and result in better
    quality information for the Ukrainian public. Empowering the public
    with facts advances the U.S. goal of a democratic, prosperous, and
    secure Ukraine.
        To inoculate foreign publics against disinformation, our embassies
    work with European partners to build media literacy skills in audiences
    vulnerable to disinformation and fake news. By training citizens to
    more carefully scrutinize news items for simple markers such as source,
    author, and byline, we can empower countless people to protect
    themselves against disinformation and mitigate the firehose of
    falsehood, particularly in critical regions such as eastern Ukraine.
    This moves the needle forward on the U.S. strategic goal of a Europe
    whole, free, and at peace. If confirmed, I will ensure this work
    continues.
        English-language programs enable foreign publics to consume
    alternate news and obtain a more balanced perspective of the world.
    Ukrainian President Poroshenko announced 2016 as the Year of English
    and promoted English learning as a way to make Ukraine's workforce more
    competitive as Ukraine pursues its chosen European trajectory. U.S.
    public diplomacy programs are essential to fulfilling this goal.
    English-language programs not only provide skills that help Eastern
    Europeans pursue a Euro-Atlantic path but also build lasting people-to-
    people relationships in even the most challenging context.

        Question 8. What programs do you believe are most effective to
    countering Russian propaganda?

        Answer. Russia rejects the post-Cold War order in Europe and
    increasingly seeks to undermine U.S. influence with our Allies and
    partners with an eye to fragmenting the transatlantic alliance.
    Russia's campaigns use traditional diplomatic, military, and economic
    tools, as well as ``active measures,'' a major component of which is
    propaganda and misinformation. The State Department's public outreach
    strategy is based on the recognition that both the message and the
    messenger are important for effective communication with audiences.
    When making public statements as the United States Government, the
    number one goal should be to empower our embassies with materials the
    local press across the region can carry, both in print and in digital
    form. This applies both to debunking myths, but more importantly,
    priming the information environment with positive messages about the
    United States and the transatlantic alliance. However, the fight
    against misinformation is bigger than us, and the U.S. Government
    cannot be as effective if it fights alone. Those most vulnerable to
    malign information campaigns could become our strongest messaging
    allies through systematic support. If confirmed, I will continue to
    work with our partners who are on the frontlines of the war of
    misinformation and arm them with the core competencies necessary to not
    only counter disinformation but advance positive, accurate, and
    responsible messaging. Specifically, I will aim to help governments
    communicate more effectively through the European Digital Diplomacy
    Exchange, empower journalists and other non-governmental communicators
    to uncover and publicize important stories through the Digital
    Communicators Network, and strengthen civil society through trainings
    and networking opportunities through a number of regional programs.

        Question 9. Do you believe the Global Engagement Center can play an
    important and constructive role in promoting American national security
    interests?

        Answer. Yes. Both extremist messaging and state-sponsored
    disinformation operations represent a critical national security threat
    to the United States. The Global Engagement Center (GEC) was mandated
    in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act to lead and coordinate
    Federal Government efforts to recognize, understand, expose, and
    counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation that
    undermine U.S. national security interests. The GEC's role in this
    effort is essential to the effective coordination of the multitude of
    U.S. Government efforts to counter these national security threats.
        The GEC has a proven track record of playing an important and
    constructive role in promoting American national security interests
    with the work it continues to perform with regard to its original
    counterterrorism mission. The GEC has been pivotal in U.S. effort to
    counter the recruitment of terrorist groups such as ISIS and exposing
    and countering their warped and perverse ideology, and the GEC will
    continue to advance this effort.
        I hope that the GEC will employ the learned skills and successful
    aspects of its counterterrorism mission towards its expanded mission to
    counter propaganda and disinformation emanating from foreign states.
    Congress expanded the GEC's mission and granted it new legal
    authorities out of growing concern about the adverse effects of state-
    sponsored propaganda and disinformation, which have emerged as a clear
    national security concern that is increasing in overall size and
    sophistication. State-sponsored disinformation operations impact United
    States foreign policy objectives and create a lack of confidence in
    foreign populations and sow seeds of doubt in the susceptible
    populations living in our allied and partner nations.
        As stated in the Director of National Intelligence's January 2017
    report, countries and entities involved in spreading disinformation
    during election campaigns in Western democracies will apply what they
    have learned ``to future influence efforts worldwide, including against
    US allies and their election processes.''

        Question 10. Most analysts and USG officials believe that Russia
    violated the INF treaty this year. Do you share this assessment? How
    should the United States respond?

        Answer. Yes, I share the assessment that Russia remains in
    violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, as it
    has been for several years. In July 2014, the United States declared
    Russia in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty not to
    possess, produce, or flight test a ground-launched cruise missile
    (GLCM) with a range between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. This finding was
    made public in the 2014 Report on Adherence to and Compliance with Arms
    Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments,
    and reaffirmed in the 2015 and 2016 editions.
        The administration has made very clear to Russia its concerns about
    Russia's violation of the INF Treaty and the risks it poses to European
    and Asian security. I believe the INF Treaty is in the national
    security interest of the United States and of Russia--but only if
    Russia returns to full compliance with its treaty obligations. If
    confirmed, I will certainly take every opportunity to raise this in
    Moscow, as this is a significant issue in the bilateral relationship.
        The administration is taking additional steps to pressure Russia to
    return to compliance and ensure Russia will not gain a significant
    military advantage from its decision to violate the Treaty. If
    confirmed, I will work closely with our Allies as we develop
    proportionate responses to Russia's ongoing violation and make very
    clear to Russian officials U.S. concerns about Russia's violation of
    the INF Treaty and the risks it poses to European and Asian security.

        Question 11. We have seen Russia build an increasingly cooperative
    relationship with Iran, particularly vis-a-vis Syria, but also
    Afghanistan and elsewhere. How should the United States respond?

        Answer. Recent Russian actions in Syria and ongoing cooperation
    with Iran across a range of issues are concerning. The region is
    complex, and U.S. efforts to defeat ISIS must factor in our interest in
    ending the conflict in Syria and containing Iran's influence.
        If confirmed, I will remain clear-eyed about Russia's actions in
    Syria and its relationship with Iran, and I will be frank in our
    dialogue with Russia. I will be resolute in calling out Russia's bad
    behavior as it arises, and will consider our full range of sanctions,
    as well as military, diplomatic, and law-enforcement tools to protect
    U.S. interests.
        If confirmed, I will urge Russia to fully support the Afghan
    Government through coordinated international efforts aimed at ensuring
    an Afghanistan that is stable, prosperous, and not a threat to the
    United States and others. To date, cooperation between the United
    States and Russia on Afghanistan has been limited. The United States
    has offered bilateral consultations with Russia to discuss how we might
    cooperate to support Afghanistan and to foster a peace process between
    the Afghan Government and the Taliban, though it remains to be seen
    whether Russia is interested in playing a productive role in this
    process, or rather that of a spoiler.

        Question 12. We have seen Russia build an increasingly cooperative
    relationship with Iran, particularly vis a vis Syria, but also
    Afghanistan and elsewhere. What do you assess to be Russia's long term
    interest in building a relationship with the world's leading sponsor of
    terrorism?

        Answer. Russia views Iran as a key partner in addressing common
    threats: impeding Western interests in its region of influence,
    maintaining stability in Central Asia, retaining influence in
    Afghanistan and Syria, and blocking U.S. goals in the Middle East.
        Moscow and Tehran have cooperated to bolster the Assad regime since
    the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, with Russia dramatically
    increasing its support in September 2015. Iranian-supported militias
    backed by Russian air support enabled pro-regime forces to seize and
    hold key terrain from opposition forces. In turn, Russia offered Iran
    legitimization by giving it a seat at the table in international
    discussions about the Syrian conflict. At the same time, Moscow and
    Tehran are jockeying for the role of top influencer on the Assad
    regime.
        Russian official rhetoric shows it is keen to expand its economic
    and trade relationship with Iran. However, Russia and Iran are both
    highly dependent on energy exports. While trade volumes between Russia
    and Iran grew to $2.2 billion in 2016 from $1.3 billion in 2015, Iran
    is only Russia's 42nd-largest trading partner. Virtually the entire
    increase in Russian exports to Iran from 2015-2016 came in military
    procurements and civil aviation.

        Question 13. How can the United States and its allies, particularly
    in the NATO, work to confront this alliance?

        Answer. Countering traditional military threats remains as central
    to NATO as it was when the Alliance was created in 1949. But today's
    security environment involves a broader array of challenges, including
    asymmetric warfare. Iran is developing ballistic missiles that threaten
    NATO Allies. Russian disinformation and malign influence campaigns seek
    to undermine Western democratic institutions and principles, sow
    disunity within Europe, and weaken our transatlantic bonds.
        NATO is already responding. Under the leadership of Secretary
    General Stoltenberg all Allies agreed, by the end of 2017, to outline
    concrete plans for reaching their 2 percent defense spending goal. In
    June 2017, Allies also individually agreed to take on the full set of
    military capabilities assigned to them by NATO--the first time this has
    ever occurred. The President has proposed spending $4.8 billion on the
    European Deterrence Initiative as a concrete demonstration of the U.S.
    will and capability to defend our Allies. In July 2016, Allies declared
    Initial Operational Capability of a NATO ballistic missile defense
    capability, which defends Alliance populations, territory, and forces
    against a potential ballistic missile attack from regional threats like
    Iran.
        As Allies said at the 2016 NATO Warsaw Summit, Russia's aggressive
    actions are a source of regional instability that fundamentally
    challenge the Alliance, have damaged Euro-Atlantic security, and
    threaten our long-standing goal of a Europe whole, free, and at peace.
    NATO has responded to this changed security environment by enhancing
    its deterrence and defense posture, including by placing a forward
    presence in the eastern part of the Alliance.
        On July 7, the President stated in his speech in Warsaw, a strong
    alliance of free, sovereign and independent nations is the best defense
    for our freedoms and for our interests. The United States has
    demonstrated not merely with words but with its actions that we stand
    firmly behind Article 5, the mutual defense commitment.

        Question 14. How will you work with Russia to ensure it lives up to
    international agreements to impose sanctions on state sponsors of
    terrorism and human rights abusers, particularly in Iran and North
    Korea? According to the latest TIP Report, the Russian Government
    contracts with the North Korean Government to allow North Korea to
    operate force labor camps on Russian soil.

        Answer. I am committed to holding Russia accountable for meeting
    its international obligations and commitments. If confirmed, I will
    work to deter Russia from actions that would undermine international
    security or violate human rights.
        I will support and uphold laws enacted by Congress such as the
    Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act to hold human rights
    abusers in Russia accountable. I will also strive to effectively
    contribute to implementing all Russia sanctions, including the
    Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which Congress
    recently passed. The U.S. Government has carefully coordinated with our
    allies on Russia/Ukraine sanctions since 2014, and I will work with my
    colleagues to maintain this collaborative approach as we implement our
    new sanctions. The goal of the sanctions, however, remains the same: to
    impose costs on Russia sufficient to change the Russian Government's
    behavior.
        On DPRK, the United States hopes that along with U.S. allies and
    partners around the world, Russia will press with the DPRK that the
    only path to a secure, economically-prosperous future is to abandon its
    unlawful weapons programs that endanger international peace and
    security.
        If confirmed, I will seek Russia's cooperation to ensure the full
    implementation of all UN sanctions pertaining to recent UN Security
    Council resolutions in response to DPRK provocations. Secretary
    Tillerson has discussed directly with President Putin the need for the
    Russians to join us in the pressure campaign on North Korea.
        Russia and China represent the two largest markets for North
    Koreans working abroad, a significant revenue source for the DPRK
    regime. In March this year, the DPRK and Russia concluded an agreement
    to expand the number of North Korean workers in Russia. Russia (along
    with China) has watered down all the sanctions measures the United
    States and partners have proposed. Russia needs to downgrade its DPRK
    guest worker program as their wages are siphoned off by the regime to
    fund the banned weapons programs. If confirmed, I will urge Russia to
    increase diplomatic and economic pressure on the regime.
        Addressing Iran's continued support for terrorism, and violations
    and abuses of the human rights of its citizens remains a priority for
    the United States. The United States regularly targets for financial
    and visa sanctions those who abuse or violate human rights in Iran, and
    I will make every effort to work with Russia, as we do with our like-
    minded partners, to ensure it lives up to its agreements in bringing
    Iran to task for its malign and destabilizing activities.
        Entities or individuals from any nation, including Russia, that
    transfer conventional weapons or controlled items to Iran, North Korea,
    or Syria may be sanctioned under the Iran North Korea Syria
    Nonproliferation Act Sanctions Act (INKSNA). In the past two years, the
    Department sanctioned 19 Russian entities under INKSNA.

        Question 15. According to the latest TIP Report, the Russian
    Government contracts with the North Korean Government to allow North
    Korea to operate force labor camps on Russian soil. As Ambassador to
    Russia, would you consider addressing this issue? In general, how would
    you engage the Russian Government on human trafficking concerns?

        Answer. Russia remains a Tier 3 country in the 2017 Trafficking in
    Persons Report. The report cites the Russian Government's contracts
    with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) under which the
    DPRK operates labor camps on Russian soil and subjects thousands of
    North Korean workers to forced labor. The report also notes that Russia
    lacks a national action plan to combat trafficking and offers no
    funding for victim rehabilitation.
        The United States remains concerned over Russia's low political
    will to address human trafficking. If confirmed, I will engage Russian
    officials at all levels to encourage them to take concrete steps to
    prevent trafficking, protect the victims, and prosecute the offenders.

        Question 16. Venezuela's state-owned oil company PdVSA, (Pedevesa)
    and its subsidiary Citgo--which has energy infrastructure in the United
    States--are under extreme financial pressure. Under a deal last year,
    49.9 percent of Citgo was mortgaged to Rosneft, the Russian Government-
    owned oil company run by Vladimir Putin crony Igor Sechin. It is also
    possible that Rosneft acquired other PdVSA bonds on the open market
    what could bring their ownership potential to over 50 percent. If Citgo
    defaults on its debts, Rosneft, an entity currently under American
    sanctions because of Russia's belligerent behavior, could come to own a
    majority stake in strategic US energy infrastructure including 3
    refineries and several pipelines.

       Does this potential deal concern you?

        Answer. Russian state-controlled oil company Rosneft has extended a
    number of loans to Venezuelan state-owned oil company Petroleos de
    Venezuela, S.A (PDVSA). Some of these loans are secured by PDVSA assets
    located in the United States, specifically PDVSA-owned U.S.-based
    petroleum company Citgo. At this time, PDVSA is not in default on loan
    payments to Rosneft and there are no plans to transfer Citgo ownership
    to Rosneft.

        Question 17. Do you believe the United States Committee on Foreign
    Investment (CFIUS) should be reviewing this case?

        Answer. Should a change in the foreign ownership of Citgo occur in
    the future, the transaction would be closely scrutinized by the
    Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS).

        Question 18.  Are you concerned about other efforts of the Russian
    Government to meddle in the American energy market?

        Answer. This CFIUS review process allows the U.S. Government to
    impose mitigation measures or block any ownership changes which could
    negatively impact U.S. national security.

        Question 19. Three respected international tribunals have concluded
    in unanimous decisions that Russia violated international laws and
    norms by expropriating Yukos oil company and must compensate
    shareholders. Additionally, in 2014, the European Court of Human Rights
    concluded that Russia's actions against Yukos violated Russia's
    obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and awarded
    Yukos shareholders more than $2.5 billion in compensation. However,
    thousands of U.S. investors have lost an estimated $14 billion and have
    received no compensation.

       Will you engage with the Russian Government and advocate for the
            U.S. investors who have yet to receive compensation?

        Answer. We are currently awaiting the outcome of two cases in front
    of U.S. Federal and Dutch courts involving the U.S. investors in Yukos.
    If I am confirmed, I will monitor these cases closely and, if
    necessary, will advocate to the Russian Government on behalf of the U.S
    investors in Yukos for compensation.

        Question 20. As you know, the situation facing lesbian, gay,
    bisexual, transgender and queer people in Russia can be extremely
    challenging. They often face violence and government crackdowns, with a
    strict "anti-propaganda" law that potentially criminalizes any
    discussion of homosexuality. And the Russian republic of Chechnya has
    lately conducted an anti-gay purge that really beggars description,
    with witch hunts, torture, and summary executions.

       Unfortunately, the Trump administration's response to these attacks
            on this vulnerable community has been weak. Secretary Tillerson
            and the President have not raised Chechnya publicly even once
            and Secretary Tillerson has stated that he does not view
            protecting human rights as a priority of his department. This
            could have dangerous implications for security and stability in
            the region.
       How do you plan to raise human rights concerns with your Russian
            counterparts, and especially with regards to the LGBTQ
            community?

        Answer. I believe the Department of State's mission is at all times
    guided by longstanding American values of freedom, democracy,
    individual liberty, and human dignity. I also believe the Russian
    people, like people everywhere, deserve a government that supports an
    open marketplace of ideas, transparent and accountable governance,
    equal treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise their rights
    without fear of retribution--and am concerned the space for civil
    society and free media in Russia has become increasingly restricted.
        I also share your concern about the violence against the LGBT
    community in Chechnya that was brought to light by brave journalists at
    Novaya Gazeta and researchers at Human Rights Watch. There have been
    multiple reports of mass illegal detentions, systematic torture of
    hundreds of LGBT persons, and extrajudicial killings.
        Through public statements and a letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Foreign Minister Lavrov, the State Department has requested from the
    Russian Government a full investigation of the reports of abuse against
    LGBT persons in Chechnya and accountability for those found to be
    responsible.
        I am also committed to upholding the rights of individuals in
    Russia and elsewhere and will support and uphold laws enacted by
    Congress such as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act to
    hold human rights abusers in Russia accountable.
        If confirmed, I will work with State Department colleagues, Allies,
    and partners to continue to call on the Government of Russia, in both
    public statements and private discussions, to uphold its international
    obligations and OSCE commitments to promote and protect human rights
    and fundamental freedoms.

        Question 21. I was pleased that you definitively stated in your
    hearing that there was ``no question Russia meddled in our elections.''
    Unfortunately, President Trump has not been as clear and definitive in
    his statements and I am concerned that in our eagerness to work with
    Russia we lose sight of the importance of holding Russia accountable
    for their interference.

       As U.S. Ambassador to Russia, how will you continue to hold the
            Russian Government accountable for their actions in interfering
            with the U.S. election process?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to press Russian officials
    against further Russian intrusion in the democratic processes of the
    United States, and those of any other countries. Furthermore, I am
    committed to contributing to the swift implementation of the Countering
    America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which represents the will
    of the Congress, and American people, in responding to Russian election
    interference in the United States.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
          to Governor Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1.  As you know, the situation facing lesbian, gay,
    bisexual, transgender and queer people in Russia can be extremely
    challenging. They often face violence and government crackdowns, with a
    strict ``anti-propaganda'' law that potentially criminalizes any
    discussion of homosexuality.
        Senator Toomey and I have a resolution pending before this
    committee condemning the abuses in Chechnya, calling on the Russian
    Government to protect its citizens, calling on our government to demand
    the release of individuals wrongfully detained, and also to hold
    perpetrators accountable through sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.

         How do you plan to raise human rights concerns with your Russian
            counterparts, and especially with regards to the LGBTQ
            community, particularly with respect to Chechnya?

        Answer. I share your concern about the violence against the LGBTI
    community in Chechnya that was brought to light by brave journalists at
    Novaya Gazeta and researchers at Human Rights Watch. There have been
    multiple reports of mass illegal detentions, systematic torture of
    hundreds of LGBTI persons, and extrajudicial killings.
        Through public statements and a letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Foreign Minister Lavrov, the State Department has pressed the Russian
    Government to fully investigate the reports of abuse and to prosecute
    those responsible.
        If confirmed, I will work with Allies and partners press the
    Government of Russia, to uphold its international obligations and OSCE
    commitments to promote and protect human rights and fundamental
    freedoms.
        I am committed to upholding the rights of individuals in Russia and
    elsewhere and will support and uphold laws enacted by Congress such as
    the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act to hold human
    rights abusers in Russia accountable.

        Question 2.  Given Russia's increasingly aggressive behavior in
    Europe and in light of the President's lackluster public support for
    NATO, how will you communicate to Russia that the United States remains
    strongly committed to NATO and defending our European allies?

        Answer. The United States is committed under Article 5 of the North
    Atlantic Treaty to the collective defense of any and all NATO Allies.
    Collective defense under Article 5 is a bedrock principle of NATO,
    which underpins the transatlantic relationship. President Trump has
    publicly reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to Article 5, as have
    Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis.
        The United States' commitment to Article 5 is ironclad, and the
    United States backs up this commitment though a broad set of actions,
    including deterrence and reassurance. This includes leading a
    rotational multinational battle group in Poland as part of NATO's
    enhanced Forward Presence. In addition, the United States supports
    deterrence and defense activities in Europe through the European
    Reassurance Initiative (ERI). This administration's Fiscal Year 2018
    Budget request included $4.8 billion--a $1.4 billion increase from last
    year--to fund ERI.
        The ERI provides funding to increase U.S. presence across Europe,
    expand U.S. participation in exercises and training activities with
    NATO Allies and partners, enhance prepositioning of U.S. military
    equipment in Europe, improve infrastructure at military installations,
    and provide assistance to build the capacity of our allies and partners
    to defend themselves and enable their full participation as operational
    partners in responding to crises. These activities also support Article
    3 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which focuses on individual and
    collective capacity to resist armed attack.

        Question 3.  Russia is also currently out of compliance with the
    Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and is developing ground-
    launched cruise missiles prohibited under the Treaty.
        What can we do to bring Russia back into compliance with the INF
    Treaty? Will you commit to raising this issue with the appropriate
    contacts if appointed as Ambassador to Russia? What is your perspective
    about the trajectory that strategic arms reduction dialogue should
    take, between Russia and the United States and also China?

        Answer. The administration has made very clear to Russia its
    concerns about Russia's violation of the INF Treaty and the risks it
    poses to European and Asian security. I believe the INF Treaty is in
    the national security interest of the United States and of Russia--but
    only if Russia returns to full compliance with its treaty obligations.
    If confirmed, I will certainly take every opportunity to raise this in
    Moscow, as this is a significant issue in the bilateral relationship.
        Ultimately, it is up to the decision-makers at the highest levels
    of the Russian Government to make the political decision to return to
    compliance with its obligations under the INF Treaty. For several
    years, the U.S. has pressed russia to do so; thusfar Moscow has refused
    to substantively engage at either the political or technical expert
    level. I understand that the administration is taking additional steps
    to pressure Russia to return to compliance, and to ensure Russia will
    not gain a significant military advantage from its decision to violate
    the Treaty. If confirmed, I will work closely with State Department
    Leadership and our Allies to develop proportionate responses to
    Russia's ongoing violation, including sharing available information on
    Russia's intermediate-range ground-launched cruise missile production
    and flight-testing.
        Regarding the trajectory of the strategic arms reduction dialogue,
    the administration is focused on ensuring the United States and Russia
    reach the central limits of the New START Treaty on Feburary 5, 2018
    before assessing next steps on strategic arms control.

        Question 4.  If confirmed, what would you do to persuade Russia to
    work with the United States and China to peacefully denuclearize the
    Korean Peninsula? Did you gain any insights as Ambassador to China
    about how we might work with China and also with Russia to develop a
    coordinated, multilateral diplomatic strategy to dealing with North
    Korea?

        Answer. Both Russia and China have publicly committed to the
    peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The international
    community is united in condemning North Korea's continued violations of
    its international obligations and commitments and demanding that North
    Korea give up its prohibited nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
    The administration's goal is to seek Russian agreement to increase
    pressure on North Korea through the full implementation of DPRK related
    U.N. sanctions, employing all economic and diplomatic levers available
    in order to press the Kim Jong-Un regime to change course. Russia has
    repeatedly called for restraint and dialogue with North Korea, but has
    resisted strengthening sanctions against the Kim Jong-Un regime.
        The Russian Government, however, must be made to realize that North
    Korea shows no interest in multilateral discussions to halt or reduce
    their nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Furthermore, the regime
    rejected the Russian and Chinese dialogue proposal known as ``freeze-
    for-freeze,'' where the U.S. would suspend U.S.-ROK joint exercises in
    exchange for a suspension of DPRK missile and nuclear testing.
        This administration remains steadfast in working with our allies to
    sanction individuals and entities, including those in Russia, who
    violate standing United Nations or United States sanctions by
    participating in proscribed activities with North Korea. We continue to
    press Russia to recognize that any existing economic relationship with
    the DPRK enables Kim Jong-Un's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile
    program in defiance of international law. This administration will
    continue to increase pressure on North Korea, including by pressing the
    Russians to reduce their economic relationship with North Korea, until
    Kim Jong-Un halts his destabilizing weapons programs and returns to
    international dialogue.
        From my time as Ambassador to China, I understand the pivotal role
    of China plays in any effort to halt North Korea's prohibited nuclear
    and ballistic missile programs. China, Russia and the United States
    participated in the six-party format; this example proves that the
    three nations are capable of working from a common playbook to get
    things done.

        Question 5.  The President's recalcitrance to accept the unified
    conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia actively
    meddled in the 2016 U.S. Presidential elections is extremely troubling.
    Even more troubling are the ongoing investigations by former FBI
    Director Mueller and the U.S. Congress into the President's ties to
    Russia, whether there was any collusion between his campaign and the
    Russia Government during the 2016 elections, and the possibility that
    he attempted to obstruct investigations into these ties.

       I was pleased by your unequivocal statement that there is no
            question about Russia interference in our election. How will
            you communicate to Russia that this behavior is unacceptable
            and will not be tolerated in the future?

        Answer. The U.S. intelligence community's assessment, as reported
    in October 2016 and January 2017, made clear the Russian Government
    directed the compromise and subsequent release of emails in advance of
    the November 8, 2016 U.S. general election with the intent to influence
    the election, erode faith in U.S. democratic institutions, sow doubt
    about the integrity of our electoral process, and undermine confidence
    in the institutions of the U.S. Government. This is unacceptable;
    confidence in the integrity of our election process is the bedrock of
    our democracy. If confirmed, I will continue to press Russian officials
    against further Russian intrusion in the democratic processes of the
    United States, and those of any other countries.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
           to Governor Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. by by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. I was recently in Poland, where I visited our troops in
    Powidz, which serves as an important deterrent against Russian
    aggression, and Ukraine, which is at the front line of Russia's
    destabilizing efforts.

       How do you assess Russia's actions in Eastern Europe?
       What do you believe are their aims?
       What do you think we need to do reassure our Eastern European
            allies?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign to undermine core Western
    institutions and weaken faith in the democratic and free-market system.
    This campaign is aggressive and coordinated. Russia has consistently
    demonstrated a willingness to employ active measures of various forms
    including hybrid warfare, disinformation campaigns, and malign
    influence activities. The United States should continue to work closely
    with its allies and partners to enhance collective resilience against
    these threats. It is also important the United States pursue a whole-
    of-government approach to address this problem set.
        At the Warsaw Summit, NATO Heads of State and Government committed
    to enhancing individual and collective resilience against a full
    spectrum of threats, including hybrid and cyber-attacks, from any
    direction, in keeping with the intent of Article 3 of the North
    Atlantic Treaty.
        In Europe, the United States is seeking to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies. The effects of Russian pressure continue to be
    greatest in the frontline states of Ukraine and Georgia, where Russia
    undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of these
    neighbors. In response to Russian aggression in Ukraine, the
    Departments of State and Defense have committed over $750 million in
    training and equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and
    territorial integrity. The Balkans are also increasingly a target of
    Russian malign influence. It is important our assistance seek to deter
    Russian aggression as well as encourage reforms in these countries that
    eliminate fraud and abuse and reorient their economies away from
    Russian economic pressure.
        The European Defense Initiative (EDI), including the $4.8 billion
    requested for FY 2018, provides funding to increase U.S. presence
    across Europe, expand U.S. participation in exercises and training
    activities with NATO Allies and partners, enhance prepositioning of
    U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve infrastructure at military
    installations, and provide assistance to build the capacity of our
    allies and partners to defend themselves and enable their full
    participation as operational partners in responding to crises.
        Further on the military side, NATO will continue to prepare for,
    deter and defend against attacks that employ chemical, biological,
    radiological, or nuclear material; to invest in robust, flexible, and
    interoperable military capabilities; and to protect our military supply
    chains and work to address, as appropriate, existing dependencies on
    Russian-sourced legacy military equipment through national efforts and
    multinational cooperation.
        If confirmed, I will continue to press these core U.S. national
    security interests at all levels within the Russian government.

        Question 2. LGBT rights have been a strong interest of mine both
    before coming to the Senate and here in the Senate. These rights have
    been under acute pressure in Russia, particularly in certain provinces
    such as Chechnya. What do you plan to do, if confirmed, to help protect
    LGBT rights in Russia?

        Answer. I believe the Department of State's mission is at all times
    guided by longstanding American values of freedom, democracy,
    individual liberty, and human dignity. I also believe the Russian
    people, like people everywhere, deserve a government that supports an
    open marketplace of ideas, transparent and accountable governance,
    equal treatment under the law, and the ability to exercise their rights
    without fear of retribution--and am concerned the space for civil
    society and free media in Russia has become increasingly restricted.
        I also share your concern about the violence against the LGBT
    community in Chechnya that was brought to light by brave journalists at
    Novaya Gazeta and researchers at Human Rights Watch. There have been
    multiple reports of mass illegal detentions, systematic torture of
    hundreds of LGBT persons, and extrajudicial killings.
        Through public statements and a letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Foreign Minister Lavrov, the State Department has requested from the
    Russian government a full investigation of the reports of abuse against
    LGBT persons in Chechnya and accountability for those found to be
    responsible.
        I am also committed to upholding the rights of individuals in
    Russia and elsewhere and will continue to support and uphold laws
    enacted by Congress such as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law
    Accountability Act to hold human rights abusers in Russia accountable.
        If confirmed, I will work with Allies and partners to continue to
    call on the Government of Russia, in both public statements and private
    discussions, to uphold its international obligations and OSCE
    commitments to promote and protect human rights and fundamental
    freedoms.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have advanced the cause of democracy by helping to create
    the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), whose mission is to
    promote an economically vibrant, geopolitically secure and politically
    free Central and Eastern Europe with close and enduring ties to the
    United States. CEPA's programs and analysis have advocated for Europe's
    new democracies to solidify the gains of the post-Communist period and
    to act beacons to the countries to their east. An important component
    of these efforts is close engagement with both senior government
    leaders and civil society. A prominent example is the work that CEPA
    has done to highlight the progress of anti-corruption efforts in
    Romania, and how this progress has strengthened Romania's role as a
    security ally in the Black Sea region. The institute has also
    encouraged partners in the Balkans and NATO's eastern neighborhood to
    remain committed to the path of reform amid mounting geopolitical
    pressure. These efforts have served to reinforce U.S. and NATO public
    diplomacy and expand people-to-people contacts on both sides of the
    Atlantic.
        In the field of human rights, CEPA has worked to engage civil
    society and call attention to the plight of dissidents in, Belarus,
    Moldova and Russia. CEPA continued to raise concerns about democracy
    and human rights in Russia even in the period of the ``Reset.'' A
    notable project was the CEPA Belarus Working Group, co-chaired with
    Freedom House, which used reports, open letters, seminars in Washington
    and at the OSCE, and trips for Belarusian opposition figures to the
    United States to raise public awareness about the plight of political
    prisoners in Belarus and to inform Congressional and Executive
    policymaking at a pivotal moment in the country's political
    development. If confirmed I will remain committed to promoting human
    rights and democracy in all of the countries of Europe and Eurasia.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Europe and Eurasia today?

       What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
            confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Europe and
            Eurasia?
       What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?
       If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response?
       What challenges will you face in Europe and Eurasia in advancing
            human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The myriad of human rights issues currently facing Europe
    and Eurasia have my full attention. These concerns are not limited to
    any country or region. They range from torture, enforced
    disappearances, and extrajudicial killings in Chechnya to abuse of the
    political opposition in Russia, attacks on Roma and anti-Semitism in
    various parts of Europe, and the persecution of Christians and other
    religious minorities in Turkey. Respect for human rights is a core
    American value. There should be no room for hate crimes against members
    of vulnerable communities such as LGBTI individuals, migrants, or
    persons with disabilities. If confirmed, I will strongly support the
    Department of State's ongoing work with our European partners to combat
    all forms of intolerance and to strengthen respect for human rights.
        America's alliances are strongest when our values and those of our
    allies are aligned. The United States has been diligent in encouraging
    its allies, especially in Central Europe, to remain firmly committed to
    the democratic principles and rule of law upon which the NATO Alliance
    was founded. If confirmed, I will speak up against restrictions on
    civil society and free expression, discrimination against minority
    groups, and steps that undermine the independence of the judiciary or
    otherwise threaten the foundations of constitutional order while
    continuing to build communication and trust with all allies.
        In addition to diplomatic engagement, I will continue to support
    U.S. foreign assistance in Europe and Eurasia that supports civil
    society and strengthening of democratic institutions. This assistance
    provides legal and financial support to human rights defenders
    persecuted for their work, supports civil society's efforts to monitor
    and investigate human rights violations and hold perpetrators
    accountable, and sustains programs that increase citizens' knowledge of
    their rights and fundamental freedoms.

        Question 3. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Europe and Eurasia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with
    a broad spectrum of society among European publics, including human
    rights activists, civil society, religious groups, and the
    organizations that represent them.

        Question 4. Will you and your bureau actively engage with relevant
    governments in Europe and Eurasia to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly detained in their states?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will engage European authorities and call
    on them to ensure the resolution of cases involving victims of
    politically-motivated prosecution in a fair and timely manner,
    respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, including all the
    protections and fair trial guarantees necessary for their defense. I
    will urge them to conduct independent and credible investigations into
    reported human rights violations, and bring those responsible to
    justice.
        In particular, I will continue to advocate for consular access to
    all U.S. citizens and swift due process for all detained or
    incarcerated U.S. citizens in Europe.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department continues to
    thoroughly vet all individuals and units nominated to participate in
    U.S.-funded security assistance activities, in accordance with the
    Leahy law. If there are findings of credible information regarding
    gross violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible parties do not participate in U.S.-funded
    training and will assist their respective governments to bring them to
    justice.

        Question 6. Will you direct U.S. embassies in Europe and Eurasia to
    engage on matters of human rights, civil rights and governance?

        Answer. I am committed to ensuring our Embassies in Europe and
    Eurasia remain engaged on these issues. As Secretary Tillerson has
    said, American leadership requires moral clarity. We are strongest when
    our values and those of our allies are aligned, and when we hold our
    rivals accountable for human rights abuses at home. If confirmed, I
    will ensure that engagement on combatting democratic backsliding, civil
    rights, and human rights violations remain integral components of our
    mission.

        Question 7. What will you do to build people-to-people ties between
    Americans and Europeans, and to support European and Eurasian civil
    societies, human rights activists, and independent media? What do you
    need from Washington-based U.S. officials on this?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will strongly support the Bureau's broad
    range of public diplomacy, media training and literacy, civil society
    engagement and other programs that support the goals of sharing and
    amplifying American values on independent media, human rights, and
    fostering robust civil society dialogue. Continued congressional
    engagement and support of professional and academic exchange programs,
    peer-to-peer engagement, as well as educational, cultural, and other
    regional programs that provide exchanges of ideas and best practices
    will be key to the continued success of those efforts.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a diverse and inclusive team in the
    European and Eurasian Affairs Bureau, across all of its missions, and
    communicate this is a priority for me as the Assistant Secretary. If
    confirmed, I will urge the Bureau to reflect our whole-of-mission
    commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion. In keeping with
    Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, I will ensure all
    supervisors, at all of our missions, have access to and avail
    themselves of opportunities to receive regular formal training and
    regular guidance on EEO principles, diversity, and inclusion to
    sensitize them to these important issues and maximize diverse talents
    in our workforce.

        Question 9. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

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

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the countries of Europe or Eurasia?

        Answer. Neither I, nor any member of my immediate family has any
    financial interests in Europe or Eurasia.

        Question 13. Did Russia interfere in the 2016 U.S. election?

        Answer. The U.S. intelligence community's assessment, as reported
    in October 2016 and January 2017, found that there was a Russian effort
    to influence the November 8, 2016 U.S. general election. The objective
    of these efforts was to erode faith in U.S. democratic institutions,
    sow doubt about the integrity of our electoral process, and undermine
    confidence in the institutions of the U.S. Government. The
    administration has been clear that it takes this issue seriously;
    Secretary Tillerson has raised it with Minister Lavrov and stated that
    there will not be an improvement in the bilateral relationship until it
    has been dealt with.
        Confidence in the integrity of our election process is the bedrock
    of our democracy. If confirmed, I will continue to press Russian
    officials against further intrusion in the democratic processes of the
    United States, and those of our Allies. I am committed to swift
    implementation of the Countering America's Adversaries Through
    Sanctions Act, which represents the will of the American people, in
    responding to Russian election interference in the United States.

        Question 14. Unity with Europe on Russia sanctions is critical to
    their success. What is your diplomatic plan to build support within
    Europe for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    our European Allies and partners to maintain unity on Russia sanctions
    and their implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a
    collaborative and consultative approach on sanctions, and I will
    continue to seek feedback from our allies, who have been steadfast
    partners on Russia sanctions.
        My goal is to ensure these sanctions support our important, common
    work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring control of Crimea
    to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia in foreign
    elections-while also remaining vigilant against unintended consequences
    for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our many foreign
    policy priorities related to Europe as we implement these sanctions,
    including our commitment to promoting European energy security and
    encouraging interoperability in NATO weapons systems. Close
    coordination with our allies is crucial to enabling the sanctions to
    achieve their ultimate goal: imposing costs on Russia, sufficient to
    change the Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 15. Victoria Nuland played a central role in engaging
    directly with Russia and European counterparts regarding the
    implementation of the Minsk agreements. Kurt Volker is the Special
    ``Envoy'' in charge of that portfolio now and has been deeply engaged
    in the region. What will your role be with respect to diplomacy on the
    Minsk Process?

        Answer. Special Representative Volker is the U.S. Government's
    point person on Ukraine negotiations. His appointment by Secretary
    Tillerson has reenergized engagement on the negotiations to end
    Russia's aggression in eastern Ukraine. Volker's role is focused on
    negotiations to resolve the conflict in keeping with the terms of the
    Minsk Agreement and, specifically, to restore Ukraine's territorial
    integrity and ensure the safety and security of all Ukrainian citizens,
    regardless of language, ethnicity, or religion.
        This is one important component in the Department's wider approach
    to countering Russian aggression in, and strengthening, the state of
    Ukraine. Russian aggression is not limited to eastern Ukraine, and our
    relationship with Ukraine is not limited to negotiations to resolve the
    conflict in the east. If confirmed, I will lead the State Department
    effort to counter Russian aggression more broadly, including in Crimea,
    and elsewhere in Europe. While its military defends the nation in the
    east, Ukraine simultaneously faces another fierce engagement--what
    Ukrainian Prime Minister Groysman and others have described as the
    ``war on corruption''--the outcome of which will define Ukraine's
    future. While Ukraine has accomplished much since the heady days of its
    2014 Euromaidan revolution, there is still much to be done to ensure
    Ukraine fulfills its European, democratic ambitions. This transition
    away from Russian influence, requiring difficult, but necessary
    political and economic reforms, is arguably even more critical in the
    long-run than the conflict in the east.
        My role, if confirmed, will be to lead in the development and
    implementation of the overall U.S. approach to Ukraine while
    coordinating closely with Special Representative Volker on negotiations
    with Russia. I have every confidence in Volker's ability to succeed
    and, if confirmed, will work to ensure frequent and effective
    communication between him, myself and the Secretary so that his work
    and the Bureau's wider approach to Ukraine are coordinated.

        Question 16. Russia has also deployed its military and other
    influence tools to support the breakaway of territories in Georgia and
    Moldova. What will you do to counter Russian aggression in these states
    and address the ``frozen conflict'' situations in them? How will you
    promote democratic, accountable governance and the rule of law in
    Georgia and Moldova, critical antidotes to Russia's attempts to
    undermine their sovereignty and stability?

        Answer. The U.S. supports Georgia's sovereignty and territorial
    integrity within its internationally-recognized borders and reject
    Russia's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. I support the
    continuation of active U.S. participation in the Geneva International
    Discussions, the only forum that brings together Georgia, Russia, the
    United States, and de facto officials from Abkhazia and South Ossetia
    and addresses the security and humanitarian consequences of the 2008
    conflict. The United States counters Russian influence in Georgia by
    supporting democracy and governance, promoting economic growth through
    targeted economic opportunities, and increasing access to objective
    sources of information for populations vulnerable to Russian influence,
    including in communities bordering the Russian occupied Georgian
    territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. U.S. policies and
    corresponding assistance programs in Georgia strengthen institutional
    checks and balances and the rule of law. U.S. assistance builds the
    capacity of law enforcement authorities and encourages reform in
    criminal justice sector institutions, strengthening Georgia's ability
    to prosecute transnational organized crime and maintain the country's
    low levels of corruption. If confirmed, I will continue to support
    these important priorities in Georgia.
        Concerning Moldova, the United States supports the country's chosen
    European trajectory by building resiliency in Moldovan institutions so
    they are better able to withstand Russian malign influence. I will
    continue our bilateral coordination in a number of key areas, including
    efforts to modernize and increase the capacity of Moldovan law
    enforcement and criminal justice institutions to counter corruption,
    combat trafficking in persons, and support essential reforms in the
    justice and law enforcement sectors. I will continue to focus on
    building the capacity of Moldova's internal security institutions to
    effectively and appropriately respond to destabilizing activities. I
    will also continue to ensure our assistance increases Moldova's energy
    security by advancing renewable energy opportunities and promoting
    interregional connectivity to reduce reliance on Russian resources.
    Moreover, I will work to strengthen Moldova's economic growth by
    continuing programming that improves the business environment. Such
    assistance will foster investment opportunities for American
    businesses, as well as counter Russian malign influence by reducing
    Russia's economic leverage over Moldova. I will actively participate in
    the 5+2 negotiations, which seek to provide for a true special status
    for Transnistria while guaranteeing Moldova's sovereignty and
    territorial integrity. The United States supports the full
    implementation of the 1999 Istanbul summit commitments.

        Question 17. The recent Russia sanctions legislation was signed
    into law on August 2 and includes a robust authorization for assistance
    to counter malign Russian Government influence across Europe and
    Eurasia. In contrast, the administration's FY18 budget request called
    for significant cuts across Europe, at a time when Russia is
    aggressively attacking democratic institutions and exerting its
    influence across the continent. What is your plan for implementing the
    intent of this legislation with respect to building resilience in
    democratic institutions in Europe?

        Answer. Russia uses a constellation of approaches, overt and
    covert, to influence the policies of other governments and undermine
    domestic stability in Europe. Russia seeks to weaken European unity and
    erode faith in democratic institutions. A Europe whole, free, and at
    peace is in the interests of the United States. Efforts to disrupt
    democratic processes and weaken unity directly and negatively affect
    U.S. interests and security, while institutionalized respect for human
    rights, good governance, and rule of law contributes to long-term
    stability. By promoting our shared democratic values, and by holding
    our European partners accountable to their commitments and the rule of
    law, the United States strengthens our partners' capabilities to
    mitigate vulnerabilities to malign influences and counter threats to
    their security and sovereignty. The approach to this must be
    comprehensive and whole-of-government, and the Department of State has
    a critical role to play in addressing this threat.
        If confirmed, I will prioritize efforts to build the resilience of
    our European partners against Russia's efforts to undermine these
    democratic processes, including through exchanges of information and
    best practices, as well as programming for European publics. Secretary
    Tillerson has been clear that he views as the highest priorities for
    U.S. assistance those areas of Central and Eastern Europe affected by
    pressure from the Russian Federation. We will continue ongoing
    assistance efforts and engagements that seek to build and reinforce the
    rule of law, support democratic institutions, promote human rights, and
    drive economic development in vulnerable countries in Europe.

        Question 18. Some have criticized the current Serbian Government
    for rolling back democratic reforms and press freedom, and Belgrade
    also continues to maintain close ties with Moscow while seeking to join
    the EU. How will you manage relations with Belgrade? What can we do to
    keep Serbia on its stated path to Europe, at the same time supporting
    the democratic change that is needed there and, of course, urging
    Serbia to recognize Kosovo as an independent state?

        Answer. A democratic, prosperous Serbia that takes a positive role
    in the region is fundamentally important to the stability of the
    Western Balkans. Given its historic, economic, ethnic, and political
    ties to its neighbors, Serbia is often described as the linchpin of the
    Western Balkans. If confirmed, I will prioritize integrating Serbia
    into the rest of Europe and the West in order to cement it and the
    region on a path towards development and stability--in line with the
    national security interests of the United States.
        Serbia is also an important security partner for the United States.
    It is a member of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, has a robust
    State partnership program with the Ohio National Guard, and keeps an
    average of 330 service members in UN and EU peacekeeping operations in
    places such as the Central African Republic, Cyprus, and Lebanon.
        I recognize that Serbia often seeks to balance its relationship
    with the West and Russia. Serbia sometimes takes actions the United
    States does not support, such as observing Russian military maneuvers
    in Crimea or sending humanitarian supplies to Syria via Russian planes,
    instead of through the United Nations.
        However, I firmly believe Serbia's future lies with Europe and the
    West, and that the goal of the United States should be to help it get
    there. To do so, Serbia will have to harmonize its foreign policy with
    that of the European Union, including on Russia and other issues such
    as normalizing relations with Kosovo. If confirmed, I will reiterate
    U.S. support for the EU-facilitated Serbia-Kosovo Dialogue process. I
    will also prioritize continued U.S. assistance to help Serbia implement
    the economic, democratic, and rule of law reforms that are critical to
    Serbia's EU aspirations.
        U.S. support for Serbia to develop itself democratically and
    economically will have long-term implications on the region. Serbia's
    success will help enable the success of the entire Western Balkans and
    United States foreign policy in the region.

        Question 19. Bosnian political leaders seem to have become more
    entrenched in their ethnic camps, which has held back much needed
    reform. The EU has emphasized economic reforms in Bosnia over dealing
    with thorny political issues. I understand that State has pushed for
    more political reform--what are your views on this? What is the right
    approach on Bosnia?

        Answer. The U.S. believes political reform is necessary to improve
    the functionality and stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Political
    reforms undertaken by Bosnia and Herzegovina should complement, and not
    compete with, the economic reforms needed to fulfill the European
    Union's Reform Agenda. The United States is working with its European
    partners to support Bosnia and Herzegovina as it undertakes the
    necessary economic and political reforms to join the European Union and
    pursue its goals for further Euro-Atlantic integration. It is only
    through concerted action that we will achieve our goals.
        I understand that the administration believes an agreement on
    reforms that would bring the electoral system into line with rulings by
    the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights before
    2018 elections is possible. Bosnia's political parties need the help of
    the international community (particularly the EU and United States) to
    reach a timely agreement on electoral reforms. I support the
    administration position that the United States will support reforms
    only if they are consistent with the Dayton framework of one state, two
    entities, and three constituent peoples. Also, any reform agreement
    will require the support or at least the acceptance of parties
    representing all three peoples. It is important the reforms be both
    agreed and implemented in time for the October 2018 elections.

        Question 20. How will you respond to the separatist efforts of
    Republika Srpska, or efforts by some Bosnian Croats to carve out an
    ethnic entity of their own? Do you see any opportunities for
    substantial reform in Bosnia, including coming into compliance with the
    European Court of Human Rights ruling that ethnic criteria for seats in
    the collective presidency and parliament are discriminatory?

        Answer. The United States supports the provisions of the Dayton
    Accords, including a unified Bosnia and Herzegovina comprised of two
    entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika
    Srpska. The United States and our European Allies are committed to
    working with our Bosnian partners in a spirit of dialogue to pass
    election law amendments that enjoy broad political support. Any changes
    to the election law must move Bosnia and Herzegovina closer to European
    standards by addressing European Court of Human Rights rulings. If
    confirmed, I will actively oppose changes that run counter to European
    Court of Human Rights rulings, make the rulings harder to implement, or
    strengthen divisions among the peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I
    agree with the administration that it is important to make progress on
    electoral reform prior to the October 2018 elections, and will hold
    accountable Bosnian politicians who undermine efforts to build
    consensus.

        Question 21. The Helsinki Final Act and subsequent OSCE agreements
    have established that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms
    are a ``direct and legitimate concern'' of OSCE participating states,
    not simply an internal matter. Can you outline your views on the OSCE
    and give us your vision on how the United States can best use this
    organization to promote U.S. objectives in Europe? Do you think that
    raising concerns about human rights violations and promoting democratic
    development is imposing our values on others, or represents a strategic
    part of advancing U.S. security interests in Europe and Eurasia?

        Answer. Although Europe has made enormous strides since the 1975
    Helsinki Final Act, serious challenges to human rights, the rule of law
    and democracy persist, with implications for U.S. security interests
    and universal human values. The Organization for Security and
    Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), its institutions, and participants
    address these challenges through the most highly-developed body of
    human rights commitments of any regional organization. If confirmed, I
    will ensure the United States continues to press all OSCE participating
    States to meet their commitments.
        I fully support the continued close cooperation between the United
    States and the OSCE to advance comprehensive political-military,
    economic and environmental, and human dimension security and stability
    throughout Europe and Central Asia. In particular, if confirmed, I will
    continue to promote U.S. leadership and robust engagement in the OSCE
    to advance democratic reform, prevent and resolve conflicts, support
    civil society, promote tolerance and non-discrimination, and defend
    human rights and fundamental freedoms.

        Question 22. Among the OSCE region's protracted conflicts, where do
    you see the greatest possibility for the United States to help achieve
    a positive resolution?

        Answer. The OSCE plays an important role toward resolving the
    protracted conflicts in Europe. If confirmed I will support the United
    States' continued active participation in the relevant negotiating
    bodies--including the Geneva International Discussions addressing the
    conflict in Georgia, the Minsk Group on Nagorno-Karabakh, and the 5+2
    talks on a settlement of the Transnistrian conflict--and will continue
    to encourage dialogue and engagement at the OSCE on these protracted
    conflicts. As a co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States
    fully supports efforts to help Azerbaijan and Armenia find a lasting
    settlement based on international law, the UN Charter, and the Helsinki
    Final Act, including the principles of non-use of force, territorial
    integrity, and the rights to self-determination of peoples. The Geneva
    International Discussions--in which the United States is a
    participant--provide an important forum for dialogue on security,
    stability, and humanitarian issues in Georgia. As an observer of the
    5+2 Talks on the Transnistrian Settlement Process, the United States
    seeks a comprehensive, peaceful, and sustainable settlement of the
    conflict based on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the
    Republic of Moldova within its internationally recognized borders with
    a special status for Transnistria that fully guarantees the human,
    political, economic, and social rights of its population. The United
    States also heads the OSCE field Mission in Moldova, which works on a
    full range of political, social, economic and other issues in Moldova,
    as well as conflict settlement and implementation of OSCE Summit
    commitments on withdrawal of Russian forces from the territory of
    Moldova.

        Question 23. How can the OSCE help to push back against Russian
    disinformation and aggression across Europe?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the OSCE continuing to play a
    pivotal role in addressing Russia's violation of Ukraine's sovereignty
    and territorial integrity, including Russia's occupation and attempted
    annexation of Crimea. I will support implementation of the Minsk
    agreements through the Normandy format process and the Trilateral
    Contact Group. The United States is the largest single contributor of
    financing and personnel to the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to
    Ukraine (SMM), which provides critical information on the security
    situation in eastern Ukraine and efforts by the sides to implement the
    Minsk agreements. The United States will continue to support the OSCE's
    independent Representative on Freedom of the Media, who promotes
    freedom of expression, including a vibrant, investigative media that is
    one key to exposing disinformation. If confirmed, I will also ensure
    that the United States continues to regularly counter Russian
    disinformation within the OSCE Permanent Council and in other OSCE
    fora.

        Question 24. Hungary and Poland are both engaged in democratic
    backsliding that threatens their judicial independence, press freedom,
    and the functioning of their civil societies. EU efforts to hold both
    of these governments accountable for assaults on their countries'
    democratic institutions have failed to yield positive results. How will
    you seek to curtail this democratic backsliding in two of our NATO
    allies, given the democratic values to which NATO members have ascribed
    and the risks to the alliance if these values are abandoned?

        Answer. The United States works closely with with Poland and
    Hungary as NATO Allies. The United States relies on our allies to be
    strong inside and out, with robust democratic institutions, economies,
    and defense capabilities. As the President, Vice President, and
    Secretary of State have made clear, we expect our allies to meet their
    commitments. This means upholding the values enshrined in the
    Washington Treaty of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of
    law, and spending at least two percent of GDP on defense. If confirmed,
    I will express our concerns when our allies fall short of their
    commitments in any of these areas, whether on defense spending or
    threats to rule of law and democratic institutions.
        The United States raises concerns with allies privately and
    publicly. Divided societies are more likely to be targeted by malign
    influence, and strengthening Europe's frontier states must be a
    priority in Europe. If confirmed, I will express concerns about
    measures in Poland, Hungary or any other ally that weaken the
    separation of powers or any other component of a sound constitutional
    order. I will reinforce the importance the United States places on
    media freedom and a level playing field for U.S. companies abroad. At
    the same time, in both countries, I will work to strengthen bilateral
    ties, interpersonal relationships and cooperation in the security,
    energy and other realms that advance U.S. interests.
        If confirmed, I will also seek ways, in partnership with others, to
    support civil society, civic education, and independent media. The
    region's transformation still requires U.S. attention and commitment if
    democratic gains are to be sustained. If confirmed, I will continue to
    stress the importance of strong democratic institutions in ongoing
    efforts to build and maintain prosperous economies, attract investment
    and resist malign influences.

        Question 25. Since last year's failed coup, the government-directed
    crackdown in Turkey has been massive, with some fifty thousand
    individuals reportedly detained, including human rights workers,
    journalists, teachers, judges, opposition politicians, and U.S.
    citizens. I was shocked to see that two senior Amnesty International
    officials were arrested and remanded to pretrial detention this summer.
    Regarding last year's failed coup, what are the implications for our
    relationship with Turkey if Turkish democracy continues to erode, or
    Turkey veers toward a one-party state? How should the United States
    respond?

        Answer. Turkey remains a key NATO Ally and critical partner in the
    Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. Its strategic location and regional
    clout give Ankara significant influence on issues of core interest to
    the United States, including Iraq, Syria, the Eastern Mediterranean,
    and Afghanistan. It is in the U.S. national interest for Turkey to be a
    stable, democratic, prosperous, and reliable Ally. The health and
    vibrancy of Turkish democracy matters and is important to the long-term
    stability of Turkey and the entire region.
        Turkey has an obligation to bring those responsible for the
    attempted coup to justice, while ensuring transparency, rule of law,
    freedom of the press, freedom of speech, human rights, and fundamental
    freedoms for the entire population. These tenets are essential to the
    strength of democratic societies and represent the same principles the
    Turkish people so courageously defended last year. The prolonged state
    of emergency is threatening these very principles, as well as causing
    rifts with key allies and partners. If confirmed, I will urge the
    Government of Turkey to end the state of emergency and rely on its
    democratic institutions, which are sufficiently strong to overcome the
    threats and challenges Turkey faces.
        The detention of U.S. citizens, Amnesty International and other
    human rights officials, journalists, academics, prosecutors, judges and
    opposition politicians is very concerning. If confirmed, I will
    underscore with the Turkish Government the importance of respect for
    due process and individual rights, as enshrined in the Turkish
    Constitution and consistent with Turkey's own international
    commitments. Non-governmental organizations, dissenting voices, and a
    robust civil society are essential elements of any strong democracy. If
    confirmed, I will remind the Turkish Government that freedom of
    expression, including for speech and the media- even speech which some
    find controversial or uncomfortable--strengthens democracy and needs to
    be protected. At the same time, I will continue to work to strengthen
    the U.S.-Turkish security relationship and to deepen Turkey's anchoring
    in the transatlantic alliance.

        Question 26. Let us assume the United States walks away from the
    nuclear deal with Iran and Europe does not follow us. Do you believe
    that the best policy for the United States, if we walk away from the
    nuclear agreement with Iran, is to impose sanctions on European
    companies and banks that continue to do business with Iran?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners. I cannot prejudge the outcome of the
    administration's review in terms of sanctions implications.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with our European
    partners and the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of any
    measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to combat
    Iran's malign activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile
    program and support for terrorism.

        Question 27. With increased incidents of hate at home and in
    Europe, concrete initiatives addressing racism and xenophobia are
    critical for the safety of our diplomats. I have annually supported
    funds to address anti-Semitism in Europe. How can we work together to
    establish a similar funded initiative for Europe to counter racism and
    xenophobia?

        Answer. If confirmed, ensuring the safety of our diplomats and all
    Americans abroad will be my number one priority. The Department of
    State works with our European partners to combat anti-Semitism and
    other forms of intolerance, to foster inclusion, and to promote the
    human rights of persons belonging to vulnerable groups, including those
    of the Jewish faith. The Department also annually reports on anti-
    Semitism in European countries where threats or attacks against Jewish
    persons are particularly significant. In addition to diplomatic
    engagement, U.S. foreign assistance in Europe and Eurasia supports and
    empowers civil society in these areas, helping to foster increased
    inclusion of minority and disadvantaged groups.
        As Europe grapples with a rise in xenophobic far-right parties, I
    look forward, if confirmed, to working with you to strengthen our
    diplomacy and partnerships with Europeans as well as such European
    institutions as the OSCE, the European Union and the Council of Europe
    to ensure we are adequately combatting racism and xenophobia. If
    confirmed, I will continue to speak out forcefully against racism and
    xenophobia.

        Question 28. Anti-Semitism, harassment and discrimination against
    Roma and Europeans of African descent, closing borders to refugees from
    Africa, Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere are cause for concern in
    Europe. As the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly's Special Representative on
    Anti-Semitism, Racism and Intolerance, I have supported work to combat
    intolerance in Europe. If confirmed as Assistant Secretary, what will
    you do to ensure that anti-Semitism, harassment and discrimination
    against Roma and Europeans of African descent, and closing borders to
    refugees from Africa, Syria, and Afghanistan remain of top priority in
    United States foreign policy and in our OSCE work?

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democratic governance is a core
    element of U.S. foreign policy. These values form an essential
    foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies. Standing up
    for human rights and democracy is not just a moral imperative but is in
    the interest of the United States in making the world more stable and
    secure. As Secretary Tillerson said in the introduction to the 2016
    Annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, when it comes to
    human rights, ``our values are our interests.''
        The United States works with European and Eurasian states to
    achieve common goals, engages in formal bilateral democracy and rule of
    law dialogues, and actively supports human rights defenders and civil
    society through jointly-funded programs and related efforts. Through
    multilateral fora and bilaterally, the United States works with
    governments in Europe and Eurasia to combat anti-Semitism, xenophobia
    and other forms of intolerance, foster inclusion and promote the human
    rights of persons belonging to vulnerable minorities, including Roma,
    Europeans of African descent and refugees in Europe.
        If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with the OSCE's
    Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and with the
    OSCE's respective Tolerance Representatives, to condemn and combat
    anti-Semitism, anti-Christian and anti-Muslim sentiment, racism and
    other forms of intolerance and hate-motivated crimes against members of
    vulnerable populations, including LGBTI persons, women, persons with
    disabilities, and migrants. At the Hamburg Ministerial, the United
    States supported the adoption of a working definition of anti-Semitism,
    and worked with Finland in support of a widely endorsed proposed
    decision on strengthening the OSCE's engagement on the human rights and
    inclusion of persons with disabilities. Unfortunately, Russia blocked
    consensus on both decisions.
        If confirmed, I will continue to promote and speak out strongly in
    support of human rights, including those of the most vulnerable.

        Question 29. We are dismayed by the failure of Serbian political
    leaders and officials to fulfill the promises they freely made to bring
    to justice those responsible for the murder of the Bytyqi brothers in
    1999. Reports are that the leading suspect in the case has close ties
    to the ruling party. Given this administration's emphasis on ``America
    First,'' what will you do to encourage Belgrade finally to act in this
    case of three U.S. citizens who were, without cause or legal
    proceeding, brutally executed by Serbian Interior Ministry forces and
    then dumped into a mass grave almost 20 years ago?

        Answer. I share your disappointment with Serbia's lack of progress
    in the Bytyqi case. administration officials have raised the case with
    Serbian leaders at all levels of government, including with Serbian
    President Aleksandar Vucic. The United States has also informed Serbian
    officials that these issues stand in the way of closer bilateral
    relations. The State Department maintains regular contact with the
    Bytyqi family, and, along with the family, continues to seek additional
    strategies to push for progress on the case. Earlier this year, Serbia
    appointed a new Special War Crimes Prosecutor--the position had
    remained vacant for almost a year and a half--and U.S. officials have
    asked her to make the Bytyqi case a priority in her work. I am hopeful
    that that the new Prosecutor will advance the investigation and
    prosecution of those responsible for the Bytyqi murders.

        Question 30. The purportedly simplified citizenship procedure in
    Hungary, which eases the process for ethnic Hungarians in neighboring
    countries to acquire citizenship, has been dogged by reports of
    corruption and the sale of Hungarian passports and has resulted in a
    roughly 10 percent increase in the number of Hungarian citizens. But
    the Hungarian Government's interest in expanding what it perceives as a
    sympathetic voting constituency before the 2018 elections may make them
    disinclined to remedy systemic corruption in the issuance of Hungarian
    passports and thus increase the likelihood that the Visa Waiver Program
    will be abused. How will you address these and other national security
    issues relating to Hungary, including Hungary's evolving relations with
    Russia?

        Answer. We rely on our allies, including Hungary, to be strong
    domestically and internationally. We also look to them to uphold the
    spirit and letter of the Washington Treaty, including its commitments
    to meeting defense investment obligations and upholding our shared
    values of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. If
    confirmed, I will emphasize to Hungary the importance of these
    responsibilities and, if they are not met, express U.S. concerns as a
    close friend and ally.
        Respect for rule of law and the fight against corruption are
    critical to ensuring the integrity of Hungary's passport issuance
    procedures. Hungary has a sovereign right to determine its citizenship
    laws; at the same time, the process through which individuals obtain
    citizenship and passports are of international concern, particularly as
    they affect our border security. Integrity of a country's identity
    documentation procedures is a key consideration of Visa Waiver
    Program's security framework. If confirmed, I expect to work closely
    with the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State's
    Bureau of Consular Affairs to ensure the protection of our national
    security.

        Question 31. In many parts of the region you cover, the challenges
    facing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people include
    societal violence, government crackdowns, and/or ``anti-propaganda''
    laws that criminalize any discussion of homosexuality. Unfortunately,
    the Trump administration has sent concerning signals that it will not
    prioritize promotion of human rights, particularly of LGBT persons. How
    do you plan to raise with your counterparts the human rights issues
    facing LGBT persons? Do you see these issues as relevant to security
    and stability in Europe and Eurasia?

        Answer. The Department of State remains committed to protecting the
    human rights of all persons, including LGBT persons. Democracy and
    stability are most secure when all people, including the most
    vulnerable, live freely without fear of violence or discrimination.
        In June, Secretary Tillerson emphasized that violence and
    discrimination against any vulnerable group undermines collective
    security and American values, and has raised concerns with the Russian
    Government about the treatment of LGBT persons in Chechnya. U.S.
    Embassies--including those in hostile environments--continue to take
    steps to protect the human rights of LGBT persons. U.S. diplomats
    continue to use their convening power to bring different allies
    together in support of human rights and fundamental freedoms. If
    confirmed, I will continue the Department's special focus on the
    protection of vulnerable groups, including religious and ethnic
    minorities, persons with disabilities, survivors of gender-based
    violence, and LGBT persons.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1.  This month, the Russian government poured tens of
    thousands of troops into its Zapad military exercises. What do you
    think the significance of these exercises with these kinds of troop
    levels means for American security posture in Europe?

        Answer. The ZAPAD 2017 exercise has raised regional tensions within
    Europe. Russia's disregard for the territorial integrity of its
    neighbors has caused significant concern among NATO Allies and partners
    about potential threats to their security.
        Russia has the right to exercise its forces; the United States and
    its NATO Allies conduct military exercises as well. However, we adhere
    scrupulously to all of our commitments with regard to military
    transparency under the OSCE's Vienna Document and have been careful to
    meet all relevant arms control obligations. Russia's lack of
    transparency regarding some of its large military activities has
    increased the risk of misunderstanding or miscalculation. Russia's
    neighbors are particularly concerned about Russia's so-called ``snap''
    military exercises where Russia fails to inform its neighbors in
    advance.
        It is important the U.S. and our NATO Allies continually review our
    military posture and military activities and exercises in Europe. If
    confirmed, I am committed to working with Allies to ensure our posture
    is capable of meeting the full range of threats confronting NATO.
        In the face of continued Russian aggression in Ukraine and
    provocative behavior elsewhere, we are taking prudent, concrete
    measures to support the security of NATO Allies and partners. The U.S.
    and NATO posture in the region is defensive, proportionate, and in line
    with international commitments. NATO's unity is critical to an
    effective deterrent.

        Question 2.  How much of a military threat does Russia pose to our
    European neighbors? What are the administration's plans to continue to
    reassure our European allies that the United States remains committed
    to transatlantic security?

        Answer. Russia has demonstrated a willingness to use military force
    against its neighbors, most recently in Ukraine, and to employ active
    measures of various forms including hybrid warfare, disinformation
    campaigns, and malign influence activities. The United States should
    continue to work closely with its allies and partners to enhance
    collective resilience against these threats. It is important for the
    United States to pursue a whole-of-government approach to address this
    problem set.
        The United States is committed under Article 5 of the North
    Atlantic Treaty to the collective defense of all NATO Allies and has
    led NATO's efforts to establish a persistent, rotational air, land, and
    sea presence on NATO's Eastern Flank. The U.S. is leading the NATO
    enhanced Forward Presence multinational battle group in Poland. In
    addition, the United States supports deterrence and defense activities
    in Europe through the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI). This
    administration's Fiscal Year 2018 Budget request included $4.8
    billion--a $1.4 billion increase from 2017--to fund EDI. The EDI funds
    Operation Atlantic Resolve (OAR), which is the U.S. contribution to
    NATO's enhanced deterrent posture. OAR increases U.S. presence across
    Europe (including the deployment of a rotational Armored Brigade Combat
    Team to NATO's east), expands U.S. participation in exercises and
    training activities with NATO Allies and partners, enhances
    prepositioning of U.S. military equipment in Europe, improves
    infrastructure at military installations, and provides assistance to
    build the capacity of our allies and partners to defend themselves and
    enable their full participation as operational partners in responding
    to crises.
        The United States is also working to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies in key European states. The effects of Russian pressure
    continue to be greatest in the frontline states of Ukraine and Georgia,
    where Russia undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of
    these neighbors. In response to Russian aggression in Ukraine, the
    Departments of State and Defense have committed over $750 million in
    training and equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and
    territorial integrity. The Balkans are also increasingly a target of
    Russian malign influence. It is important that our assistance seek to
    deter Russian aggression as well as encourage reforms in these
    countries that eliminate fraud and abuse and reorient their economies
    away from Russian economic pressure.

        Question 3.  What steps will you take to pressure Russia to comply
    with the terms of the agreement?

        Answer. By maintaining Trans-Atlantic unity on sanctions,
    transforming Ukraine's military into a capable fighting force, and
    backing Ukraine's reform agenda, we have made clear to Moscow that the
    invasion of eastern Ukraine is a losing proposition. We must keep up
    the pressure, and if confirmed, I will make it one of my highest
    priorities.
        As Secretary Tillerson has said, U.S. sanctions will stay in place
    until Russia fulfills its Minsk commitments. The separate Crimea-
    related sanctions will remain until Moscow returns the peninsula to
    Ukraine. The existing sanctions regimes, in coordination with G7 and EU
    sanctions, provide leverage to compel Moscow to fulfill its
    commitments. We must also continue to strengthen Ukraine's resiliency
    against Russian pressure. In response to Russian aggression, the United
    States has committed more than $750 million in security assistance to
    provide training and equipment to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty
    and territorial integrity, better monitor and secure its borders, and
    deploy its forces more safely and effectively. The Department is
    closely examining how to best use security assistance funding going
    forward to bolster Ukraine's ability to defend its sovereignty and
    territorial integrity.
        In addition to support for Ukraine's territorial integrity, the
    United States is implementing a robust assistance program to build
    democratic institutions, promote economic development, combat
    corruption, and strengthen Euro-Atlantic integration. The more Ukraine
    builds its economy and strengthens its democratic institutions, the
    more Russia fails in its effort to destabilize the country by
    continuing the conflict in the Donbas.

        Question 4.  How will you engage with Russia and Ukraine to push
    back further efforts by Russia to increase its occupation and influence
    of Ukraine?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson reenergized our engagement to end
    Russia's aggression in eastern Ukraine by appointing Kurt Volker as
    Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations--the U.S. government's
    point person on Ukraine negotiations. Volker has clearly delineated our
    key goals: the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity and the
    safety and security of all Ukrainians, regardless of language,
    nationality, religion, or ethnicity. Since his appointment in early
    July, Volker has closely coordinated with the Normandy Quartet
    (including France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine) and has engaged with
    other allies and stakeholders in an effort to break the logjam in the
    Minsk process. I have every confidence in Special Representative
    Volker's ability to succeed. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    frequent and effective communication between him, myself and the
    Secretary so that his work and the Bureau's wider approach to Ukraine
    are coordinated.
        The United States has been clear with Russia that its aggression in
    Ukraine is the key obstacle to improving our bilateral relationship.
    Russian aggression is not limited to eastern Ukraine. If confirmed, I
    will work to counter Russian aggression more broadly, including in
    Crimea, and elsewhere in Europe.

        Question 5.  Congress recently authorized lethal assistance to
    Ukraine, do you support that effort? What steps do you believe we
    should take to more effectively support Ukraine as it battles Russian
    hybrid warfare?

        Answer. To my knowledge, the United States has neither provided
    defensive weapons nor ruled out the option of doing so, but the
    administration will continue to examine how best to use U.S. security
    assistance going forward to bolster Ukraine's ability to defend its
    sovereignty and territorial integrity. As Secretary Tillerson stated,
    Ukraine has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression. The
    United States continues to focus on finding a diplomatic solution to
    the crisis in eastern Ukraine through the full implementation of the
    Minsk agreements.
        Russian aggression in Ukraine includes the use of hybrid warfare to
    include disinformation and malign influence. Ukraine was the target of
    cyber-attacks in December 2015 and 2016, and in June 2017. On September
    29, an interagency team will visit Kyiv for meetings with Ukrainian
    officials to discuss policy and incident response to cyber-attacks.
    Countering hybrid warfare requires a broad whole of government approach
    in order to build national resiliency.
        In response to Russian aggression, the United States has committed
    more than $750 million in security assistance to provide training and
    equipment to help Ukraine better monitor and secure its borders while
    deploying its forces more safely and effectively. The United States and
    allies established a Multinational Joint Commission and training group
    to coordinate international efforts and build Ukraine's defense
    capacity to deter further Russian aggression. Sanctions, too, remain a
    valuable tool in this effort. As Secretary Tillerson told his Russian
    counterpart directly, Minsk-related sanctions will remain in place
    until Russia fully implements its commitments, and separate Crimea-
    related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns the
    peninsula to Ukraine.
        More broadly, the United States, along with our European Allies and
    partners, has assisted and encouraged Ukraine to pursue broad reforms
    that will reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen democratic institutions,
    and reduce corruption. Reform across sectors such as energy, the
    economy, land, pension, education, healthcare, defense, and most
    importantly judicial, will help to build a stronger and more resilient
    Ukraine. Continuing Kyiv's democratic and economic transformation,
    coupled with more capable Ukrainian Armed Forces, contributes directly
    to Ukraine's resilience in the face of continued Russian aggression,
    and in particular, Moscow's hybrid warfare tactics.

        Question 6.  What would your strategy be to deal with Russian
    aggression in Ukraine and other Russia-related threats in Central and
    Eastern Europe? How do you propose addressing Russia's perceived
    "spheres of influence" or national interests versus another country's
    territorial integrity and national interests? What options would you
    employ to achieve Russia's withdrawal from lands it unlawfully
    controls, such as Crimea, eastern Ukraine, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and
    Transnistria?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign to undermine core Western
    institutions and weaken faith in the democratic and free-market system.
    This campaign is aggressive and coordinated. Russia has demonstrated a
    willingness to employ active measures of various forms including hybrid
    warfare, disinformation campaigns, and malign influence activities. A
    Europe whole, free, and at peace is in the interests of the United
    States. Efforts to disrupt democratic processes and weaken European
    unity directly and negatively affect U.S. interests and security. The
    United States should continue to work closely with its allies and
    partners to enhance collective resilience against these threats. It is
    important for the United States to pursue a whole-of-government
    approach to address this problem set.
        In Europe, the United States is seeking to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies. The effects of Russian pressure continue to be
    greatest in the neighboring states of Ukraine and Georgia, where Russia
    undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of those
    countries. The Western Balkans are also increasingly a target, as
    Russia is trying to block the Euro-Atlantic integration of the region.
    It is important our assistance deter Russian aggression against these
    countries as well as encourage reforms in them to eliminate fraud and
    abuse and reorient their economies away from Russian economic pressure.
    The European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), including the $4.8 billion
    requested for FY 2018, provides funding to increase U.S. presence
    across Europe, expand U.S. participation in exercises and training
    activities with NATO Allies and partners, enhance prepositioning of
    U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve infrastructure at military
    installations, and provide assistance to build the capacity of our
    allies and partners to defend themselves and enable their full
    participation as operational partners in responding to crises.
        The administration supports a country's right to choose its own
    future, its own partners, without outside interference or intimidation.
    The administration in turn continues to support Georgia's sovereignty
    and territorial integrity within its internationally-recognized borders
    and rejects Russia's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. If
    confirmed, I would support this policy by continuing to actively
    participate in the Geneva International Discussions--the only forum
    that brings together Georgia, Russia, the United States, and de facto
    officials from Abkhazia and South Ossetia--and addresses the security
    and humanitarian consequences of the 2008 conflict. Within Georgia, I
    would continue to support efforts to counter Russian influence by
    strengthening democracy and governance, promoting economic growth by
    targeting economic opportunities, and increasing access to objective
    sources of information for populations vulnerable to Russian influence,
    including in communities bordering the Russian occupied Georgian
    territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
        With regard to Ukraine, transatlantic unity on sanctions, support
    for the Ukrainian military's transformation into a capable fighting
    force, and strong encouragement of Ukraine's reform agenda all serve to
    combat Russia's influence and aggression. As Secretary Tillerson has
    said, U.S. sanctions will stay in place until Russia meets its Minsk
    commitments. Crimea-related sanctions will remain in place until Russia
    returns the peninsula to Ukraine.
        Concerning Moldova, the United States supports the country's chosen
    European trajectory by helping build resiliency in Moldova's governance
    institutions so they are better able to withstand Russian malign
    influence. If confirmed, I would encourage active Department
    participation in the 5+2 negotiations, which seek to provide for a true
    special status for Transnistria while guaranteeing Moldova's
    sovereignty and territorial integrity.

        Question 7.  In recent months, Erdo?an has undertaken an intense
    crackdown on perceived opponents--what many are calling a witch hunt in
    retaliation for the July 2016 coup attempt. This has included the
    firing more than 100,000 state employees including soldiers, police
    officers, members of the military, judges, and even midwives;
    imprisonment of tens of thousands, including journalists, human rights
    defenders, and activists, many of whom have alleged torture and brutal
    mistreatment while in custody; restrictions on internet and social
    media access; and the shuttering of media and civil society
    organizations.
        What implications has the ``purge'' since last summer's attempted
    coup had on domestic institutions in Turkey, particularly the judicial
    system and police?

        Answer. The 2016 coup attempt has had far-reaching impacts on
    Turkey. The dismissal or suspension of nearly 150,000 state employees,
    including police officers, prosecutors, and judges, and detention of
    tens of thousands, including human rights activists, journalists,
    academics, opposition politicians, and U.S. citizens, is of deep
    concern. The prolonged state of emergency runs contrary to democratic
    principles and undermines domestic institutions. If confirmed, I will
    underscore to the Turkish government the importance of respect for due
    process and individual rights, as enshrined in the Turkish Constitution
    and consistent with Turkey's own international commitments. At the same
    time, I will continue to work to strengthen the U.S.-Turkish security
    relationship and to deepen Turkey's anchoring in the transatlantic
    alliance.

        Question 8.  In recent months, Erdo?an has undertaken an intense
    crackdown on perceived opponents--what many are calling a witch hunt in
    retaliation for the July 2016 coup attempt. This has included the
    firing more than 100,000 state employees including soldiers, police
    officers, members of the military, judges, and even midwives;
    imprisonment of tens of thousands, including journalists, human rights
    defenders, and activists, many of whom have alleged torture and brutal
    mistreatment while in custody; restrictions on internet and social
    media access; and the shuttering of media and civil society
    organizations.
        What implications has the ``purge'' since last summer's attempted
    coup had on international institutions including Turkish delegations to
    NATO and the U.N.?

        Answer. Turkey remains an active U.N. member working on a number of
    issues of core interest to the United States, including the
    international responses to the crisis in Syria, North Korean nuclear
    provocations, and Russian aggression in Crimea. Turkey also remains a
    key NATO Ally and critical partner in the Global Coalition to Defeat
    ISIS. After the July 2016 attempted coup, the Government of Turkey
    recalled some Turkish military officials serving at multiple NATO
    military headquarters, but the Turks have continued to provide officers
    for NATO assignments. Since the attempted coup, Turkey has maintained
    its participation in NATO operations in Kosovo and Afghanistan.

        Question 9.  Turkish security guards violently assaulting peaceful
    protestors in Sheridan Circle in Washington, D.C. in May of this year
    during President Erdogan's visit. Do you believe the administration has
    taken the appropriate steps to fully condemn this assault on American
    values and fundamental freedoms of free speech and assembly?

        Answer. I share Secretary Tillerson's opinion that the conduct of
    some Turkish security personnel during President Erdogan's visit to the
    United States was deeply disturbing.
        I have not been privy to discussions with Turkish officials, but I
    can assure you that if confirmed, I will always strive to protect the
    interests, safety, and security of the United States and the American
    people. I will work to ensure that we have a relationship with Turkey
    that protects, promotes, and defends those interests.

        Question 10.  Turkish security guards violently assaulting peaceful
    protestors in Sheridan Circle in Washington, D.C. in May of this year
    during President Erdogan's visit. Will you continue to raise this issue
    with the Turkish government?

        Answer. I share Secretary Tillerson's opinion that the conduct of
    some Turkish security personnel during President Erdogan's visit to the
    United States was deeply disturbing.
        I have not been privy to discussions with Turkish officials, but I
    can assure you that if confirmed, I will always strive to protect the
    interests, safety, and security of the United States and the American
    people. I will work to ensure that we have a relationship with Turkey
    that protects, promotes, and defends those interests.

        Question 11.  Are you concerned about increasing Turkish-Russian
    military cooperation?

        Answer. Turkey is an important NATO ally that supports U.S.
    national security interests in a number of crucial areas, notably in
    the effort to defeat ISIS. With regard to Turkish-Russian military
    technical cooperation, Turkey's expression of interest in purchasing
    Russian S-400 air defense missiles is concerning, and potentially
    constitutes a violation of recent U.S. sanctions. If confirmed, I will
    continue to make clear to Turkish officials the importance of the
    commitment NATO Allies, including Turkey, made at the Warsaw Summit in
    2016, to enhance resilience by working to address existing dependencies
    on Russian-sourced legacy military equipment through national efforts.
    If confirmed, I will work to strengthen U.S.-Turkish security
    cooperation and will encourage all Allies to abide by their NATO
    commitments and procure military equipment interoperable with NATO
    systems.

        Question 12.  Unfortunately, the negotiation process over the
    Cyprus question is currently stalled, as U.N. Secretary General Antonio
    Guterres concluded the latest round in Crans-Montana in July 2017 after
    the parties failed to reach agreement. U.N. Special Envoy Espen Barth
    Eide has left his position. Will the United States maintain high level
    engagement on this issue?

        Answer. The United States will maintain high-level engagement on
    this issue. Although it did not participate formally in the UN-
    facilitated, leader led negotiations, the United States has played a
    critical role. The administration has sought to be helpful in
    facilitating communication between the sides throughout the
    negotiations maintaining a strong relationship with both leaders, and
    the UN. The U.S. remains ready to assist with the resumption of
    negotiations in ways the sides deem helpful and we remain committed to
    the framework for reuniting Cyprus as a bi-zonal, bi-communal
    federation based on political equality and continues to urge the sides
    to take advantage of the work achieved thus far. Senior American
    officials are prepared to travel to Cyprus to support efforts to return
    to negotiations.

        Question 13.  Unfortunately, the negotiation process over the
    Cyprus question is currently stalled, as U.N. Secretary General Antonio
    Guterres concluded the latest round in Crans-Montana in July 2017 after
    the parties failed to reach agreement. U.N. Special Envoy Espen Barth
    Eide has left his position. What implications does Erdogan's narrow
    victory in the referendum have on the ongoing negotiations of the
    Cyprus question?

        Answer. We are hopeful that, after the period of reflection, all
    parties will engage in the effort to reach a negotiated settlement. The
    Cyprus issue did not feature prominently in the 2017 referendum
    campaign. If confirmed I will continue to encourage all parties to find
    common ground.

        Question 14.  Unfortunately, the negotiation process over the
    Cyprus question is currently stalled, as U.N. Secretary General Antonio
    Guterres concluded the latest round in Crans-Montana in July 2017 after
    the parties failed to reach agreement. U.N. Special Envoy Espen Barth
    Eide has left his position. Do you believe that Erdogan will be willing
    to agree to a withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus?

        Answer. Turkey's troop presence is one question on which the
    parties will need to reach mutual agreement in the context of a final
    settlement. We urge all parties to make the tough compromises necessary
    for a solution.

        Question 15.  How will you work with European countries to ensure
    they live up to international agreements to impose sanctions on state
    sponsors of terrorism and human rights abusers, particularly in Iran
    and North Korea?

        Answer. The United States continues to work very closely with the
    European Union (EU) and European countries to counter the increased
    threats posed by Iran and North Korea (DPRK). Transatlantic unity on
    sanctions reinforces their impact.
        On DPRK, the EU is in the process of transposing all U.N.
    designations and restrictions related to DPRK sanctions into EU law. If
    confirmed, I will continue to coordinate with European partners and the
    international community to expand sanctions and increase diplomatic and
    economic pressure on the Kim regime to compel the DPRK to return to
    negotiations, with an ultimate goal of the complete, verifiable and
    irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and a dismantling
    of the regime's ballistic-missile programs.
        The United States conducts regular consultations with our EU
    counterparts on human rights in North Korea. The EU is a key partner in
    our efforts to implement the recommendations of the 2014 U.N.
    Commission of Inquiry and to promote accountability for those
    responsible for human rights abuses in the DPRK, including through the
    annual U.N. Third Committee and Human Rights Council resolutions on the
    situation in the DPRK.
        Addressing Iran's continued support for terrorism, and violations
    and abuses of the human rights of its citizens remains a priority for
    the United States and requires use of all tools at the U.S.
    government's disposal, including all non-nuclear related existing
    sanctions, to hold the Iranian government accountable for its actions.
    The United States works with like-minded partners multilaterally, such
    as in the U.N. Human Rights Council and U.N. General Assembly, to
    increase international pressure on Iran for its human rights violations
    and abuses. The U.S. government also regularly targets for financial
    and visa sanctions those who abuse or violate human rights in Iran. The
    Departments of State and Treasury continue to review new targets for
    financial sanctions in consultation with partners.
        If confirmed, it will be a high priority for me to ensure continued
    unity with European allies on DPRK, Iran and other international
    issues.

        Question 16.  How do you expect to rally Europe in favor of more
    economic pressure on Russia? Will you encourage the President to engage
    with European leaders in support of this legislation as well?

        Answer. I am aware many of our European allies have reservations
    about the new sanctions law, and if confirmed, I will be committed to
    working closely with them to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and
    their implementation. The U.S. government has employed a collaborative
    and consultative approach on sanctions implementation, and I will
    continue to seek feedback from U.S. allies, who have been steadfast
    partners on Russia sanctions.
        My goal is to ensure these sanctions support our important, common
    work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring control of Crimea
    to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia in foreign
    elections--while also remaining vigilant against unintended
    consequences for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our
    many foreign policy priorities related to Europe as the U.S. government
    and the EU implement these sanctions, including our commitment to
    promoting European energy security. Close coordination with our allies
    is crucial to enabling the sanctions to achieve their ultimate goal:
    imposing costs on Russia, sufficient to change the Russian government's
    behavior.

        Question 17.  Do you believe the United States should maintain
    investments into public diplomacy efforts in Eastern Europe?

        Answer. Yes. Public diplomacy efforts that invest in people through
    exchanges, media literacy programs, and English-language trainings are
    indispensable as the United States seeks to advance its national
    interests in the face of a rising tide of Russian disinformation.
    Initiatives such as the International Visitor Leadership Program
    (IVLP), the Fulbright Program, and other people-to-people exchanges
    build enduring relationships that cannot be perfectly measured but rank
    among our most effective investments. This is particularly true in
    countries such as Ukraine and Moldova, where Russian disinformation
    threatens to turn citizens away from the Euro-Atlantic community. Many
    U.S. exchange program alumni become leaders in their home countries; by
    investing in a country's most promising youth through short exchanges,
    we invest in a shared vision for the future. Media-focused exchanges,
    such as Ukraine's Media Partnership Program that pairs independent
    Ukrainian media outlets with U.S. media outlets in a long-term
    mentorship relationship, are equally impactful and result in better
    quality information for the Ukrainian public. Empowering the public
    with facts advances the U.S. goal of a democratic, prosperous, and
    secure Ukraine.
        To inoculate foreign publics against disinformation, our embassies
    work with European partners to build media literacy skills in audiences
    vulnerable to disinformation and fake news. By training citizens to
    more carefully scrutinize news items, we can empower people to protect
    themselves against disinformation, particularly in critical regions
    such as eastern Ukraine. This moves the needle forward on the U.S.
    strategic goal of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. If confirmed, I
    will ensure this work continues.
        English-language programs enable foreign publics to consume
    alternate news and obtain a more balanced perspective of the world.
    Ukrainian President Poroshenko announced 2016 as the Year of English
    and promoted English learning as a way to make Ukraine's workforce more
    competitive as Ukraine pursues its chosen European trajectory. U.S.
    public diplomacy programs are essential to fulfilling this goal.
    English-language programs not only provide skills that help Eastern
    Europeans pursue a Euro-Atlantic path but also build lasting people-to-
    people relationships in even the most challenging context.

        Question 18.  What programs do you believe are most effective to
    countering Russian propaganda?

        Answer. Russia rejects the post-Cold War order in Europe and
    increasingly seeks to undermine U.S. influence with our Allies and
    partners with an eye to fragmenting the transatlantic alliance.
    Russia's campaigns use traditional diplomatic, military, and economic
    tools, as well as ``active measures,'' a major component of which is
    propaganda and misinformation. The State Department's public outreach
    strategy is based on the recognition that both the message and the
    messenger are important for effective communication with audiences.
        When making public statements as the United States government, the
    number one goal should be to empower our embassies with materials and
    messaging that the local press can carry, both in print and in digital
    form. This applies both to debunking myths, but more importantly,
    priming the information environment with positive messages about the
    United States and the transatlantic alliance. However, the fight
    against misinformation is bigger than any one country, and the U.S.
    government cannot be as effective if it fights alone. Those most
    vulnerable to malign information campaigns could become our strongest
    messaging allies through systematic support. If confirmed, I will
    continue to work with our allies and partners who are on the frontlines
    of the war of misinformation and arm them with the core competencies
    necessary to not only counter disinformation but advance positive,
    accurate, and responsible messaging. Specifically, I will seek to help
    governments communicate more effectively through the European Digital
    Diplomacy Exchange, empower journalists and other non-governmental
    communicators to uncover and publicize important stories through the
    Digital Communicators Network, and strengthen civil society through
    trainings and networking opportunities through a number of regional
    programs. I will also work to ensure close and effective collaboration
    between the Bureau of European and Eurasian affairs and the Global
    Engagement Center.

        Question 19.  Do you believe the Global Engagement Center can play
    an important and constructive role in promoting American national
    security interests?

        Answer. Yes. Both extremist messaging and state-sponsored
    disinformation operations represent a critical national security threat
    to the United States. The Global Engagement Center (GEC) was mandated
    in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act to lead and coordinate
    Federal Government efforts to recognize, understand, expose, and
    counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation that
    undermine U.S. national security interests. The GEC's role in this
    effort is essential to the effective coordination of the multitude of
    U.S. government efforts to counter these national security threats.
        The GEC has a proven track record of playing an important and
    constructive role in promoting American national security interests
    with the work it continues to perform with regard to its original
    counterterrorism mission. The GEC has been pivotal in U.S. effort to
    counter the recruitment of terrorist groups such as ISIS and exposing
    and countering their warped and perverse ideology, and the GEC will
    continue to advance this effort.
        I hope that the GEC will employ the learned skills and successful
    aspects of its counterterrorism mission towards its expanded mission to
    counter propaganda and disinformation emanating from foreign states.
    Congress expanded the GEC's mission and granted it new legal
    authorities out of growing concern about the adverse effects of state-
    sponsored propaganda and disinformation, which have emerged as a clear
    national security concern that is increasing in overall size and
    sophistication. State-sponsored disinformation operations impact United
    States foreign policy objectives and create a lack of confidence in
    foreign populations and sow seeds of doubt in the susceptible
    populations living in our allied and partner nations. If confirmed I
    will work to ensure close and effective collaboration between the
    Bureau of European and Eurasian affairs and the GEC.

        Question 20.  Many European countries have experienced an alarming
    uptick in far right wing political movements that are anti-Semitic,
    anti-immigrant, and anti-globalist. Many of these political parties
    reject cooperation with the United States and the wider global
    community. How will you engage with governments that are increasingly
    espousing these beliefs? Will you continue to promote the values of
    democracy, tolerance, and the post-war international order?
        In many parts of the region you cover, the situation facing
    lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people can be extremely
    challenging. They often face violence and government crackdowns, and in
    several countries they face "anti-propaganda" laws that potentially
    criminalizes any discussion of homosexuality.

       Unfortunately, the Trump administration's response to all of this
            has been weak and Secretary Tillerson has stated that he does
            not view human rights as a priority of his department. This
            could have dangerous implications for security and stability in
            the region.

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democratic governance is a core
    element of U.S. foreign policy. These values form an essential
    foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies. Standing up
    for human rights and democracy is not just a moral imperative but is in
    the interest of the United States in making the world more stable and
    secure. As Secretary Tillerson said in the introduction to the 2016
    Annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, when it comes to
    human rights, ``our values are our interests.''
        The United States works with European and Eurasian states to
    achieve common goals, engages in formal bilateral democracy and rule of
    law dialogues, and actively supports human rights defenders and civil
    society through jointly-funded programs and related efforts. Through
    multilateral fora and bilaterally, the United States works with
    governments in Europe and Eurasia to combat anti-Semitism, xenophobia
    and other forms of intolerance, foster inclusion, and promote the human
    rights of persons belonging to vulnerable minorities, including LGBTI
    persons. If confirmed, I will continue to promote and speak out
    strongly in support of democracy and human rights, including those of
    the most vulnerable.

        Question 21.  How do you plan to raise human rights concerns with
    your counterparts, and especially with regards to the LGBTQ community?

        Answer. The Department of State remains committed to protecting and
    promoting the human rights of all persons, including the LGBTQ
    community. Democracy and stability are most secure when all people,
    including the most vulnerable, live freely without fear of violence or
    discrimination. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's special
    focus on the protection of vulnerable groups, including religious and
    ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, survivors of gender-based
    violence, and LGBTQ persons.
        In June, Secretary Tillerson issued a statement emphasizing that
    violence and discrimination against any vulnerable group undermines
    collective security and American values. U.S. Embassies--including
    those in hostile environments--continue to take steps to protect the
    human rights of LGBTQ persons. If confirmed, I will continue to speak
    out in support of human rights, including those of LGBTQ persons.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Todd Young

        Question 1. What do you believe are Putin's grand strategic
    objectives with respect to the U.S., the EU, and NATO? How should the
    U.S. respond to those objectives?

        Answer. Russia does not accept the post-Cold War settlement in
    Europe and is pushing back against it. The Russian objective is to
    restrict the sovereign choices of the countries on Russia's periphery,
    in particular to prevent those countries from building new
    relationships with NATO and the EU, and to exercise veto power over the
    foreign and security policies of those countries. As the United States
    experienced during the 2016 election, Russia also actively interferes
    in the democratic processes and institutions of Western governments,
    including those of NATO Allies, Partners, and EU member states. It does
    so in order to sow chaos, dilute the support for countries on the
    Russian periphery, and weaken the overall attraction of the democratic
    values that threaten Putin's system of government in Russia.
        I believe our response should be twofold. We must be clear-eyed
    about Russia's transgressions, frank in our dialogue with Russia, and
    resolute in raising the costs of their behavior, including the use of
    military, diplomatic, and law enforcement tools. We must also continue
    to build the resilience of U.S. allies on NATO eastern flank, including
    through the strengthening of military capabilities and through a whole-
    of-government approach that works with NATO and the EU to improves the
    defenses of allies and partners against disinformation and malign
    influence. Both areas will be major priorities for me if confirmed.

        Question 2. Based on your experience and your preparation for the
    hearing, what is the difference between the U.S. military posture we
    have in Europe and the U.S. military posture we need? Do you believe
    the U.S. should have a larger and more capable military presence in
    Eastern Europe? Can you provide specifics? Do you believe we should
    have permanently stationed U.S. military units in the Baltics?

        Answer. It is important that the U.S and our NATO Allies
    continually review our military posture and military activities and
    exercises in Europe. If confirmed, I am committed to working with
    Allies to ensure our posture is capable of meeting the full range of
    threats we face today.
        In the face of continued Russian aggression in Ukraine and
    provocative behavior elsewhere, we are taking prudent, concrete
    measures to support the security of NATO Allies. The U.S. and NATO
    posture in the region is defensive, proportionate, and in line with
    international commitments. It represents a significant commitment by
    Allies and is a tangible reminder that an attack on one is an attack on
    all.
        One of the steps the administration has taken to bolster our
    military presence in Europe is the European Defense Initiative (EDI),
    which includes $4.8 billion requested for FY 2018. EDI provides funding
    to increase U.S. presence across Europe, expand U.S. participation in
    exercises and training activities with NATO Allies and partners,
    enhance prepositioning of U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve
    infrastructure at military installations, and provide assistance to
    build the capacity of our allies and partners to defend themselves and
    enable their full participation as operational partners in responding
    to crises.
        In addition to Operation Atlantic Resolve (OAR)--the United States'
    contribution to the Alliance's persistent, rotational air, land, and
    sea presence in NATO's East--the U.S. has also deployed a rotational
    armored brigade combat team (ABCT) to European soil to concretely
    demonstrate action to back up our commitments.
        If confirmed, one of my highest priorities will be to consult early
    and often with our NATO Allies to review the state of forward defenses
    in relation to Russian force levels and military behavior. Through
    these consultations and in coordination with colleagues at the
    Department of Defense, I will examine our posture and plans to
    determine whether additional steps are needed, with a particular
    emphasis on determining the right mix of rotational and permanently
    stationed forces to meet deterrence and defense needs.

        Question 3. Russia has used energy as a tool of coercion against
    our allies and partners in Europe. Specifically what more can we do to
    help our allies and partners in Europe reduce their dependence on
    Russian energy?

        Answer. The administration is committed to working with our
    European partners to enhance European energy security, and if
    confirmed, I would continue this engagement. Energy security derives
    from a diversity of energy type, supply sources, and delivery routes,
    as well as an integrated and efficient regional energy market. An
    energy secure Europe serves as a strong partner for the United States
    in meeting global challenges, and the United States supports European
    energy projects in several sectors. We use both diplomatic engagement
    and assistance programming in support of our European allies and
    partners' efforts to enhance their energy security. Since FY 2014, the
    United States has provided over $92 million toward energy programs in
    Europe and Eurasia.
        In the electricity sector, the United States government engages in
    technical cooperation as the European Union strengthens its electricity
    market regulator, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators
    (ACER). The United States supports the Baltic states as they work with
    the European Commission to complete the integration of the Baltic power
    network into the EU electricity grid via Poland. The United States also
    supports key gas projects that will diversify supply sources, including
    the Southern Gas Corridor, the Interconnector Greece-Bulgaria, the
    Interconnector Bulgaria-Serbia, and the Finland-Estonia Baltic
    Connector. Additionally, U.S. support for infrastructure for LNG
    imports, particularly in Croatia, Greece, and Southern Europe, will
    allow Europe to import gas from anywhere in the world. In addition to
    infrastructure, the United States supports the EU's implementation of
    its own market liberalization rules and laws, in particular the Third
    Energy Package, designed to ensure the proper functioning of Europe's
    gas system. The U.S. also supports measures to ensure our partners can
    get the resources they need to be energy secure, such as the recent
    contract between American company Xcoal and Ukrainian firm Centrenergo
    to supply Ukraine with 700,000 tons of anthracite coal by the end of
    2017, which will ensure Ukraine's power plants have sufficient
    feedstock for power generation.
        Russia has and continues to use Europe's reliance on its natural
    gas exports to achieve political and economic objectives that run
    counter to Europe's larger economic and political interests. Russia
    aims to build two new major pipelines, Nord Stream 2 and a multiline
    Turk Stream, which would enable it to largely circumvent Ukraine as a
    transit country while increasing Europe's reliance on its gas exports.
    Russia has an established energy relationship with Europe and it is
    neither possible nor desirable to exclude Russian gas from the European
    market. However, Russia should play by the same rules as others; Russia
    should not be able to use its market position to either exert
    geopolitical leverage on its European neighbors or engage in anti-
    competitive practices. I know our European interlocutors share these
    apprehensions, and if confirmed, I will continue close consultation
    with them on this important issue.

        Question 4. Ambassador Huntsman argued in his statement that we
    should not hesitate to remind government officials that they are
    accountable for their actions. It is well known that Russia is
    violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Consistent with
    your statement, how should NATO and the United States specifically hold
    Russia accountable for its violation of the INF Treaty?

        Answer. Reciprocal transparency is the foundation of effective
    U.S.-Russian arms control. Russia appears to have been in a state of
    non-compliance with the INF Treaty for some time now, and has
    undertaken an expansion and modernization of both its conventional
    forces and nuclear triad. This represents a serious source of concern
    for both the United States and its Allies.
        The administration is currently undertaking a review of INF and the
    U.S.-Russian arms control agenda more broadly. If confirmed, I will
    build on the administration's efforts to pressure Russia to return to
    compliance while working with Allies to ensure they have the tools
    needed to raise the costs of agression and thus ensure Russia will not
    gain a significant military advantage from its decision to violate the
    Treaty. If confirmed, I will work closely with NATO as we develop
    proportionate responses to Russia's ongoing violation and make clear to
    Russian officials U.S. concerns about Russia's violation of the INF
    Treaty and the risks it poses to European and Asian security.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. As you know, the situation facing lesbian, gay,
    bisexual, transgender and queer people in Russia can be extremely
    challenging. They often face violence and government crackdowns, with a
    strict ``anti-propaganda'' law that potentially criminalizes any
    discussion of homosexuality.
        Senator Toomey and I have a resolution pending before this
    committee condemning the abuses in Chechnya, calling on the Russian
    Government to protect its citizens, calling on our government to demand
    the release of individuals wrongfully detained, and also to hold
    perpetrators accountable through sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.
        How do you develop a strategy to address human rights concerns in
    Russia, and especially with regards to the LGBTQ community in Chechnya?

        Answer. I share your concern about the violence against the LGBTI
    community in Chechnya. There have been multiple reports of mass illegal
    detentions, systematic torture of hundreds of LGBTI persons, and
    extrajudicial killings. Through public statements and a letter from
    Secretary Tillerson to Foreign Minister Lavrov, the State Department
    has pressed the Russian Government to fully investigate the reports of
    abuse and to prosecute those responsible.
        If confirmed, I will work with Allies and partners to continue to
    call on the Government of Russia to uphold its international
    obligations and OSCE commitments to promote and protect human rights
    and fundamental freedoms. I am committed to upholding the rights of
    individuals in Russia and elsewhere and will continue to support and
    uphold laws enacted by Congress such as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of
    Law Accountability Act to hold human rights abusers in Russia
    accountable.

        Question 2. Mr. Mitchell, it appears that neither Moscow nor Kyiv
    thinks the ``Minsk-2'' agreements can be implemented. On September 7
    former Swedish Prime Minister Bildt published a piece in the Washington
    Post saying that the Kremlin may be softening its opposition to an
    impartial U.N. peacekeeping force as part of a renewed settlement.
        What are the prospects for achieving a resolution to the conflict
    in Ukraine? Is there any other route for a settlement? What might be
    the impact on U.S. interests if a resolution could only permit some
    continued Russian presence in eastern Ukraine?

        Answer. The United States continues to support Ukraine, along with
    our French and German allies, in pushing for full implementation of the
    Minsk agreements. Russia and the forces it arms, leads, trains, and
    fights alongside in eastern Ukraine are the primary obstacle to Minsk
    implementation. Moscow will only choose to implement the Minsk
    agreements if it believes continued conflict in eastern Ukraine is no
    longer in Russia's interest, and this is why the United States must
    continue to work with our European and G-7 partners to change Russia's
    calculations on Ukraine. Transatlantic unity on sanctions, support for
    the Ukrainian military's transformation into a capable fighting force,
    and strong encouragement of Ukraine's reform agenda have turned the
    invasion of eastern Ukraine into an increasingly losing proposition for
    Moscow. If confirmed, I pledge to keep up the pressure, as this
    presents our best strategy to change Russia's behavior.
        The United States will not accept anything less than the full
    restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity. As Secretary Tillerson
    has said, U.S. sanctions will stay in place until Russia meets its
    Minsk commitments. This means Russia must withdraw its forces from
    eastern Ukraine and restore control of the contested area to Ukrainian
    authorities, up to and including Ukraine's internationally recognized
    border with Russia. Separate Crimea-related U.S. sanctions will remain
    until Moscow returns the peninsula to Ukraine. Existing sanctions
    regimes, in coordination with G7 and EU sanctions, provide leverage to
    compel Moscow to fulfill its commitments. In addition, the United
    States and its allies must continue to provide all forms of support
    necessary for ensuring Ukrainian resiliency in the face of Russian
    pressure.
        Russia's proposal for a U.N. force in eastern Ukraine is a possible
    indication that Moscow is becoming more amenable to a peaceful
    resolution of the conflict and should be explored. However, as
    proposed, the measure would fall short of restoring Ukraine's
    territorial integrity. Secretary Tillerson has been clear that any
    resolution must provide a path to achieving the restoration of
    Ukraine's territorial integrity and the safety and security for all its
    citizens, regardless of language, ethnicity, or religion. As such, any
    U.N. force would have to have a broad mandate for peace and security
    throughout the entire area of conflict, including international
    supervision of the Ukrainian side of the Russia-Ukraine border, to
    avoid deepening or institutionalizing the externally imposed divisions
    inside Ukraine.September 19, 2017

        Question 3. What are the administration's plans for continuing to
    reassure allies and partners and to deter Russian aggressive activity
    in Europe?

        Answer. Russia threatens U.S. allies and partners both militarily
    and through an aggressive, coordinated campaign to undermine Western
    democratic institutions. Russia has consistently demonstrated a
    willingness to employ active measures of various forms including hybrid
    warfare, disinformation campaigns, and malign influence activities. The
    United States should continue to work closely with its allies and
    partners to enhance collective resilience against this full spectrum of
    threats.
        The administration has made a priority of strengthening the
    European Defense Initiative (EDI). This includes the $4.8 billion
    requested for FY 2018, which provides funding to increase U.S. presence
    across Europe, expand U.S. participation in exercises and training
    activities with NATO Allies and partners, enhance prepositioning of
    U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve infrastructure at military
    installations, and provide assistance to build the capacity of our
    allies and partners to defend themselves and enable their full
    participation as operational partners in responding to crises.
        NATO will continue to prepare for, deter and defend against attacks
    that employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material; to
    invest in robust, flexible, and interoperable military capabilities;
    and to protect our military supply chains and work to address, as
    appropriate, existing dependencies on Russian-sourced legacy military
    equipment through national efforts and multinational cooperation.
        The effects of Russian pressure continue to be greatest in Ukraine
    and Georgia, where Russia undermines the sovereignty and territorial
    integrity of these neighbors. In response to Russian aggression in
    Ukraine, the Departments of State and Defense have committed over $750
    million in training and equipment to help Ukraine defend its
    sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Balkans are also
    increasingly a target of Russian malign influence. It is important our
    assistance seek to deter Russian aggression as well as encourage
    reforms in these countries that eliminate fraud and abuse and reorient
    their economies away from Russian economic pressure.
        If confirmed as the Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European
    and Eurasian Affairs, I will treat the need to reassure allies as one
    of my highest priorities, and will press these core U.S. national
    security interests at all levels within the Russian Government.

        Question 4. European leaders think that the JCPOA has significantly
    increased European and Middle Eastern security and have talked about
    trying to continue the Iran deal even if the U.S. pulls out. But
    European leaders have made clear that in such a scenario, Europe would
    actually give Iran more economic and diplomatic concessions to make up
    for the U.S. ending sanctions relief. How would it be in the U.S.
    interest to see Iran actually get more concessions out of Europe to
    stay in the JCPOA because the U.S. has begun to pull out?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with our European
    partners and the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of any
    measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to combat
    Iran's malign activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile
    program and support for terrorism.

        Question 5. One of your early tasks, if you are confirmed, will be
    to rally European support for the new Russia sanctions law that this
    Congress passed in late July. How do you expect to rally Europe in
    favor of more economic pressure on Russia at the same time that the
    Trump administration is discussing ending U.S. participation in the
    JCPOA and increasing sanctions on Iran?

        Answer. I am aware many of our European allies have reservations
    about the new sanctions law, and if confirmed, I will be committed to
    working closely with them to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and
    their implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative
    and consultative approach on sanctions, and I will continue to seek
    feedback from our allies, who have been steadfast partners on Russia
    sanctions.
        My goal is to ensure these sanctions support our important, common
    work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring control of Crimea
    to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia in foreign
    elections--while also remaining vigilant against unintended
    consequences for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our
    many foreign policy priorities related to Europe as we implement these
    sanctions, including our commitment to promoting European energy
    security. Close coordination with our allies is crucial to enabling the
    sanctions to achieve their ultimate goal: imposing costs on Russia,
    sufficient to change the Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 6. I understand that Trump administration is concerned
    about Iran's ability to expand its nuclear program after the first 10
    years of the JCPOA, when the JCPOA's strictest limits begin to expire.
    But why should we risk alienating our allies by trying to beach the
    deal over that issue now, rather than waiting until closer to the end
    of the JCPOA and seeing then if we need to re-negotiate terms to
    address Iran's potential threat? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep
    the deal in place now and address concerns about the out years in the
    future, if Iran continues to be a malign actor a decade from now?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and its broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners.
        Secretary Tillerson has expressed particular concern about the
    provisions of the JCPOA under which certain restrictions on Iran's
    nuclear program progressively expire over time. It is important the
    United States, working closely with its partners, begins to discuss
    these concerns so they can be addressed well before these restrictions
    begin to cease.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial, and if confirmed, I will work closely with
    our European partners on these issues.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Jeffery A. Merkley

        Question 1. Despite the fact that the United States, the
    International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and our European
    counterparts all certify that Iran is in compliance with the nuclear
    deal, it appears the Trump administration is looking for a way out.
    This would pose a threat to the United States and regional security, in
    addition to undermining U.S. credibility and influence on the world
    stage. If the United States abandons our European allies on this issue,
    do you believe the Europeans will back up the United Sates on other
    grave international security issues?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and its broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. Europe remains key to addressing any
    number of other pressing international issues, including combatting
    terrorism and addressing the threat from North Korea. Our European
    partners want to work with us to address these challenges, and if
    confirmed, I will focus on ensuring the United States and Europe remain
    in lockstep on these issues.

        Question 2. European leaders think that the Joint Comprehensive
    Plan of Action (JCPOA) has significantly increased European and Middle
    Eastern security and have talked about trying to continue the Iran deal
    even if the United States pulls out. But European leaders have also
    made clear that in such a scenario, Europe would give Iran more
    economic and diplomatic concessions to make up for the United States
    ending sanctions relief. How would it be in the U.S. interest to see
    Iran get more concessions out of Europe to stay in the JCPOA because
    the U.S. has begun to pull out?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with our European
    partners and the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of any
    measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to combat
    Iran's malign activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile
    program and support for terrorism.

        Question 3. Russia's hybrid warfare encompasses a range of actions
    from propaganda and misinformation; to coercive economic measures;
    cyberattacks; and corruption. You have written that Russia tests
    alliances within the West by destabilizing small- and medium-size
    American allies on the periphery. One tool of deterrence is to ensure
    that European countries have strong and democratic institutions, strong
    rule of law, and are accountable to their citizens. How will you ensure
    that we are clear to allies and partners that they are expected to live
    up to their commitments on democratic governance and anti-corruption?
    How will you support these efforts in countries that are more
    vulnerable?

        Answer. Russia uses a constellation of approaches, overt and
    covert, to influence the policies of other governments and undermine
    domestic stability in Europe. Russia seeks to weaken European unity and
    erode faith in democratic institutions. A Europe whole, free, and at
    peace is in the interests of the United States. Efforts to disrupt
    democratic processes and weaken unity directly and negatively affect
    U.S. interests and security, while institutionalized respect for human
    rights, good governance, and rule of law contributes to long-term
    stability. By promoting our shared democratic values, and by holding
    our European partners accountable to their commitments and the rule of
    law, the United States strengthens our partners' capabilities to
    mitigate vulnerabilities to malign influences and counter threats to
    their security and sovereignty. The approach to this must be
    comprehensive and whole-of-government, and the Department of State has
    a critical role to play in addressing this threat.
        If confirmed, I will prioritize efforts to build the resilience of
    our European partners against Russia's efforts to undermine these
    democratic processes, including through exchanges of information and
    best practices, as well as programming for European publics. We will
    continue ongoing assistance efforts and engagements that seek to build
    and reinforce the rule of law, support democratic institutions, promote
    human rights, and drive economic development in vulnerable countries in
    Europe.

        Question 4. As a Central Europe expert, how will you address
    concerns about the spread of ``illiberal democratic'' politics that
    threaten the foundation of shared values that form the basis of our
    post-Cold War relationships with Europe?

        Answer. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has led
    international efforts to strengthen democratic and free-market
    institutions and defense capabilities in Central Europe, and the region
    as a whole has made great strides. The United States relies on our
    allies to be strong inside and out, with strong democratic
    institutions, economies, and defense capabilities. As the President,
    Vice President, and Secretary of State have made clear, we expect our
    allies to meet their commitments. This means upholding the values
    enshrined in the Washington Treaty of democracy, individual liberty,
    and the rule of law, and spending at least two percent of GDP on
    defense. If confirmed, I will express our concerns when our allies fall
    short of their commitments, whether on defense spending or threats to
    rule of law and democratic institutions.
        The United States raises concerns with allies privately and
    publicly. Divided societies are more likely to be targeted by malign
    influence, and strengthening frontier states must be a priority in
    Europe. If confirmed, I will express concerns about measures in any
    NATO ally that weaken the separation of powers or any other component
    of a sound constitutional order. I will reinforce the importance the
    United States places on media freedom and a level playing field for
    U.S. companies abroad. At the same time, I will work to strengthen
    bilateral ties, interpersonal relationships and cooperation in the
    security, energy and other realms that advance U.S. interests.
        If confirmed, I will also seek ways, in partnership with others, to
    support civil society, civic education, and independent media. The
    region's transformation still requires U.S. attention and commitment if
    democratic gains are to be sustained. If confirmed, I will continue to
    stress the importance of strong democratic institutions in ongoing
    efforts to build and maintain prosperous economies, attract investment
    and resist malign influences.

        Question 5. In many parts of the region you would cover as
    Assistant Secretary the situation facing lesbian, gay, bisexual,
    transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people can be extremely challenging. They
    often face violence, government crackdowns, and even "anti-propaganda"
    laws that criminalize any discussion of homosexuality. What specific
    steps will you take to advance LGBTQ rights with your European
    counterparts?

        Answer. The Department of State remains committed to protecting and
    promoting the human rights of all persons, including the LGBTQ
    community. Democracy and stability are most secure when all people,
    including the most vulnerable, live freely without fear of violence or
    discrimination. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's special
    focus on the protection of vulnerable groups, including religious and
    ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, survivors of gender-based
    violence, and LGBTQ persons.
        In June, Secretary Tillerson issued a statement emphasizing that
    violence and discrimination against any vulnerable group undermines
    collective security and American values. U.S. Embassies--including
    those in hostile environments--continue to take steps to protect the
    human rights of LGBTQ persons. If confirmed, I will continue to speak
    out in support of human rights, including those of LGBTQ persons.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to A. Wess Mitchell by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. The administration seems to be signaling that it may
    not certify Iranian compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of
    Action. The President has on numerous occasions indicated that he would
    want a better deal, which is also what U.N. Ambassador Nicki Haley
    seemed to indicate in a recent speech at the American Enterprise
    Institute.
        But the only reason we were able so successfully build pressure on
    Iran was through a unified international response that led to unified
    sanctions regime that isolated Iran. It is quite apparent from both
    public statements and private discussions that our European partners,
    who were our closest allies in negotiating the JCPOA, do not support
    walking away and renegotiating.

       How exactly does the administration plan to negotiate a better deal
            without international unity and a leaky sanctions regime?
       How does the administration plan to build consensus in Europe where
            unanimity amongst all of the EU countries is needed to impose
            certain EU-wide sanctions?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our
    European partners.
        priorities to ensure we closely coordinate with our European
    partners and the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of any
    measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to combat
    Iran's malign activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile
    program and support for terrorism.

        Question 2. At his confirmation hearing, Secretary Tillerson
    stated, ``We must also be clear-eyed about our relationship with
    Russia. Russia today poses a danger. But it is not unpredictable in
    advancing its own interest. It has invaded the Ukraine, including the
    taking of Crimea, and supported Syrian forces that brutally violates
    the laws of war. Our NATO allies are right to be alarmed at a resurgent
    Russia.''

       If confirmed, what do you intend to do to reassure our NATO allies
            regarding Russia?

        Answer. NATO's unity and U.S. leadership are both critical to an
    effective deterrent against aggression. In the face of continued
    Russian aggression in Ukraine and provocative behavior elsewhere, we
    are taking prudent, concrete measures to support the security of NATO
    Allies. The U.S. and NATO posture in the region is defensive,
    proportionate, and in line with international commitments. It
    represents a significant commitment by Allies and is a tangible
    reminder that an attack on one is an attack on all.
        It is important that the U.S and our NATO Allies continually review
    our military posture and military activities and exercises in Europe. I
    am committed to working with Allies to ensure our posture is capable of
    meeting the full range of threats we face today.
        One of the steps the administration has taken to bolster our
    military presence in Europe is the European Defense Initiative (EDI),
    which includes $4.8 billion requested for FY 2018. EDI provides funding
    to increase U.S. presence across Europe, expand U.S. participation in
    exercises and training activities with NATO Allies and partners,
    enhance prepositioning of U.S. military equipment in Europe, improve
    infrastructure at military installations, and provide assistance to
    build the capacity of our allies and partners to defend themselves and
    enable their full participation as operational partners in responding
    to crises.
        As part of Operation Atlantic Resolve (OAR)--the United States'
    contribution to the Alliance's persistent, rotational air, land, and
    sea presence in NATO's East--the U.S. has also deployed a rotational
    armored brigade combat team (ABCT) to European soil to concretely
    demonstrate action to back up our commitments.
        If confirmed, I will continue to reaffirm the unshakeable U.S.
    commitment to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, while calling upon all
    Allies to fulfill their commitments on defense spending and
    capabilities so that we can together meet all future threats
    effectively.

        Question 3. According to the figures I have seen, the European NATO
    allies have approximately 5,200 troops in Afghanistan. In the
    administration's new strategy, what role do you see for Europe in
    stabilizing Afghanistan going forward?

        Answer. Non-U.S. NATO troops play a crucial role in Afghanistan.
    Through troop contributions, security assistance, and development
    assistance, our European Allies and partners have been essential in
    achieving the progress we've seen since 2001. Europeans are not only
    contributing forces to the NATO-led Resolute Support Mission (RSM), but
    they also pledged in 2016 at the Warsaw Summit to give approximately
    $900 million annually to help financially sustain the Afghan National
    Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) through 2020. Europeans also give a
    substantial amount of development assistance to Afghanistan. In October
    2016, our European Allies pledged approximately $5.5 billion at the
    Brussels Conference on Afghanistan to support Afghanistan's development
    through 2020.
        The President's new South Asia strategy will give our Allies and
    partners more predicability in understanding U.S. planning in
    Afghanistan. With this new strategy, the administration will shift from
    a time-based drawdown plan to a conditions-based drawdown plan. For too
    long, slow decision-making by the U.S. Government has forced Allies to
    scramble to adjust their troop contributions to Afghanistan to align
    with U.S. plans. Giving Allies and partners more predictability on U.S.
    plans will help guide their own planning. Our Allies have responded
    positively to this change.
        The United States will continue to ask its European Allies to
    contribute forces for RSM and to help close critical mission
    shortfalls. Allies will be asked to continue and enhance their security
    presence and development assistance to Afghanistan. The administration
    is currently finalizing the details of these requests. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with Ambassador Hutchison and our Allies to ensure
    that commitments at the Warsaw Summit and Brussels Conference are met,
    and that NATO contributes robustly to the success of the new U.S.
    strategy.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                      WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2017 (a.m.)

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:55 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Cory Gardner,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Gardner [presiding], Risch, Markey,
    Murphy, and Kaine.

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

        Senator Gardner. This hearing will come to order.
        Let me welcome you all to today's Senate Foreign Relations
    hearing for nominations.
        I apologize for being late. I was introducing a fellow
    Coloradan to head the National Institute of Standards and
    Technology in Boulder, Colorado right before this committee
    hearing. So thank you for the indulgence and I apologize for
    being late.
        The nations of Vietnam and Timor-Leste are important
    partners for the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region. Since the
    establishment of diplomatic ties in 1995, Vietnam and the
    United States have enjoyed a robust and fast-growing
    relationship. The United States is now Vietnam's second largest
    bilateral trading partner. Common security challenges in the
    region have allowed for steady growth of our security
    partnership. President Trump and Prime Minister Nguyen
    reaffirmed and committed to strengthen these ties during the
    Prime Minister's visit to Washington on May 31st. Vietnam will
    host the 2017 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC, leaders
    summit in November, a momentous occasion for the country.
        The White House has announced that President Trump plans to
    attend the APEC summit, which will be a critical show of
    leadership from the United States. I sincerely hope that the
    President's trip will go as planned.
        Timor-Leste is one of the youngest nations in the world,
    having gained its independence only in 2002. It is an emerging
    democracy, and in 2017, they held presidential and
    parliamentary elections that were widely recognized as free and
    fair and encouraging development.
        It is my hope that the nominees before us today, if
    confirmed, could advance these partnerships to benefit U.S.
    national and economic security.
        And with that, I will turn it over to my colleague and
    ranking member, Senator Markey.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Thank
    you for having this hearing.
        Today we are considering the nominations of two outstanding
    diplomats to represent the United States in Timor-Leste and
    Vietnam. Ms. Fitzpatrick and Mr. Kritenbrink, we thank you and
    your families for your years of service representing America
    abroad as members of the Foreign Service.
        If confirmed, you will embark on diplomatic missions to two
    very important emerging countries. In 2002, Timor-Leste became
    the first new sovereign state of the 21st century and joined
    the United Nations and the community of Portuguese language
    countries. Today it seeks full economic integration into the
    Southeast Asia region as it continues its economic and
    political growth. It is very important that the United States
    continue to support it on this path.
        The Vietnam-United States relationship has a difficult
    history, as we are reminded this week by Ken Burns' documentary
    broadcast on PBS. But remarkably, just over 40 years after the
    end of the Vietnam War, we have not only normalized relations,
    but have developed an expanding relationship that includes
    economic, political, and security cooperation. It is critical
    that we continue to build this relationship for the mutual
    benefit of both the American and Vietnamese people. At the same
    time, we must continue to strongly urge the Vietnam Government
    to meet international standards with respect to human rights
    and democratic governance.
        I have every confidence that, if confirmed, each of you
    will perform your mission with distinction. Please do not
    question whether or not we appreciate the service that career
    diplomats play in the representation of our country.
        We thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much and I yield back the
    balance of my time.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Markey.
        Our first nominee is Mr. Daniel Kritenbrink of Virginia.
    Mr. Kritenbrink is a career member of the Senior Foreign
    Service Class of Minister-Counselor and has served as an
    American diplomat since 1994. He currently serves as the Senior
    Advisor at the State Department. Mr. Kritenbrink has previously
    served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Beijing and has also
    served as a Senior Director at the National Security Council.
    Thank you, you and your family, for your willingness to serve,
    and we will begin with your testimony first.
        And our next nominee, who we will turn to after that, of
    course, is Kathleen Fitzpatrick of the District of Columbia.
    Ms. Fitzpatrick is also a Career Member of the Senior Foreign
    Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, and has served as an
    American diplomat since 1983. She currently serves as the
    Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of
    Intelligence and Research at the Department of State. Thank
    you, you and your family, for your willingness to serve.
        Mr. Kritenbrink, we will begin with you.

       STATEMENT OF DANIEL J. KRITENBRINK, OF VIRGINIA, A CAREER
        MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-
     COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY
     OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF
                                VIETNAM

        Mr. Kritenbrink. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Gardner,
    Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee, for the
    honor of allowing me to testify before you and for considering
    my nomination by the President to be the next United States
    Ambassador to Vietnam. I am deeply grateful for the confidence
    that President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me.
        I would also like to thank my wife Nami and my children,
    Mia and Joseph, who are sitting right behind me, for joining me
    today. Their love has been a constant source of support and
    encouragement, without which I would not be here.
        It has always been my dream to serve my country, and I have
    been privileged to do so as a Foreign Service officer since
    1994. I have spent most of my career in Asia. I know how
    critical this dynamic region is to U.S. interests. Few
    countries highlight the impact of consistent, creative, U.S.
    engagement more than Vietnam. That is something I have
    witnessed firsthand, including during three official trips to
    Vietnam and during my overseeing the negotiation of two
    bilateral joint statements with Vietnam in 2015 and 2016.
        Over the last 40 years, the U.S.-Vietnam relationship has
    undergone a profound transformation. Thanks to the efforts of
    successive U.S. administrations, the Congress, veterans, the
    business community, and members from among the more than 2
    million Vietnamese Americans, Vietnam has become a valuable and
    strategic partner. If confirmed, I look forward to working
    closely with the Senate to advance American interests and build
    upon the already strong ties between the United States and
    Vietnam, including in the following areas.
        First, security. Our two countries have expanded security
    cooperation, including U.S. support to strengthen Vietnam's
    maritime security capabilities, as part of our shared interest
    in upholding international law and resisting coercion in the
    South China Sea. We are also helping Vietnam build capacity to
    become a more active contributor on the regional and global
    stage. We are encouraging Vietnam to continues its active role
    within ASEAN, and we support Vietnam's planned contributions to
    UN peacekeeping missions. The United States and Vietnam have
    also increased collaboration on preventing North Korea from
    threatening the region through its nuclear and missile
    programs. If confirmed, I will continue this vital work.
        Second, trade and investment. Bilateral trade with Vietnam
    has grown exponentially, increasing from $451 million in 1995
    to $52 billion in 2016. Last year, Vietnam was America's
    fastest growing export market. U.S. investment in Vietnam has
    grown to $1.5 billion. Yet challenges obviously remain. If
    confirmed, I will work to boost U.S. exports and expand trade
    and investment ties. I will also advocate for a level playing
    field for U.S. companies and investors.
        Third, human rights. There has been some progress in
    Vietnam on human rights and religious freedom, due in no small
    part to congressional engagement and a productive bilateral
    dialogue on these issues. However, the trend over the past 18
    months of increased arrests, convictions, and harsh sentences
    of activists is deeply troubling. If confirmed, I will continue
    to advocate for human rights and religious freedom and for the
    need to make progress in combating trafficking in persons. I
    will stress to Vietnam's leadership that progress on these
    issues is critical to enabling our partnership and Vietnam
    itself to reach its fullest potential.
        Fourth, people-to-people ties. The bonds between the
    American and Vietnamese people are strong and growing. More
    than 21,000 Vietnamese now study in the United States. Over
    80,000 Vietnamese visited the United States last year, and over
    half a million Americans visited Vietnam. The new Fulbright
    University Vietnam and the Peace Corps program in Vietnam will
    serve as the bridge to our brighter future together.
        Fifth, humanitarian and war legacy issues. Providing the
    fullest possible accounting for U.S. personnel missing from the
    Vietnam War era remains our solemn obligation, and we must not
    stop until that work is complete. Since 1993, the United States
    has contributed over $103 million to mitigate threats posed by
    unexploded ordnance. We have invested nearly $115 million in
    the remediation of dioxin contamination in Danang. Our
    cooperation on these issues continues to build a foundation of
    trust to expand our relationship.
        And this is just the beginning. Vietnam is an increasingly
    important partner on other regional and global challenges,
    including pandemic disease, wildlife and drug trafficking, and
    transnational crime.
        If confirmed, I will work with our exceptional U.S. mission
    staff to strengthen our partnerships with Vietnam and the
    Vietnamese people. I will also make the safety and welfare of
    mission personnel a top priority, including by ensuring they
    have appropriate facilities in Vietnam from which to do their
    important work. Our goal remains to advance American interests
    across the board and support the development of a strong,
    prosperous, and independent Vietnam that contributes to
    international security, engages in mutually beneficial trade,
    and respects human rights and the rule of law.
        Thank you again for considering my nomination. I look
    forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Kritenbrink's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Daniel J. Kritenbrink

        Thank you Chairman Gardner, Ranking Member Markey, and members of
    the committee for the honor of allowing me to testify before you, and
    for considering my nomination by the President to be the next United
    States Ambassador to Vietnam. I am deeply grateful for the confidence
    that President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me. I would
    also like to thank my wife Nami, and my children, Mia and Joseph, for
    joining me today. Their love has been a constant source of support and
    encouragement, without which I would not be here.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the Senate to
    advance American interests and build upon the already strong ties
    between the United States and Vietnam.
        It has always been my dream to serve my country, and I have been
    privileged to do so as a State Department Foreign Service Officer since
    1994. I have spent most of my career in Asia, including in a variety of
    leadership positions. I know how critical this dynamic region is to
    U.S. interests. Few countries highlight the impact of consistent,
    creative U.S. engagement in Asia more than Vietnam. That is something I
    witnessed firsthand during my previous work with the Vietnamese,
    including three official trips to Vietnam, and my overseeing the
    negotiation of two bilateral Joint Statements with Vietnam in 2015 and
    2016.
        Over the last 40 years, the U.S.-Vietnam relationship has undergone
    a profound transformation. Thanks to the efforts of successive U.S.
    administrations, the Congress, and others, such as veterans, the
    business community, and members from among the more than two million
    Vietnamese-Americans, Vietnam has become a valuable and strategic
    partner. If confirmed, I will work to continue developing the U.S.-
    Vietnam relationship in support of a wide range of shared interests,
    including in the following areas.
        First, security. Our two countries have significantly expanded
    security cooperation, including through U.S. support to strengthen
    Vietnam's maritime security capabilities, as part of our shared
    interest in upholding international law and resisting coercion in the
    South China Sea, a region vital to our respective security and
    commercial interests as Asia-Pacific nations. We are also helping
    Vietnam build capacity to become a more responsible and active
    contributor on the regional and global stage. We are encouraging
    Vietnam to continue its active role within ASEAN, and we support
    Vietnam's planned contributions to U.N. peacekeeping missions. The
    United States and Vietnam have also increased collaboration on
    preventing North Korea from threatening the region through its nuclear
    and missile programs. If confirmed, I will continue this vital work.
        Second, trade and investment. Bilateral trade with Vietnam has
    grown exponentially, increasing from $451 million in 1995 to $52
    billion in 2016. Last year, Vietnam was America's fastest growing
    export market. U.S. investment in Vietnam has grown to $1.5 billion.
    Yet challenges obviously remain. If confirmed, I will work to boost
    U.S. exports and expand trade and investment ties. I will also advocate
    for a level playing field for U.S. companies and investors, including
    by urging Vietnam to improve labor and environmental standards,
    transparency for state-owned enterprises, and intellectual property
    protection, so that our two countries enjoy a strong trade relationship
    that is free and fair.
        Third, human rights. There has been some progress in Vietnam on
    human rights and religious freedom in recent years, due in no small
    part to Congressional engagement and a productive bilateral dialogue on
    these issues. However, the trend over the past 18 months of increased
    arrests, convictions, and harsh sentences of activists is deeply
    troubling. If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for human rights
    and religious freedom, and for the need to make further progress in
    combating trafficking in persons, while stressing to Vietnam's
    leadership that progress on these issues remains a top priority for the
    United States, and is critical to enabling our partnership--and Vietnam
    itself--to reach its fullest potential.
        Fourth, people-to-people ties. The bonds between the American and
    Vietnamese people are strong and growing. More than 21,000 Vietnamese
    now study in the United States, placing Vietnam in the top six source
    countries for foreign students. These students not only build mutual
    understanding, but they also contributed nearly $700 million to the
    U.S. economy in 2015. Over 80,000 Vietnamese visited the United States
    last year, supporting American jobs in every state, and over half a
    million Americans visited Vietnam. The new Fulbright University Vietnam
    and the Peace Corps program in Vietnam will further deepen these ties
    that will serve as the bridge to our brighter future together.
        Fifth, humanitarian and war legacy issues. Providing the fullest
    possible accounting for U.S. personnel missing from the Vietnam War era
    remains our solemn obligation, and we must not stop until that work is
    complete. Vietnam has provided critical assistance to those efforts for
    decades. Since 1993, the United States has contributed over $103
    million to mitigate lingering threats posed by unexploded ordnance. We
    have invested nearly $115 million in the remediation of dioxin
    contamination in Danang, which is scheduled to be completed later this
    year, and we have committed to doing more. Our cooperation on these
    issues continues to build a foundation of trust to expand our
    relationship.
        This is just the beginning. In addition to the many issues I have
    mentioned, Vietnam is an increasingly important partner on other
    regional and global challenges, including pandemic disease, wildlife
    and drug trafficking, and transnational crime. With a booming economy
    and a young and energetic population that holds overwhelmingly positive
    views of the United States, Vietnam has the potential to emerge as one
    of our strongest partners in the Asia-Pacific.
        If confirmed, I will work with our exceptional U.S. Mission staff
    in Hanoi and in Ho Chi Minh City to strengthen our partnership with
    Vietnam and the Vietnamese people. I will also make the safety and
    welfare of Mission personnel a top priority, including by ensuring they
    have appropriate facilities in Vietnam from which to do their important
    work. Our goal remains to advance American interests across the board
    and support the development of a strong, prosperous, and independent
    Vietnam that contributes to international security, engages in mutually
    beneficial trade, and respects human rights and the rule of law.
        Thank you again for considering my nomination. I look forward to
    your questions.

        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        Ms. Fitzpatrick?

       STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN M. FITZPATRICK, OF THE DISTRICT OF
    COLUMBIA, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS
       OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
        PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
                   DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF TIMOR-LESTE

        Ms. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey,
    members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before you today as the President's nominee to become
    the next U.S. Ambassador to the Democratic Republic of Timor-
    Leste. I am deeply grateful to the President and Secretary
    Tillerson for placing their confidence in me to serve the
    United States in Timor-Leste, a young and promising democracy
    and friend of the United States.
        Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to welcome my family
    whose support and encouragement has brought me where I am
    today. With me, is my husband, a retired Foreign Service
    officer, Richard Figueroa. I would also like to acknowledge our
    wonderful daughters, Elizabeth and Alexandra Figueroa.
    Elizabeth is here today. Alexandra is away at school. Also with
    me are my brothers, Michael and Tom Fitzpatrick, and my sister-
    in-law, Terry Fitzpatrick.
        If I may, Mr. Chairman, both of my parents passed away 6
    years ago, but they would have been so proud of this moment.
    And if I note, my mother's love is always still with us and my
    father is a hero in our family. He is a World War II veteran,
    navigator on B-17's. His plane was shot down coming back from a
    mission. He was a POW for a year and a half. But his service to
    country and devotion to family really is a shining example to
    all of us.
        If I also may take a moment to send our love to the
    Figueroa side of the family who are in Puerto Rico and St.
    Thomas, with gratitude that they are safe as they face the
    aftermath of the hurricane.
        Mr. Chairman, Timor-Leste has shown that it is possible for
    a new country to emerge from years of conflict as a nation
    succeeding on the foundations of democratic principles.
        Timor-Leste and the United States share a friendship based
    on those common values, and our bilateral relations are
    anchored in mutual respect and admiration.
        As Secretary Tillerson said in a message on Timor-Leste's
    independence day, 15 years of independence is a remarkable
    milestone, reflecting the resolve and the commitment of the
    Timorese people to build a new democracy based on respect for
    human rights and the rule of law. We are committed to deepening
    ties between the American and Timorese people in the years to
    come.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work to fulfill our
    commitment to deepen ties with a country that has earned our
    respect and set its own path as a democratic and resilient
    state. And this has been exemplified in the last several months
    as Timor-Leste held peaceful, credible, and fair presidential
    and parliamentary elections, the first without UN peacekeepers.
        As a democratic country in a strategic neighborhood, Timor-
    Leste is an increasingly important voice for human rights and
    democracy regionally and globally. It is a founding member of
    the G-7 Plus fragile states group, sharing best practices on
    how societies rebuild after conflict. Timor-Leste has also been
    an important voice on regional issues, including calling for
    North Korea to abide by UN Security Council resolutions, which
    they did at the ASEAN regional forum in August when Timor-Leste
    made a statement in that regard.
        Timor-Leste has also applied to join ASEAN and the World
    Trade Organization.
        Our cooperation, whether through USAID, our military-to-
    military engagement, our Peace Corps volunteers, or a new
    Millennium Challenge Corporation threshold program, will build
    capacity for stronger democratic institutions, inclusive
    economic growth, and better security. We have supported Timor-
    Leste in diversifying its economy, bolstering the country's
    ability to work with the United States on issues of common
    concern. For example, a coffee cooperative, established and
    developed with U.S. assistance, now provides sustainable income
    for 22,000 of its members.
        Our growing security partnership with Timor-Leste builds
    capacity to respond to natural disasters and humanitarian
    crises, strengthens maritime security, and it deepens the
    professionalism of the Timorese military and law enforcement.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with our team in
    Dili and Washington, our Timorese hosts, and other
    international partners to further strengthen our cooperation
    with Timor-Leste and to advance U.S. interests. I will also
    work to deepen our outreach to the Timorese people,
    particularly the large youth population, so that our future
    ties are built on a strong foundation.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
    and other Members of Congress as we continue to promote our
    interests in Timor-Leste and the broader East Asia and Pacific
    region.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to appear
    before you today, and I am honored to take your questions.
        [Ms. Fitzpatrick's prepared statement follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Kathleen M. Fitzpatrick

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, members of the committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as the
    President's nominee to become the next U.S. Ambassador to the
    Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste. I am deeply grateful to the
    President and Secretary Tillerson for placing their confidence in me to
    serve the United States in Timor-Leste, a young and promising democracy
    and friend of the United States.
        I would like to introduce my family, whose support and
    encouragement has brought me to where I am today. With me today is my
    husband, retired Foreign Service Officer Richard Figueroa. I would also
    like to acknowledge our wonderful daughters, Elizabeth and Alexandra
    Figueroa; Elizabeth is here today, while Alexandra is away at college.
    My brothers Michael and Tom Fitzpatrick and sister-in-law Terry have
    also joined us today. Both of my parents passed away six years ago but
    they would have been very proud of this moment. My Mom's love still
    surrounds us. And, my father, a WWII veteran--who flew as a navigator
    on B-17s, and when his plane was shot down, was a POW for a year and a
    half--serves as a shining example of service to country and devotion to
    family. I would also like to send my love to the Figueroa side of our
    family who live in Puerto Rico and St. Thomas, with gratitude that they
    are safe as they endure the aftermath of Hurricane Maria. Finally Mr.
    Chairman, I also thank my many mentors and colleagues who have
    supported me throughout my career.
        Mr. Chairman, Timor-Leste has shown that it is possible for a new
    country to emerge from years of conflict as a nation succeeding on the
    foundations of democratic principles and respect for human rights.
        Timor-Leste and the United States share a friendship based on those
    common values, and our bilateral relations are anchored in mutual
    respect and admiration. We respect the tremendous struggles Timor-Leste
    has endured to become the newest country in Asia, and we commend the
    vibrant and developing democracy Timor-Leste has built to respond to
    the aspirations of its diverse people. As President Trump said in a
    message on Timor-Leste's 15th independence day this year, the progress
    of this young country reflects the national spirit and determination of
    the Timorese people.
        Secretary Tillerson echoed the President's comments in his own
    message when he said: ``Fifteen years of independence is a remarkable
    milestone, reflecting the resolve and commitment of the Timorese people
    to build a new democracy based on respect for human rights and the rule
    of law. We are committed to deepening ties between the American and
    Timorese peoples in the years to come.'' Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I
    will work to fulfill our commitment to deepen ties with a country that
    has earned our respect, a country that has set its own path--symbolized
    by the star the Timorese chose to adorn their nation's flag--as a
    democratic, resilient and stable state.
        Timor-Leste has held peaceful, credible and fair presidential and
    parliamentary elections in 2017, the first without U.N. peacekeepers,
    reflecting the diversity of emerging political views, especially among
    young people voting for the first time, and with an impressively high
    turnout.
        As a young country in a large and strategic neighborhood, Timor-
    Leste faces economic, security, and environmental challenges. Timor-
    Leste is actively addressing some of these concerns. Its leaders are
    working with Australia in a conciliation process to resolve peacefully
    a maritime boundary dispute in accordance with international law using
    a mechanism that could be a model for other countries seeking to solve
    such differences. It has applied to join ASEAN and the World Trade
    Organization. Timor-Leste is an increasingly important voice for human
    rights and democracy globally. It is a founding member of the g7+
    fragile states group and shares experiences and best practices on how
    societies rebuild after conflict. Timor-Leste has also been an
    important voice on regional issues of mutual concern, including calling
    for North Korea to abide by U.N. Security Council resolutions at the
    ASEAN Regional Forum in August.
        Our cooperation, whether through USAID, military-to-military
    engagement, Peace Corps, or a new Millennium Challenge Corporation
    Threshold Program, will build capacity for inclusive economic growth,
    maritime security, and stronger governance. Much of our collaboration
    assists Timor-Leste in diversifying its economy for more sustainable
    development, bolstering Timor-Leste's ability to work with the United
    States on issues of common concern. A coffee cooperative established
    and developed with USAID and USDA assistance, for example, now provides
    sustainable income and access to rural health clinics for its 22,000
    members.
        Our growing security partnership with Timor-Leste builds capacity
    to respond to natural disasters and humanitarian crises, strengthens
    maritime security, and deepens the professionalism of the Timorese
    military. Our armed forces conduct regular bilateral exercises, and a
    rotating U.S. Navy Seabees detachment provides critical humanitarian
    assistance and infrastructure support to the Timorese people. To
    support Timor-Leste's efforts to strengthen rule of law, we also train
    Timorese law enforcement personnel at the regional International Law
    Enforcement Academy. We have also worked with Timor-Leste as it
    strengthens its ability to combat trafficking in persons.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with our team in Dili and
    Washington, our Timorese hosts, and other international partners to
    further strengthen our bilateral and multilateral cooperation with
    Timor-Leste and advance U.S. interests there and in the region. I will
    also work to deepen our outreach to the Timorese people, particularly
    the large youth population, so that our future ties are built on a
    strong foundation.
        Mr. Chairman, during my Foreign Service career, I have proudly
    served the United States both in Washington and abroad. If confirmed, I
    will use my experience to guide our mission in Dili to strengthen our
    relationship with the region's newest nation. Over the years, members
    of the U.S. Congress have shown particular interest in Timor-Leste's
    development and success, having played an important role in the
    country's independence. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    this committee and other members of Congress, whether here in
    Washington or in the region, as we continue to promote our interests in
    Timor-Leste and the broader East Asia and Pacific region.
        Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. I am
    honored to take your questions.

        Senator Gardner. Thank you both for your time and
    testimony. And congratulations again on your nominations, and
    to your families, again welcome to the Foreign Relations
    Committee.
        I will begin briefly with questions.
        Broadly speaking in Asia, we seem to have had over the past
    several decades policies that may reflect the 4-year or 8-year
    tenure of a presidency, but rarely do we have policies that
    last 10 or 20 years when it comes to an Asia strategy writ-
    large.
        I have been developing legislation known as the Asia
    Reassurance Initiative Act, which would focus on three areas
    talking about economic opportunities and enhancing trade
    throughout Southeast Asia in particular, talking about the
    security challenges that we face, Asia-Pacific security
    initiative, counterterrorism activities, maritime capabilities,
    training opportunities. And then, of course, the third leg of
    the stool would be promoting U.S. values, human rights,
    democracy components.
        Both of you in the region, what do you think the most
    important sort of elements of the U.S.-Asia policy to be? Ms.
    Fitzpatrick?
        Ms. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question
    and for your commitment to the Asia-Pacific region.
        In that regard, Mr. Chairman, in a new democracy such as
    Timor-Leste, the newest country in Asia, we will continue--if
    confirmed, I will continue to build on our efforts to
    strengthen democratic institutions, to build sustainable
    development and economic diversification, as well as to further
    strengthen our very vibrant military-to-military engagement
    with Timor-Leste. So those would be my top priorities, as well
    as to advance our public diplomacy and our outreach to the
    Timorese people.
        Senator Gardner. Mr. Kritenbrink?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your question
    and also your commitment and support to our interests in the
    Asia-Pacific.
        I think you have summed it up quite well, Mr. Chairman. And
    when I look at the Asia-Pacific, I guess basically I would say
    we have an enduring national interest in a secure, open, and
    free Asia-Pacific, and I think those are the fundamental
    interests that animate our policies. And building on your
    comments, I would say in Vietnam, I think that means we
    continue to advance policies that support our common interests.
    We both share an interest in a peaceful, secure, stable Asia-
    Pacific where differences are resolved peacefully in accordance
    with international law. If confirmed, I would work aggressively
    on those issues, similarly on the economic and trade side, and
    as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, certainly our values have to
    remain central to our engagement with the region and with
    Vietnam in particular.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you to you both.
        Mr. Kritenbrink, we had an opportunity to talk about North
    Korea in the office. And of course, both of your opening
    statements referenced North Korea. Could you talk a little bit
    about your experience, that is, your background on North Korea
    but also your experience as it relates to working with Vietnam
    to further isolate the North Korean regime using Vietnam's
    leadership as a way to cut off trade and isolate further trade
    with North Korea?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Certainly the issue of North Korea and the threat that its
    nuclear weapons and missile programs present to the region and
    to the world is a grave national security threat and perhaps
    the most serious national security threat the United States
    faces today. Under President Trump, the United States has made
    clear that we will not stand idly by in the face of this threat
    and that we will use all elements of American national power to
    combat this threat, together with our allies and partners in
    the region.
        I think particularly in the context of Vietnam, Mr.
    Chairman, I would say that as part of our global pressure
    campaign to, as you said, isolate North Korea, or restrict its
    sources of funding, we have had a very constructive and
    productive dialogue with Vietnam, and together we share an
    interest in curbing the threat posed by North Korea. And if
    confirmed, I would certainly advance that dialogue further and
    make it one of my top priorities.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        The State Department's 2017 Trafficking in Persons, the TIP
    Report, ranked Vietnam as a tier 2 country. The report
    described challenges in Vietnam's implementation of some
    relatively new anti-trafficking laws, including challenges they
    have facing limited resources, interagency coordination, and
    victim referral systems.
        Do you think Vietnam deserved the tier 2 ranking for the
    seventh year in a row? And if confirmed, how would you engage
    the Government of Vietnam to address these ongoing anti-
    trafficking challenges?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for raising that
    issue.
        I think the issue of trafficking in persons or modern day
    slavery is a critically important issue, and it is with all
    countries in the region and around the world. And certainly, if
    confirmed, I would make it a top priority with Vietnam.
        I think the assessment that the U.S. Government has made in
    our Trafficking in Persons Report of tier 2 is accurate for
    Vietnam. In other words, I think Vietnam has demonstrated a
    real commitment to tackling this problem, recognizes the
    seriousness of it and the importance of it, but candidly
    speaking, they fall short of doing the things necessary to
    actually achieve those goals.
        I think you have outlined well some of the deficiencies
    regarding lack of interagency cooperation, lack of resources,
    lack of capacity, and a lack of convictions to date, as well as
    the delay in implementing their own domestic legislation
    related to trafficking in persons.
        If I were confirmed, Mr. Chairman, again I would make it a
    top priority. It would be a topic of frequent engagement both
    at my level and at more senior levels, and also I would
    continue to support the various U.S. assistance programs that
    are also designed to improve Vietnam's capabilities to tackle
    this challenge.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Just following up on the chairman's comments, Human Rights
    Watch has now said that Vietnam's human rights record remains
    dire in all areas. And in July, a Vietnamese court sentenced a
    blogger activist to 9 years in prison, followed by 5 years
    under house arrest, for spreading, quote, anti-state
    propaganda.
        So this question of human rights, this question of
    religious freedom is clearly something that is still a big part
    of the culture of Vietnam. So we thank you for the commitments
    that you have made to the chairman to be there as a voice for
    freedom in that country.
        Let me follow up. Vietnam has mounted a series of
    challenges to China's claims in the South China Sea. Vietnam
    has been critical of China's reclamation project and has
    challenged China's maritime claims as well. After the Chinese
    protested, Vietnam in June suspended a gas drilling project in
    its exclusive economic zone. The administration's wavering on a
    South China Sea policy has left Vietnam feeling alone.
        Mr. Kritenbrink, while the United States and Vietnam are
    not treaty allies, what more can we do to reassure Vietnam that
    we will continue to provide diplomatic support as they legally
    dispute China's territorial claims?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Thank you, Senator, for that very
    important question.
        I do think that the issues in the South China Sea--the
    maritime issues in the South China Sea, the territorial
    disputes, and the behavior of various states in the region are
    a critical national interest of the United States, and our
    interests include preserving freedom of navigation and
    overflight, the peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance
    with international law, and also free, unfettered, and legal
    commerce.
        I think, Senator, the most effective approach that the
    United States can have engaging with Vietnam would be to
    continue diplomatically to engage with Vietnam to advance the
    interests that we share in common. Vietnam shares the same
    interests that we do in ensuring peace and stability and
    preserving the principles that I have just outlined in the
    South China Sea. They have stated repeatedly so publicly and
    privately.
        Secondly, Senator, I think it is in our interest to
    continue building the capacity of Vietnam's coast guard and
    other forces so that Vietnam has the ability to maintain domain
    awareness and advocate its own positions and claims. And I
    think through both our diplomatic engagement, I think our
    assistance to further Vietnam's own capacity, and then I think,
    Senator, by maintaining our constant presence, our regular and
    frequent freedom of navigation operations, we can best support
    Vietnam and other likeminded partners.
        Senator Markey. How much does Vietnam see the United States
    now as a counterbalance to China? Do you see that as an
    increasing and continuingly increasing part of our relationship
    with them?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. I think, Senator, that Vietnam maintains
    its own very complicated but important relationship with China.
    I think Vietnam, like most countries in the region, is looking
    for a diversified and balanced set of relationships in its
    foreign policy. And I think Vietnam and others in the region
    look to the United States for leadership, for leadership on
    critical maritime issues, for contributing to peace and
    stability, and also for promoting economic prosperity. I think
    the demand signals coming from our Vietnamese friends and other
    likeminded partners throughout the region are very strong.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.
        Ms. Fitzpatrick, Timor-Leste's first president and former
    Prime Minister Gusmao was in Massachusetts last week to discuss
    the challenges Timor-Leste faces with respect to achieving full
    sovereignty. One of the lingering issues he has sought to
    resolve is the maritime boundary between Timor-Leste and
    Australia. On September 1st, the Permanent Court of Arbitration
    brought Timor-Leste and Australia one step closer to a
    permanent agreement. Once this deal is concluded, it will
    require significant ongoing coordination and cooperation
    between Timor-Leste and Australia.
        How do you see the United States helping this process so
    that a final agreement can be reached and implemented?
        Ms. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, Senator.
        We do commend Timor-Leste and Australia for entering into
    the compulsory compliance mechanism under the UN Convention of
    Law of the Sea. We support international law and peaceful
    resolution of disputes, and we also were pleased that Timor-
    Leste and Australia did announce that they had reached a core
    of an agreement.
        While we do not take positions on maritime boundary
    disputes, we do see this first use of this mechanism as a
    possible tool for other countries with similar issues. And if
    confirmed, Senator, I will continue to monitor the agreement
    and support efforts to comply and to adhere to international
    law and peaceful resolution of disputes.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Gardner. Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And congratulations to each of you for your nominations but
    also for your long service to the country. These are not easy
    positions. I think folks who do not do them think there is a
    lot of glamour involved, and occasionally that is the case. But
    there are a lot of moves sometimes to places you want to go and
    sometimes to places that are tough. Sometimes your family can
    be with you. Sometimes they cannot. I think the Nation does a
    good job of thanking those who are in military service. We have
    grown to be able to do that, and that is smart. And we do not
    often have the same expression of appreciation to the many
    other Americans who serve abroad and to their families. I am
    glad your families are here with you and I congratulate you.
        My colleagues have asked questions. I was interested in
    too. So as a member of the Armed Services Committee as well, I
    want to ask you about the mil-to-mil relationships with each
    country. One of the most powerful photos that I have ever seen
    in my political life was the docking of the USS John McCain in
    Danang Harbor in August of 2010 with the entire Vietnamese
    military brass there saluting, that sign of respect following a
    war that cost 60,000 American lives and somewhere between a
    million and a half and 3 million Vietnamese lives that we would
    back with a relationship that, while it has got its
    differences, is a thriving one, is powerful.
        And then the Timorese military and the United States Navy
    participated in an annual CARA exercise that is focused
    primarily on maritime issues, maritime training.
        That is the only question I am going to ask. If you could
    each talk a little bit about the mil-to-mil relationships and
    what you think you might be able to do if confirmed to enhance
    joint security between our nations.
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Senator Kaine, thank you so much for your
    question and thank you for your comments. They mean a great
    deal to me.
        I think that the U.S.-Vietnam mil-mil relationship has
    grown, together with the rest of the bilateral relationship.
    And as you mentioned, Senator, I think it is particularly
    gratifying to see that progress given our painful history.
        When I think of the bilateral mil-mil relationship, I think
    of the following three or four priorities.
        I think first would be related to the maritime domain, and
    I think the U.S. military continues to play an important role
    in helping the Vietnamese coast guard and military develop its
    own capabilities both to achieve maritime domain awareness and
    other capabilities.
        I would also add, Senator, that it was gratifying, indeed,
    to see the USS John McCain there, and I know over the last
    year, our two sides have announced they were working towards
    the visit of a U.S. aircraft carrier to Vietnam. And I think
    that would be an equally momentous event.
        And the work on maritime includes both training, provision
    of assistance, and the like, and I think that has to continue
    going forward.
        I think related to that, Senator, the U.S. military
    continues to play an important role engaging with the
    Vietnamese military to address legacy of war issues, whether
    that be the continued contamination by unexploded ordnance or
    remaining dioxin in the country. This is a U.S. government-wide
    effort, but certainly the Department of Defense is involved and
    plays a role there and then also I think benefits--our mil-mil
    relationship benefits a great deal from the work that we do
    there and the trust that we build as a result.
        And the final point that I would mention, Senator, would be
    the humanitarian work, the humanitarian assistance, disaster
    relief kind of cooperation and training that the U.S. military
    does with the Vietnamese military.
        I think those are probably the three key pillars going
    forward. I think related to that would be the training we are
    doing to help Vietnam to be able to deploy in support of UN
    peacekeeping operations. So again, I think it is a robust
    relationship. If confirmed, those would be the first priorities
    that I would promote, if confirmed. Thank you.
        Ms. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        The United States and Timor-Leste share an interest in
    promoting regional peace, stability, and security. And in that
    regard, we have a very vibrant mil-to-mil relationship. It
    includes ship visits. It includes several annual exercises a
    year. It includes annual defense discussions. It includes
    training toward the professionalization of the Timorese
    military, as well as to enhance their expertise in various
    areas.
        And there is also another area. You mentioned the U.S.
    Navy. The U.S. Navy Seabees are present in Timor-Leste. They
    have been there since 2009 on regular rotations every 6 months.
    And as part of our humanitarian outreach effort, in conjunction
    with our mil-to-mil engagement, they engage in infrastructure
    projects. They have completed about 109 projects, including
    constructing a hospital maternity ward and other facilities, a
    new classroom for public schools, repairing water and
    sanitation facilities, and other projects in that regard. The
    work of the Navy Seabees is sort of a great representative of
    the United States in Timor-Leste.
        And although it is not quite mil-to-mil, I do want to
    mention our Peace Corps volunteers who are there and, of
    course, our embassy colleagues who are doing an active effort
    in public diplomacy, as well as our USAID colleagues.
        So, sir, those would be the areas that I would very much
    welcome continuing to support and advance, consistent with the
    work that I have done throughout my career advancing
    humanitarian assistance, human rights, as well as security and
    military-to-military policy.
        Senator Kaine. Thanks so much.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        Mr. Kritenbrink, a couple more questions.
        The U.S. in 2017--in May, the U.S.-Vietnam joint statement
    did not mention negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with
    Vietnam. That was following the U.S. decision to withdraw from
    the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership. Do you think the
    administration will be able to pursue a bilateral agreement
    with Vietnam, or should pursue an agreement? And if so, when
    and what do you think our top trade priorities will be with
    Vietnam going forward?
        Mr. Kritenbrink. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that
    question.
        I would like to emphasize, Mr. Chairman, that we continue
    to have an exceptionally important and broad and dynamic trade
    and economic relationship with Vietnam. Given the decision that
    we have made on TPP, the focus of our efforts now with Vietnam
    comes under the rubric of our TIFA, our trade and investment
    framework agreement. On a bilateral basis, we are continuing to
    engage proactively with Vietnam on a broad number of areas
    related to the economic and trade relationship. As I mentioned
    in my statement, there are many economic opportunities in
    Vietnam. Trade continues to grow exponentially. But there are
    also many challenges that remain as well.
        So primarily under the TIFA framework, our two sides are
    proactively addressing several priorities that we think need to
    be addressed so as to level the playing field, increase market
    access in a fair manner for U.S. and other foreign firms.
        I think two issues that I would mention in particular, Mr.
    Chairman, would be protection of intellectual property rights,
    which remains a real focus for the administration and a top
    priority.
        And the other issue that I would mention would be labor
    issues. I think Vietnam has made some progress on labor. I
    think Vietnam recognizes that it also needs to carry out
    certain reforms if it wants to be the kind of economy and
    country that it wants to be. But these issues are not related
    just to Vietnam's international obligations on labor. They also
    play an important part in the trade relationship.
        So those would be two specific areas.
        And then, of course, there are a whole number of specific
    issues that we as the U.S. Government as a whole of government,
    but also our friends at the U.S. Trade Representative in
    particular are focused on. Some of those have to do with
    electronic payments, other market access issues related to some
    of the agricultural exports to Vietnam. But those would be the
    priorities. And again, Mr. Chairman, I would just say our focus
    now is on working those issues bilaterally under the TIFA.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        Senator Markey, any additional questions?
        Senator Markey. No, thank you.
        Senator Gardner. Well, I want to thank you both for your
    time and testimony today. If there are no other questions from
    the panel here, of course, I will announce that the record will
    remain open until the close of business on Friday, including
    for members to submit questions for the record. This is the
    homework assignment time, so I kindly ask the witnesses to
    respond as promptly as possible and your responses will be made
    a part of the record.
        Thank you to all of you for your service today and your
    nominations. I wish you the best of luck.
        Senator Markey. Mr. Chairman?
        Senator Gardner. Yes, absolutely, please.
        Senator Markey. Can I just say these are two outstanding
    candidates, career, and necessary in terms of ensuring that our
    country is well represented overseas. Thank you and thanks to
    your families as well for your service as well.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Markey.
        And with that, the committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Daniel J. Kritenbrink by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have placed the utmost importance
    on promoting human rights and democracy. During multiple assignments at
    the U.S. Embassy Beijing Political Section and later as Deputy Chief of
    Mission, and during my assignments as China Desk Director at the State
    Department and as Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the National
    Security Council, I prioritized human rights as a key pillar of our
    engagement with China, and had frequent and frank conversations on
    human rights issues as well as individual human rights cases with
    China's officials and leaders. For example, I participated in and
    helped organize multiple rounds of the U.S.-China Human Rights
    Dialogue, met frequently with civil society activists, organized
    meetings of activists with the U.S. Ambassador and various U.S. senior
    officials, oversaw U.S. Government funding designed to support some
    activists' work, and supported negotiations over the release and travel
    to the United States of a high-profile human rights advocate.
        As NSC Senior Director, I advocated for human rights issues and
    activists in other Asia-Pacific countries as well, including Vietnam.
    For example, in 2015 and 2016, I organized and participated in meetings
    at the NSC with representatives of the Vietnamese-American and Vietnam
    human rights/civil society communities to explain our approach to
    Vietnam, hear their concerns, and receive their advice. In 2015 and
    2016, I oversaw the negotiation of two bilateral Joint Statements with
    the Vietnamese, both of which included strong human rights language,
    and in 2016 I helped organize a meeting in Hanoi for the President with
    Vietnamese civil society representatives.
        If confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam, I will continue to
    emphasize to the Vietnamese Government the importance of human rights
    and will meet with Vietnamese civil society representatives.
    Demonstrable progress on human rights is critical to enabling the
    bilateral relationship- and Vietnam itself--to reach its fullest
    potential. I am committed to engaging Vietnam at the highest levels to
    press for progress on human rights and fundamental freedoms, including
    the freedom of religion and belief, freedom of expression, and respect
    for the rule of law.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the
    Socialist Republic of Vietnam today? What are the most important steps
    you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy
    in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam? What do you hope to accomplish
    through these actions?

        Answer. The harassment, arrest, conviction, and excessive
    sentencing of individuals in Vietnam for exercising their human rights
    and fundamental rights, including freedom of expression, is deeply
    troubling. The continuing arbitrary detention of prisoners of
    conscience, including lengthy pretrial detentions and restrictions on
    individuals' ability to worship and practice their faith, are other
    pressing human rights concerns. If confirmed, I will advocate for the
    immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience. I
    will press the Government of Vietnam to bring its laws into conformity
    with Vietnam's constitution and international human rights obligations
    and commitments, including by removing burdensome restrictions on civil
    society organizations. I will meet with representatives of Vietnamese
    civil society. And I will continue to stress to Vietnam's leadership
    that progress on human rights is critical to enabling our partnership
    to reach its full potential to the mutual benefit of our peoples.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face the Socialist Republic
    of Vietnam in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. Despite some progress, the human rights situation in
    Vietnam remains challenging. Vietnam needs to unconditionally release
    all prisoners of conscience, and allow all persons to express their
    views and practice their religious beliefs without intimidation or
    harassment. Capacity building for civil society and rights
    organizations will continue to be instrumental to advancing human
    rights in Vietnam. Promoting respect for the rule of law will also
    require engagement, training, and technical assistance. I will continue
    to advocate for USG technical assistance to Vietnam's National Assembly
    and judicial sector to promote legislative and judicial reform.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will meet with human rights, civil
    society, and other NGOs in Vietnam as well as in the United States. I
    look forward to continuing the positive interactions and collaboration
    Mission Vietnam has already forged with established NGOs, while also
    reaching out to newer and smaller advocacy groups to ensure that all
    voices are heard.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Socialist Republic of Vietnam to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Socialist
    Republic of Vietnam?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to call for the
    immediate and unconditional release of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Government, and my team will
    do the same under my leadership.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will proactively support the Leahy Law by
    ensuring our Mission maintains its stringent vetting processes for any
    Vietnamese security force members and units nominated for training.
    Mission Vietnam will maintain up-to-date Standard Operating Procedures
    for Leahy vetting and will continue to take a whole-of-mission approach
    to this process. I will also ensure that we take into account human
    rights and governance principles as we plan our security assistance and
    cooperation activities. I will also continually highlight the
    importance of professionalism, rule of law, and human rights in our
    engagements with Vietnam's police, military, and other law enforcement
    counterparts.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Vietnamese on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, human rights, civil rights, and
    governance will continue to be top priorities for Mission Vietnam.

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, including in several leadership
    positions, I have had multiple opportunities to build high-functioning
    teams that represented America in all its diversity. If confirmed, I
    will ensure Mission Vietnam continually strives to promote equal
    opportunity for our officers, including women and those from
    historically marginalized groups.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, and as I have done throughout my career, I
    will make clear to U.S. Mission staff that diversity, equal
    opportunity, and respect for all employees are top priorities. I will
    also encourage all supervisors to take available courses on equal
    employment opportunity principles, diversity, and related issues. I
    will urge them to address unconscious bias and similar topics when they
    mentor junior colleagues. I will direct supervisors to transparently
    and fairly provide opportunities to all entry- and mid-level
    professionals. Through my words and actions, and by providing time for
    professional development discussions to address diversity, I will
    highlight that this is a priority for me as Ambassador, if confirmed.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam?

        Answer. No.

        Question 13. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. No.

        Question 14. Fulbright University Vietnam (FUV) and its predecessor
    entities in Vietnam have received steady funding from both State and
    USAID for almost two decades. FUV is the first-private, fully
    independent Vietnamese university founded on the principles of
    accountability, meritocracy, transparency, self-governance, mutual
    respect, and open inquiry. It is a prime example of the soft power
    assets in the region that the U.S. Government has historically invested
    in and should continue to invest in. If confirmed, how do you plan on
    supporting soft power tools such as the Fulbright University Vietnam as
    they prepare to welcome their first undergraduate class in the next
    year?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Mission's full support
    for FUV and the Peace Corps program, as well as other education and
    youth programs. FUV is poised to matriculate the first class of 50-60
    students in its Master's Degree in Public Policy Program in October
    2017. The United States continues to support FUV's capacity to recruit,
    enroll, and retain up to 1,000 future undergraduate students. I also
    look forward to supporting the Peace Corps' recruitment and placement
    of volunteers on the ground.
        If confirmed, I will ensure that Mission Vietnam continues to
    strongly promote increased understanding between the people of the
    United States and Vietnam through its support for a range of programs,
    including exchange programs. Such programs include the Fulbright
    Student and Scholar Program, the International Visitor Leadership
    Program, the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative, and the U.S.
    Speaker Program, to name a few. Our current engagement with Vietnam and
    the Vietnamese people is robust and has the potential to deepen and
    further expand to the benefit of our people-to-people ties. This will
    be one of my priorities as Ambassador, if confirmed.

        Question 15. Three war legacy issues remain a serious concern for
    Vietnam-the environmental and health effects of Agent Orange/dioxin;
    unexploded ordnance; and U.S. assistance in recovering Vietnamese
    missing-in-action (MIAs). In the past the U.S. Government has shown a
    willingness to assist in the environmental remediation of land
    contaminated by the dioxin in Agent Orange and other defoliants sprayed
    on Vietnam during the war, but some reluctance to provide support for
    Vietnamese nationals with medical conditions attributed to exposure to
    dioxin. If confirmed as ambassador what forms of U.S. assistance would
    you recommend to address these war legacy issues? What would you
    recommend that the United States can or should do to provide assistance
    to Vietnamese nationals with medical and health conditions associated
    with dioxin exposure?

        Answer. Addressing legacies of the Vietnam War continues to be one
    of the means by which our government strengthens U.S. ties with Vietnam
    and promotes goodwill between our peoples, building a foundation of
    trust that has enabled the U.S.-Vietnam partnership to move forward. If
    confirmed, I look forward to supporting our joint humanitarian efforts
    to account for personnel still missing from the war, as I believe
    providing the fullest possible accounting for U.S. personnel missing
    from the Vietnam War era remains our solemn obligation, and we must not
    stop until that work is complete.
        If confirmed, I will also support continued efforts to mitigate the
    threats posed by unexploded ordnance, as well as exploring the best
    ways for the United States to continue our support for dioxin
    remediation in Vietnam.
        We have been working hard with Vietnam to clean up a dioxin hotspot
    in Danang, which is on track to conclude this year. The President's FY
    2018 budget request includes up to $15 million for Agent Orange/dioxin
    cleanup. The United States and Vietnamese Governments are now reviewing
    potential remediation alternatives and plans regarding dioxin
    remediation at Bien Hoa.
        We also support continued assistance for Vietnamese with
    disabilities, regardless of cause, and have contributed to programs in
    support of people with disabilities across the country. We are also
    helping to build the capacity of the Vietnamese Government to provide
    medical and social services to all of their citizens with disabilities.
        If confirmed, I will continue Mission Vietnam's vital work in all
    these areas.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Daniel J. Kritenbrink by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. The U.S.-Vietnam partnership has many dimensions,
    including trade and economic ties as well as mutual security interests.
    As these elements of our partnership expand-they cannot come at the
    expense of speaking candidly with the Vietnamese Government about its
    violations of the rights of its own citizens.
        According to Freedom Houses' Freedom of the World Report 2017,
    Vietnam received a score of "Not Free." Basic freedoms, such as freedom
    of religion and freedom of expression are heavily restricted in
    Vietnam, most independent candidates are not allowed to run in
    legislative elections, and the Government has continued to crackdown on
    social media and the internet.
        If confirmed, how do you plan to raise these issues with the
    Vietnamese Government?

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have placed the utmost importance
    on promoting human rights and democracy. If confirmed as U.S.
    Ambassador to Vietnam, I will press the Government of Vietnam to bring
    its laws into conformity with Vietnam's constitution and international
    human rights obligations and commitments, including by removing
    burdensome restrictions on civil society organizations. I will continue
    to stress to Vietnam's leadership that progress on human rights,
    including religious freedom, is critical to enabling our partnership to
    reach its full potential to the mutual benefit of our peoples.

        Question 2. Do you commit to urge them to respect the basic human
    rights of their citizens and make sincere political reforms?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to urge the Government of
    Vietnam to respect human rights, and to implement reforms to bring its
    laws into conformity with Vietnam's constitution and international
    human rights obligations and commitments. I am committed to engaging
    Vietnam at the highest levels to press for progress on human rights and
    fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of religion or belief and
    the freedom of expression, as well as respect for the rule of law.

        Question 3. If confirmed, would you urge the Government to release
    specific political prisoners, such as human rights and pro-democracy
    lawyer Nguyen Van Dai?

        Answer. Yes. Vietnam should unconditionally release all prisoners
    of conscience. If confirmed, I will continue to call for the immediate
    and unconditional release of all political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly detained by the Government--including Nguyen Van
    Dai, among others--and my team will do the same under my leadership.

        Question 4. In its 2017 Annual Report, the bipartisan U.S.
    Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) again
    recommended that Vietnam be designated a Country of Particular Concern,
    and documented severe religious freedom violations, especially against
    ethnic minority communities.

       Do you believe the U.S. should being doing more to push for
            religious freedom in Vietnam?

        Answer. Human rights, including religious freedom, remain an
    important pillar of our engagement with Vietnam. Despite some positive
    steps, removing restrictions on religious freedom in Vietnam remains a
    key concern and priority for the United States. Vietnam should allow
    all persons to express their views and practice their religious beliefs
    without intimidation or harassment. Vietnam also should lift onerous
    restrictions on the recognition and registration of religious
    organizations. If confirmed, I will urge Vietnam to make significant
    and sustained progress on protections for religious freedom for all of
    its people, including members of both registered and unregistered
    religious groups and ethnic minority communities. If I am confirmed,
    the U.S. Mission in Vietnam under my leadership will continue to
    monitor the situation closely and regularly raise our ongoing concerns
    as we continue to urge the Government to make significant progress on
    religious freedom.

        Question 5. If confirmed, would you commit to working with USCIRF
    and the broader religious freedom community to urge the Vietnamese
    Governments to make improvements in their religious freedom record?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with USCIRF and the broader
    religious freedom communities in Vietnam and the United States to urge
    the Vietnamese Government to improve its record on religious freedom
    and do more to protect the religious freedom of all its citizens.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Kathleen M. Fitzpatrick by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democracy has been a top
    priority for me throughout my career. In particular, when I served as
    Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and
    Labor, I was very proud to lead efforts to advance our human rights
    priorities, including for religious freedom, in the Western Hemisphere,
    the Middle East, and in East Asia. Working with colleagues in the
    Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, I helped organize a U.S.-
    China Human Rights Dialogue in 2010 and traveled to Vietnam for
    discussions with Vietnamese officials emphasizing the importance of
    religious freedom.
        When I served as Chief of Staff for the Under Secretary for
    Civilian Security, Democracy and Human Rights, I worked closely with
    the Office for Combatting Trafficking in Persons. I helped manage the
    Annual Combatting Trafficking in Persons report process to ensure it
    effectively targeted trafficking issues and raised public awareness
    about trafficking issues.
        Many of my most rewarding Foreign Service experiences have been
    engagements with civil society leaders, hearing their stories and
    finding ways for our programs and diplomatic outreach could support
    their work. If confirmed, I look forward to engaging with the Timorese
    civil society in the same way.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the
    Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste today? What are the most important
    steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and
    democracy in the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste? What do you hope
    to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The people of Timor-Leste have built a new country on the
    foundations of democracy and human rights, where there is respect for
    diversity and protections for individuals of different faiths,
    cultural, and ethnic backgrounds. Timor-Leste's civil society is
    vibrant and active, and there is a free and developing media. Timor-
    Leste has made significant progress in many areas involving human
    rights. In 2017 Timor-Leste passed quality trafficking-in-persons (TIP)
    legislation and significantly increased the number of TIP
    investigations and prosecutions.
        Yet, as a young, post-conflict country, many challenges remain. The
    Timor-Leste Government continues to consult with the Government of
    Indonesia to reconcile their difficult past and promote transitional
    justice. More can be done to address gender-based violence. If
    confirmed, I pledge to draw on all of my experience advancing democracy
    and human rights to continue the diligent work of Embassy Dili in
    supporting our Timorese hosts in tackling these challenges. If
    confirmed, I will raise these issues with the Timor-Leste Government,
    engage with civil society to hear about their concerns, and continue to
    support programs that build capacity in Timor-Leste's justice sector,
    empower women, and enable civil society.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Democratic
    Republic of Timor-Leste in advancing human rights, civil society and
    democracy in general?

        Answer. The most significant challenge to addressing human rights
    concerns in Timor-Leste is developing the institutional capacity to
    effectively tackle the social and legal complexity of these issues.
    Timor-Leste has been independent for just 15 years, and its
    institutions are nascent. If confirmed, I will lead our embassy team in
    prioritizing programs and outreach that can build capacity in Timor-
    Leste to support the democracy, governance, and rule of law that I know
    the Timorese people prioritize.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society, and other non-governmental organizations in the United States
    and with local human rights NGOs in the Democratic Republic of Timor-
    Leste.
        Some of my most rewarding experiences when serving as a Deputy
    Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
    were meetings with civil society in countries in various regions of the
    world to hear their concerns and to demonstrate U.S. commitment to
    supporting human rights and democracy.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Democratic
    Republic of Timor-Leste?

        Answer. Should there be cases of persons unjustly targeted or
    imprisoned by the Government of Timor-Leste for political purposes, I
    affirm that, if confirmed, I and the embassy team would actively engage
    with government officials to address such cases.

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

        Answer. The Department of State takes the Leahy Law very seriously
    and, if confirmed, I will ensure we carefully vet recipients of our
    security assistance, in accordance with the Leahy Law. I will also
    continually highlight the importance of professionalism, rule of law,
    and human rights in our engagements with Timor-Leste's policy-makers
    and military and law enforcement counterparts.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Timorese on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will consider it an integral part of
    my job to engage with the Timorese on matters of human rights,
    including civil rights, and governance as part of our bilateral mission
    and annual reporting requirements, such as the Human Rights Report.

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

        Answer. I will continue to be committed to fostering a diverse and
    inclusive team, as I have throughout my career, including as Principal
    Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research
    where I have emphasized diversity, leadership, and professional
    development for all of our team. If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S.
    Mission in Timor-Leste continually strives to promote equal
    opportunities for our officers, particularly those from diverse
    backgrounds or historically marginalized or underrepresented groups. I
    will also actively engage the other leaders at the Mission to
    prioritize mentoring and ensure that we are developing a new generation
    of diplomats to represent our country effectively.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. My experience has given me many opportunities to build
    high-functioning teams with diverse members. I remain committed to
    equal employment opportunity principles. If confirmed, I will foster a
    work environment that recognizes the contributions of all employees,
    and will make sure they have information available about the
    Department's Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, foreign affairs
    affinity organizations, and opportunities specific to various groups.
        If confirmed, I will encourage all supervisors to take available
    courses on EEO principles, diversity, and related issues. I will urge
    them to include unconscious bias and similar topics when they mentor
    junior colleagues. I will direct supervisors to transparently and
    fairly provide opportunities to all entry- and mid-level professionals.
    If confirmed, I will highlight that this is a priority for me as the
    Ambassador by providing time for professional development discussions
    that address diversity.

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

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

        Question 11. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?
        Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws,
    regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through
    appropriate channels.

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste?

        Answer. No.

        Question 13. Have there been any material changes to your financial
    assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE financial
    disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please list and
    explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. No.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                      WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2017 (p.m.)

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:20 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson [presiding], Risch, Flake,
    Gardner, Murphy, Shaheen, Kaine, and Markey.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Johnson. This hearing will come to order.
        I want to welcome our nominees. And before moving to
    opening statements, I would like to welcome our two esteemed
    colleagues, Senator Stabenow, and I will include Senator Graham
    in the esteemed column as well.
        Senator Stabenow will introduce our nominee to be
    Ambassador to The Netherlands, Peter Hoekstra, and Senator, if
    you would like to give your opening introduction.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

        Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    And it is really a great honor and pleasure to be here today to
    introduce a former colleague. We have worked together on many
    issues. We have also been on the other side of the table versus
    each other, and yet, through all of that, I know that
    Congressman Pete Hoekstra proudly represented Michigan's second
    congressional district for 18 years.
        And I think it is fair to say that there are few people
    more suited to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to The Netherlands
    than Pete Hoekstra. You could even say it is a job he was born
    to do. Pete was born in The Netherlands. When he was 3, his
    family moved to--and you guessed it--Holland, Michigan where he
    still lives with his wife Diane.
        And like all good Dutchmen, Pete loves biking. While
    campaigning for Governor of Michigan, he rode 1,000 miles
    around our very beautiful State.
        His Dutch background is not the only qualification Pete
    would bring to the job of Ambassador. Before he was elected to
    Congress, Pete earned an MBA from the University of Michigan
    and rose through the ranks at Michigan's own Herman Miller,
    eventually serving as Vice President of Marketing. And while in
    Congress, Pete was chairman of the House Permanent Select
    Committee on Intelligence, which gave him foreign policy
    experience that will serve him well as Ambassador.
        And as former Michigan Senator Arthur Vandenberg famously
    said--and his picture we are proud to have in the reception
    room in the United States Senate--he said politics stops at the
    water's edge. And they also stop at the shores of our Great
    Lakes.
        It is true that Pete Hoekstra and I do not always agree,
    but we feel the same way about our wonderful State of Michigan,
    about invasive species that we have tackled together, and about
    our country. Pete cares deeply about Michigan. He cares deeply
    about The Netherlands, and he cares deeply about America.
        I have no doubt he will use his experience and connections
    to strengthen the already strong ties between our two great
    countries. And it will be good for our State to have him
    serving in this prominent international role.
        I look forward to supporting his nomination, and I hope
    that he will get he chance to do some biking around The Hague.
    I am honored to introduce Congressman Pete Hoekstra. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Stabenow.
        Now we are pleased to have Senator Graham, Lindsay Graham,
    who will introduce the President's nominee to be U.S.
    Ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, Mr. Edward
    McMullen.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. LINDSAY GRAHAM,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA

        Senator Graham. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
    Member. And I want to echo everything that Senator Stabenow
    said about Pete. I have known him a long time and it is really
    a compliment to you that the President would choose you for
    such an important post.
        Ed McMullen I have known ever since I have been in
    politics. If you can survive South Carolina politics, you can
    handle Switzerland. [Laughter.]
        Senator Graham. To the people of Switzerland, I can tell
    you that the President has picked one of his closest advisors,
    the chairman of his South Carolina campaign, somebody who
    jumped on the Trump train early and has done it with class and
    style. So when Mr. McMullen speaks, the President will listen,
    and I think that is a compliment to the people of Switzerland.
        To Ed himself, he was an advisor to Senator McCain when he
    first ran for President. He has been enormously helpful to me,
    and he helped President Trump. I doubt if many people can say
    those three things. And he has done it with class, loyalty. And
    one of the greatest attributes of any Ambassador I think is
    loyalty and understanding and the ability to get people to work
    together. He will be a great representative for our Nation to
    one of our most important allies.
        He has been in business for over 30 years, McMullen Public
    Affairs. He worked for The Heritage Foundation in Washington,
    the South Carolina Policy Council. He is an alumnus of the
    American-Swiss Foundation young leaders conference and has
    traveled extensively in Switzerland and Italy. And he will be a
    good representative for the two countries that you have just
    mentioned, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
        He was in charge of Governor McMaster's transition team. He
    was the Vice Chairman of the Presidential Inaugural Committee.
    He has received numerous awards in South Carolina. He has been
    a great conservative. But I want to tell my friends on the
    Democratic side that everyone respects Ed McMullen. He is
    someone who enjoys a lot of sport in our State. His lovely
    wife, Margaret Ann, is here today. Thomas and Katherine are
    very proud, his two children. He is a graduate of Hampden-
    Sydney College in Virginia, Senator Kaine. He now serves as
    Vice Chairman and Chairman-elect of the National Alumni
    Association.
        And just in conclusion, I want to thank President Trump for
    allowing Ed to serve in a capacity that he is incredibly
    qualified for. And for the people of South Carolina, this is a
    real treat for us, a small State, having someone recognized by
    the President for such an important position. So I cannot
    recommend to you more strongly Mr. McMullen. He is ready for
    this job.
        And thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. The committee wants to thank the Senators
    for those kind introductions. I know you have busy schedules.
    So you are welcome to stay, but you just cannot stay there
    because we need those seats. [Laughter.]
        Senator Johnson. Thank you very much.
        So the committee gathers today to consider the nominations
    of ambassadorships to Spain, Germany, France, The Netherlands,
    and Switzerland and Liechtenstein. The United States has close
    relations with these countries based on enduring political,
    economic, defense, and cultural ties.
        Spain, Germany, France, and The Netherlands represent four
    of the European Union's top six economies. Together they
    account for approximately half of the EU's economic strength.
    Switzerland has Europe's ninth largest economy as a member of
    the European Free Trade Association. All five are among the top
    30 trading partners of the United States, and collectively they
    have direct investments in the U.S. economy worth $1.1
    trillion. So you can see these are important relationships.
        Our security ties are no less significant. France, Spain,
    Germany, and The Netherlands are leading members of NATO.
    Switzerland is a vital counterterrorism partner, helping the
    United States dismantle terrorist financial support networks.
    The strengths of these partnerships have helped forge an
    unprecedented era of peace and stability on a continent long
    ravaged by the great power of conflict.
        As the highest representative of the United States to these
    countries, you will be tasked with maintaining and
    strengthening these crucial relationships.
        Again, I want to thank all the nominees for accepting this
    responsibility, being willing to serve. It is a sacrifice. It
    is going to be a sacrifice for you and your family. And having
    spoken and met with all of you, I am sure you will represent
    this Nation well.
        Before I introduce the nominees for their opening
    statements, I would like to recognize the distinguished ranking
    member of this committee, Senator Murphy.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS MURPHY,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I look forward to hearing your testimony and getting to
    questions and answers.
        Let me reiterate the chairman's thanks to you and to your
    families for your willingness to serve. When there is a problem
    in the world that needs United States leadership to solve it,
    the first place we turn is to Europe. This is a bond forged
    both by enduring values and interests around the world. And you
    are going to help, we hope, solidify a transatlantic
    partnership that has helped lead to an era of relative world
    stability that we hope can endure.
        You are going to face challenges. You will be working for
    an administration that cheered Britain's withdrawal from the
    European Union, that pulled the United States out of the Paris
    Climate Accord, that now threatens to pull the United States
    out of the U.S.-EU led Iran nuclear agreement. This is a very
    perilous moment for the transatlantic relationship because of
    the policies of this administration. You are going to both have
    the responsibility of soothing those tensions and reporting
    back accurately to this administration what people in Europe
    think about the President's policies.
        But we are very glad that you have chosen to take this
    responsibility, and we look forward to your testimony today.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        Again, we welcome the nominees, and we certainly welcome
    their family. I encourage you, in your opening statements, to
    introduce family members that are in the audience.
        Our first nominee is the Honorable Peter Hoekstra. Peter is
    the President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to The
    Netherlands. Mr. Hoekstra is a politician and business
    executive who served in Congress from 1993 to 2011,
    representing Michigan's second district. He was chairman of the
    House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 2004 to
    2007 and the ranking Republican on the committee until 2011.
    Mr. Hoekstra continues to be active on public policy issues and
    in business affairs as a consultant, researcher, and writer.
    Mr. Hoekstra?

    STATEMENT OF HON. PETER HOEKSTRA, OF MICHIGAN, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
               AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS

        Mr. Hoekstra. Thank you, Chairman Johnson, and good to be
    with you Ranking Member Murphy and other distinguished members
    of the committee. It is an honor to be with you today.
        I am deeply appreciative of the nomination that President
    Trump has provided to me to be the Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    The Netherlands. Obviously, with your concurrence and approval,
    I look forward to beginning my work in The Netherlands and once
    again serving the people of the United States of America.
        As all of us who have served in public office know, we
    could never get there without the support of many other people.
    Today I am joined by my wife of 42 years, Diane, right here.
    And also, we have had the support of my children and my
    daughter-in-law for the 18 years that I spent in Congress. We
    all know the frustrations and the joys that a family can go
    through when their father or their mother is called Congressman
    or Senator. But for our family, it has been a richly rewarding
    experience, and we look forward to the opportunity to serve
    again.
        I am also deeply appreciative of the kind words from
    Senator Stabenow and the support that I am also receiving from
    Gary Peters. I maybe could stop right now and say I cannot add
    anything more. I can only do damage to the very, very kind
    words that Senator Stabenow provided. As she said, in Michigan,
    we know that politics stops at the water's edge. Whether that
    is Lake Michigan or whether that is the Atlantic, that is how
    we always thought, and we always had the opportunity to work
    together. And when we disagreed, it was never on a personal
    basis, and we always remained friends and respected each other.
        Obviously, this is a special opportunity for me. I am a
    native-born Dutchman. I was born in The Netherlands in 1953. My
    parents immigrated in 1956. My parents were liberated by
    American and Canadian troops during World War II. So they had
    that fondness and appreciation for America. But packing up
    three kids and moving to this country was a wonderful
    opportunity and it was a leap of faith.
        My parents made the commitment that they would become
    Americans. They actually changed the name of one of their kids
    because they wanted to make sure that he would be fully able to
    integrate into American society and become an American.
        We lived the American dream. My dad ran a small bakery. My
    mom was a stay-at-home mom. Their kids all had the opportunity
    to go to college. And 36 years after emigrating to the United
    States, they had the opportunity to see their son get sworn
    into Congress. America was all that they had hoped for, and for
    all of us, it has become our home.
        The opportunity to go back and represent the United
    States--it is a humbling opportunity. The Netherlands was the
    second country to formally recognize this newly born country in
    1782. So this is truly a unique and unbroken relationship.
        The Dutch have continued their strong economic ties. They
    are one of the top foreign investors in the United States. We
    have a trade surplus with them of roughly $24 billion per year.
        They are a strong military ally. They supported us in our
    war for independence. They supported us in the war in
    Afghanistan. 25 Dutch soldiers have sacrificed their lives in
    Afghanistan. And obviously, that is an important relationship
    with the threats that we face today, whether it is terrorism,
    the threat from Russia and other unnamed threats that we may
    face in the future. It is hard to find an ally that has been
    more dedicated and consistent than what the Dutch have been.
        Obviously, if provided with the opportunity, it will be my
    job to manage that relationship and leave it stronger and
    better than what we have inherited. We stand on the work of
    hundreds and thousands of people that have built this
    relationship over 200 years, the proud professionals of our
    Foreign Service. I had the opportunity to meet with many of
    them when I was on the Intelligence Committee. I respect their
    work. I have relied on their foreign intelligence experience,
    and I will in the future. They are truly amazing people.
        I recognize the obligation of implementing the strategies
    and policies of the United States. These policies are
    established in Washington, D.C. I recognize the responsibility
    to the President. I recognize my responsibility to the
    Secretary of State. But as a person of the House, I also
    recognize my responsibility to the Congress of the United
    States, and I pledge that I will work faithfully and hopefully
    effectively with both the House and the Senate.
        With your approval, I look forward to once again having the
    opportunity to serve this great country. Thank you very much
    for your time, and I look forward to answering any questions
    you may have.
        [Mr. Hoekstra's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Peter Hoekstra

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and distinguished
    committee members, it is an honor to be with you today.
        I am deeply appreciative of President Trump for the nomination to
    be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. With
    your concurrence and approval, I look forward to beginning my work in
    the Netherlands and once again serving the people of the United States
    of America.
        As those who have been a part of public service know, there are
    many individuals that have helped us achieve these opportunities. I
    would like to recognize Diane, my wife of more than 42 years, for her
    unconditional love and support. Our children, Erin, Allison, and Bryan,
    and daughter-in-law Rebecca, have been supportive throughout the joys
    and frustrations of having a congressman as a father. The time in
    public service was a special and rewarding time for all of us.
        I'm also deeply appreciative of the support that Senators Debbie
    Stabenow and Gary Peters have expressed. As a Michigan delegation, we
    always knew when to set aside partisan considerations and support our
    State and each other. As they have stated, in America politics stops at
    the water's edge. Thank you Senators Stabenow and Peters.
        This is a special opportunity. I am a native Dutchman. I was born
    in the Netherlands in 1953. In 1956 my parents immigrated to the United
    States with their three young children. For them it was the beginning
    of an adventure in ``the land of opportunity.'' They had some previous
    experience with Americans, as it was American and Canadian troops who
    liberated them and an occupied Netherlands in 1945, but this was a leap
    of faith.
        My parents made the commitment that they would become
    ``Americans,'' even changing the name of one of their children so that
    he would fit in.
        We lived the American dream. My dad operated a small bakery. My mom
    was a stay-at-home mother. Their kids all graduated from college and 36
    years later they saw their son sworn into the United States Congress.
    America has been all they had hoped for. For all of us, it became our
    new home.
        The opportunity to go back and represent the United States to the
    Netherlands is a humbling opportunity. The Netherlands was the second
    country to formally recognize this newly born country in 1782. It
    supported the struggle for independence, supplying weapons and
    ammunition. The United States and the Netherlands have had an unbroken
    record of friendship going back more than 240 years. This is truly a
    unique and unbroken relationship.
        The Dutch have and continue to be a strong economic partner. They
    are one of the largest foreign direct investors in the United States.
    The U.S. also enjoys the largest trade surplus in any bilateral
    relationship with the Netherlands, roughly $24 billion. I recognize the
    strength of this relationship and will look at ways to build the
    economic ties even stronger for the benefit of both countries.
        The Dutch have also been a strong military ally of the United
    States. In Margraten, a small Dutch town, the citizens have adopted the
    graves of 8,301 U.S. military personnel who paid the ultimate price in
    helping liberate the Netherlands and defeat the Nazi's in World War II.
    The Dutch have also been a full partner in the efforts to defeat the
    threat from terrorism. Twenty-five Dutch soldiers have died in the
    Afghan war. From the founding of our country, through many conflicts
    including today's, the two countries have always stood shoulder to
    shoulder, never against each other. That needs to continue as we face
    the threats of terrorism, Russia, and other unnamed future challenges.
        Economically and militarily, it is difficult to find any ally who
    has stood by our side, hand in hand, for such a long period of time. As
    such, I recognize that the work of the men and women of the U.S.
    embassy in The Hague is a part of this long relationship with the
    Dutch. We will stand on the foundation laid by those who have served so
    effectively and diligently for the last 200 plus years. We will be
    entrusted to manage this relationship today and must leave it stronger
    and better than what we have been given.
        We walk and work in the footsteps of the first U.S. Ambassador to
    the Netherlands, John Adams, and the thousands of individuals who have
    built this strong and special relationship through the years.
        Personally, I look forward to working with those who have dedicated
    their lives to the foreign service. In my eighteen years in Congress,
    and especially my ten years on the Intelligence Committee, I observed
    the talents and the skills of our State Department professionals
    firsthand. Their knowledge of how to conduct foreign policy is
    something that I have relied on in the past and will continue to rely
    on in the future. They are truly amazing people.
        As a Congressman, I have interacted frequently with the Dutch on
    trade, military and intelligence, and cultural issues. This position
    will enable me to build on that experience.
        As an ambassador, I recognize the obligation of implementing the
    strategies and policies of the United States. These policies are
    established in Washington, D.C. I recognize the responsibilities that I
    have to the President and Secretary of State Tillerson; and as a man of
    the House, the responsibility to the Congress of the United States.
        With your approval, I look forward to once again having the
    opportunity to serve this great country. Thank you very much for your
    time today. I look forward to answering your questions.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Congressman Hoekstra.
        Our next nominee is Mr. Richard Duke Buchan, and Mr. Buchan
    is the President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Spain.
    Mr. Buchan is the founder and CEO of Hunter Global Investors
    LP. He and his family own and manage farms that grow over 100
    varieties of heirloom vegetables and raise horses. He is active
    in a number of educational and philanthropic causes. Mr. Buchan
    established the University of North Carolina's largest single
    endowment focused on Spanish languages, literature, and
    culture. Mr. Buchan?

        STATEMENT OF RICHARD DUKE BUCHAN III, OF FLORIDA, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
               STATES OF AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM OF SPAIN

        Mr. Buchan. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chairman and
    distinguished members of the committee.
        A special thanks to Senator Johnson again for your
    introduction and support.
        It is a great honor to appear before this distinguished
    committee. I am deeply grateful to President Trump and humbled
    to be his nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to
    the Kingdom of Spain and the Principality of Andorra. If
    confirmed, I will work tirelessly to represent the interests of
    the United States of America and to further enhance our strong
    partnerships with these two great nations.
        Each of us has followed a unique path to public service. As
    a 10th generation North Carolinian who grew up on a tobacco and
    cattle farm, I know that I am here because of the people and
    the land that nurtured me. I would like to recognize those in
    attendance today from my family: my amazing wife, Hannah--they
    are all behind me--my three dear children, Cate, Beau, and
    John; and my charming and insightful mother Betty. My father is
    here in spirit. I would also like to take a moment to remember
    my grandmother who taught me that I have two ears and I have
    one mouth and that I should use them accordingly. And that
    lesson has served me well in life so far.
        If confirmed, I look forward to joining the extraordinary
    team from the State Department led by Secretary Tillerson. The
    talented staff of the U.S. mission to Spain works diligently to
    serve our great Nation. I want to recognize their families who
    serve alongside them with equal honor, dedication, and
    commitment. My career in international finance has focused on
    building bridges often between diverse individuals and groups
    to bring out the best in others to solve problems. I hope to
    apply those skills leading Mission Spain.
        Global engagement is vital to America's success. My 3
    decades of work in Spain, other European countries, Latin
    America, and Asia have taught me the importance of listening to
    and learning from others to forge solutions. If confirmed, this
    experience and international perspective will be vital to my
    role as the U.S. Ambassador.
        This opportunity to serve my country is a dream come true.
    I have loved Spain since my childhood when I first read about
    that faraway land of Don Quixote and Picasso in the World Book
    Encyclopedia. In 1980, as an eager and curious high school
    student, I first convinced my parents to let me study abroad in
    Valencia, Spain.
        At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, I
    double majored in Spanish and economics, studying an entire
    academic year in Seville, Spain. In the years since, my family
    has worked to strengthen ties to Spain and Latin American
    countries by establishing The Buchan Excellence Fund, which was
    previously mentioned. It is UNC's single largest endowment
    focused on Spanish languages, literature, and culture. It
    embodies my conviction that knowledge, understanding and, above
    all, human connections are the keys to success in business,
    diplomacy, and life. As a family, we have a deep appreciation
    and respect and love for the Spanish people and culture. It is
    only surpassed by our love for the United States of America.
        Sadly, Spain like America has faced terror attacks at home,
    most recently in Barcelona. As we share their grief, we deeply
    admire their resolve in the face of evil. Spain also
    understands this is a global conflict, bravely committing blood
    and treasure to combat terror around the world. It is a
    significant contributor to NATO, EU, and U.N. peacekeeping
    missions. For over 60 years, Spain has been a welcoming host to
    our military. Rota Naval Station and Moron Air Base are
    essential for major coalition operations in the fight against
    terrorism. We thank the Spanish Government and people for their
    support. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen these historic
    ties as we confront our common enemies.
        As I know firsthand from my years as a global investor,
    Spain is a vital economic partner. The United States and Spain
    generated $24 billion in two-way trade in 2016. Spain is our
    ninth largest source of foreign direct investment. U.S.
    subsidiaries of Spanish firms employ more than 80,000 U.S.
    workers. My career has been built on finding and pursuing
    opportunities. If confirmed, I will strive to increase Spanish
    investment in the U.S. and to increase opportunities for U.S.
    businesses in Spain.
        Our human connections to Spain are deep and meaningful,
    stretching back to before the founding of our republic. Over 2
    million Americans traveled to Spain last year to explore its
    rich culture and beautiful landscape. Approximately 770,000
    Spaniards visit the U.S. each year, spending about $1.7
    billion. More than 200,000 Americans live in Spain. If
    confirmed, the safety and security of these American citizens
    will be a top priority.
        We can also rely on Spain to share our broader geopolitical
    interests. Spain has been a reliable backer of EU sanctions
    against Russia and North Korea. Spain is also an important
    partner in seeking democratic reforms in Venezuela. If
    confirmed, I will vigorously represent our policies to ensure
    that the United States and Spain continue to work together
    closely.
        While I have spoken much of Spain, if confirmed, I will
    also represent the United States before the Principality of
    Andorra. Situated in the Pyrenees Mountains, this breathtaking
    country is also rich with history and culture. Andorra has been
    a reliable partner in key votes at the United Nations and other
    important international fora. It has taken great strides in
    diversifying its economy. The embassy works closely with our
    Andorran partners on educational exchanges and trade promotion.
    If confirmed, I will be honored to represent U.S. interests in
    the Principality of Andorra and to build our long friendship
    and close bilateral cooperation.
        Distinguished Senators, I would like to thank you again for
    your time. I began by talking about our shared journey. My
    family and I have been blessed in so many ways. We owe so much
    to America. If you will honor me, I pledge to give my all to
    strengthen and advance the partnership with our long-term and
    unwavering friends, Spain and Andorra. I welcome your comments,
    questions, and a continued relationship. Thank you. And God
    bless America.
        [Mr. Buchan's prepared statement follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Richard Duke Buchan III

        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy and distinguished
    members of the committee. And another special thanks to you, Chairman
    Johnson for your personal introduction and for your support.
        It is a great honor to appear before this distinguished committee.
    I am humbled to be President Trump's nominee to serve as the United
    States Ambassador to the Kingdom of Spain and the Principality of
    Andorra. I am deeply grateful to President Trump for his confidence in
    me. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to represent the interests of
    the United States of America, and to further enhance our strong
    partnerships with these two great nations.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy and distinguished members of
    the committee, I want to start by thanking each of you for your service
    to our great nation. We need public service now more than ever, and as
    an American I want to say how much I appreciate all that you do for
    this country that we love.
        Each of us has followed a unique path to public service. As a 10th
    generation North Carolinian who grew up on a tobacco and cattle farm, I
    know that I am here because of the people and the land that nurtured
    me. I would like to recognize those in attendance here today: my
    amazing wife Hannah; my three dear children Cate, Beau and John; and my
    charming and insightful mother Betty. My father is here in spirit. I
    would also like to take a moment to remember my grandmother who taught
    me that I have two ears and one mouth and that I should use them
    accordingly. The lessons my family and community have taught me--
    including the importance of hard work, of listening to and respecting
    others, of dreaming big--will continue to guide and inspire me if I am
    allowed to represent the United States of America overseas.
        If confirmed, I look forward to joining the extraordinary team from
    the State Department led by Secretary Tillerson and the many other U.S.
    agencies that work together to represent our nation around the globe.
    The staff of the U.S. Mission to Spain works diligently to serve
    American citizens, promote American business and advance U.S.
    interests. I am awed by the talent of these patriots. I also want to
    recognize their families who serve alongside them with equal honor,
    dedication and commitment. My career in international finance has
    focused on building bridges often between diverse individuals and
    groups to bring out the best in others to solve problems. I hope to
    apply those skills leading Mission Spain.
        Global engagement is vital to America's success. Our international
    relationships impact all levels of our economy, our national security
    and our shared responsibility to address the world's toughest problems.
    My three decades of work in Spain, other European countries, Latin
    America and Asia have taught me the importance of listening to and
    learning from others to forge solutions. If confirmed, this experience
    and international perspective will be vital to my role as a U.S,
    Ambassador.
        The opportunity to serve my country as U.S. Ambassador to the
    Kingdom of Spain and the Principality of Andorra is a dream come true.
    I have loved Spain since my childhood, when I first read about that
    faraway land of Don Quixote and Picasso in the World Book Encyclopedia.
    In 1980, as an eager and curious high school student, I first convinced
    my parents to let me study abroad at La Universidad de Valencia.
        At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, I double
    majored in Spanish and economics, studying an entire academic year at
    La Universidad de Sevilla. In the years since, my family has worked to
    strengthen ties to Spain and Latin American countries by establishing
    The Buchan Excellence Fund, which is UNC's single largest endowment
    focused on Spanish languages, literature and culture. It embodies my
    conviction that knowledge, understanding and, above all, human
    connections, are the keys to success in business, diplomacy and life.
    One of our Fund's hallmark projects is 21st Century Pen Pals, a video
    exchange program between American and Spanish schoolchildren. As a
    family we have a deep appreciation, respect and love for the Spanish
    people and culture. It is only surpassed by our love for the United
    States.
        Few countries are as united in history and culture as Spain and the
    United States. These centuriesold ties have only strengthened in recent
    years as Spain has become one of our chief allies in the fight against
    terrorism, and the broader effort to uphold democracy and to promote
    prosperity around the globe. We could not ask for a better partner. It
    is an alliance based on shared values, respect and collaboration.
        Sadly, Spain, like America, has faced terror attacks at home, most
    recently in Barcelona. As we share their grief, we deeply admire their
    resolve in the face of evil. And just as we do, Spain understands this
    is a global conflict, bravely committing blood and treasure to combat
    terror around the world. It is a significant contributor to NATO, EU
    and U.N. peacekeeping missions. There are currently 3,000 Spanish
    troops deployed overseas, including in the Baltics, Turkey and West
    Africa. For over 60 years Spain has been a welcoming host to our
    military, and today, we have more than 4,000 personnel based there.
    Rota Naval Station and Mor"n Air Base are essential for major coalition
    operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and West Africa. We thank the
    Spanish government and people for their support. If confirmed, I will
    work to strengthen these historic ties as we confront our common
    enemies.
        The Trump administration is keenly aware that these efforts involve
    not just the military but law enforcement as well; and it is
    appreciative of Spain's work. We rely on Spain to help us track and
    apprehend foreign fighters. Spanish authorities have also worked
    closely with the DEA to battle the scourge of drugs. If confirmed, I
    will enhance this robust cooperation.
        As I know first-hand from my years as a global investor, Spain is a
    vital economic partner. The United States and Spain generated $24
    billion in two-way goods trade in 2016. Spain is our 9th largest source
    of foreign direct investment. Its total capital investment in the U.S.
    exceeds $72 billion; U.S. subsidiaries of Spanish firms employ more
    than 80,000 U.S. workers in financial services, construction,
    alternative energy, tourism and consumables. My career has been built
    on finding and pursuing opportunities. With Spain's economy predicted
    to grow at over three percent this year, if confirmed, I will strive to
    increase Spanish investment in the U.S. and to increase opportunities
    for U.S. businesses in Spain.
        Our human connections to Spain are deep and meaningful, stretching
    back to before the founding of our Republic. They remain strong today
    because of our shared values and interests. Over two million Americans
    traveled to Spain last year to explore its rich culture and beautiful
    landscape. Approximately 770,000 Spaniards visit the U.S. each year,
    spending about $1.7 billion. Over 28,000 Americans study in Spain each
    year and around 6,600 Spaniards study in the U.S. More than 200,000
    Americans live in Spain. If confirmed, the safety and security of these
    American citizens will be a top priority.
        We can also rely on Spain to share our broader geopolitical
    interests. Spain has been a reliable backer of EU sanctions against
    Russia and supports implementation of the Minsk agreement even as it
    shares our desire to find areas of common ground with Russia where
    appropriate. Spain is a strong supporter of tough, effective sanctions
    enforcement, and recently took action to enhance pressure on North
    Korea. Spain is also an important partner in seeking democratic reforms
    in Venezuela, and remains a strong voice within the EU for sanctions
    and other measures. If confirmed, I will vigorously represent our
    policies to insure that the United States and Spain continue to work
    together closely.
        While I have spoken much of Spain, if confirmed, I will also
    represent the United States before the Principality of Andorra.
    Situated in the Pyrenees Mountains, this breathtaking country is also
    rich with history and culture. Andorra has been a reliable partner in
    key votes at the United Nations and other important international fora.
    It has also advanced its fight against money laundering and is
    diversifying its economy. These steps have already borne fruit in a
    revitalized and increasingly outward-looking market. The Embassy works
    closely with our Andorran partners on educational exchanges and trade
    promotion. If confirmed, I will be honored to represent U.S. interests
    in the Principality of Andorra and to build on our long friendship and
    close bilateral cooperation.
        Distinguished Senators, I would like again to thank you for your
    time. I began by talking about our shared journey. My family and I have
    been blessed in so many ways. We owe so much to America. If you will
    honor me, I pledge to give my all to strengthen and advance the
    partnership with our long-term and unwavering friends, Spain and
    Andorra. I welcome your comments, questions and a continued
    relationship. Thank you. And God bless America.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Buchan. We would all do
    well to heed your grandmother's advice.
        Our next nominee is Mr. Richard Grenell, and Mr. Grenell is
    the President's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Germany. Mr.
    Grenell is a foreign policy writer and commentator. He founded
    the international consulting firm, Capital Media Partners, in
    2010. For nearly 2 decades, he has served as the primary
    communications advisor for public officials at the local,
    State, federal, and international levels, as well as for a
    Fortune 200 company. Mr. Grenell is the longest-serving United
    States spokesman of the United States having served four U.S.
    Ambassadors. Mr. Grenell?

     STATEMENT OF RICHARD GRENELL, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
               AMERICA TO THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

        Mr. Grenell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member,
    and members of the committee.
        First, let me say that I greatly appreciate the time and
    commitment you all have made to serve the American people. I am
    thankful for the sacrifices you and your families have made
    throughout your tenure in public office.
        I would also like to express my gratitude to President
    Trump for his confidence in me. I am honored and humbled to be
    here today.
        The United States truly is the land of opportunity. The
    fact that I sit before you all today is a testament to this
    country's outstanding potential. This country has provided me
    with every opportunity, from my days growing up in western
    Michigan to the life I have built with my partner in
    California. I owe so much to our great Nation.
        With your consent, I pledge to return the favor. I pledge
    to serve this country and its interests with honor and
    distinction. I pledge to respect its Constitution, and I pledge
    to uphold its values, spreading our deeply-held commitment to
    democracy, freedom, and human rights. With your consent, I will
    commit myself to the interests of this great Nation on behalf
    of all Americans as the Ambassador to the Federal Republic of
    Germany.
        All of us owe a great deal to those who helped us along the
    way. I am here today with my partner of 15 years, Matt Lashey.
    I want to publicly thank Matt for his many sacrifices, but most
    of all, for his incredible love and support. Throughout every
    challenge and opportunity that I have faced, including cancer,
    Matt has supported and encouraged me every step of the way. I
    would not be able to serve the President nor the American
    people without Matt's commitment by my side. Thank you.
        I must also add a thank you to my father, who would have
    been sitting right next to Matt if he were alive today, and to
    my mom watching from Michigan.
        If confirmed, I would be honored to once again have the
    opportunity to serve at the State Department. For 8 years, I
    served on the Executive Management Team at the United States
    Mission to the Europe, serving at the pleasure of four
    different--in fact, very different--U.S. Ambassadors.
        I know personally how stressful the arrival of a new
    ambassador can be for embassy and consulate staff. With your
    consent, I look forward to making that transition a smooth and
    enjoyable process for the many courageous and patriotic
    Americans serving their country throughout Germany.
        If confirmed, I will seek to deepen and strengthen the
    historic relationship between Washington and Berlin. Our two
    great nations share an unbreakable bond, and I look forward to
    strengthening these ties while championing the values of
    diversity, transparency, and fairness. In addition to the
    embassy in Berlin and the five consular offices, Germany is
    home to more than 30,000 American men and women serving in the
    U.S. military. If confirmed, I will make their safety and
    security a top priority.
        This past Sunday, the German people went to the polls and
    exercised their right to a representative government in a free
    and fair election. Chancellor Merkel is now negotiating to form
    a new government. Whatever the makeup of the new German
    governing coalition, I look forward to representing the
    American people as we deepen our powerful and unbreakable bond
    with the German people.
        If confirmed, I commit to broadening cooperation
    surrounding our shared goals of security and prosperity. As we
    seek to remain competitive and safe in an ever-changing world,
    we must look to strengthen those elements of friendship which
    have so greatly benefited both nations. We must increase our
    trade and economic relationships, expand our information
    sharing, and find new, innovative ways to strengthen our
    alliance and further the interests of peace around the world.
        But knowing that freedom is not free, I will also commit to
    working with the Chancellor and the new governing coalition to
    increase the pace at which Germany moves to meet its
    commitments to NATO. But in doing so, I will reinforce to the
    German people our Nation's commitment to a strong, united West.
    No other nation will disrupt this important bond that we share.
        I am honored to be here today at the pleasure of the
    President, and I look forward to answering your questions and
    hearing your suggestions.
        [Mr. Grenell's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Richard Grenell

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the
    committee, first, let me say that I greatly appreciate the time and
    commitment you all have made to serve the American people. I am
    thankful for the sacrifices you and your families have made throughout
    your tenure in public office.
        I would also like to express my gratitude to President Trump for
    his confidence in me. I am honored and humbled to be here today.
        The United States truly is the land of opportunity. The fact that I
    sit before you all today is a testament to this country's outstanding
    potential. This country has provided me with every opportunity, from my
    days growing up in midwestern Michigan to the life I've built with my
    partner in California, I owe so much to this great nation.
        With your consent, I pledge to return the favor. I pledge to serve
    this country and its interests with honor and distinction; I pledge to
    respect its constitution; and I pledge to uphold its values, spreading
    our deeply-held commitment to democracy, freedom, and human rights.
    With your consent, I will commit myself to the interests of this great
    nation, on behalf of all Americans, as the Ambassador to the Federal
    Republic of Germany.
        All of us owe a great deal to those who helped us along the way. I
    am here today with my partner of 15 years, Matt Lashey. I want to
    publicly thank Matt for his many sacrifices, but most of all, for his
    incredible love and support. Throughout every challenge and
    opportunity, Matt has supported and encouraged me every step of the
    way. I would not be able to serve the President and the American people
    without Matt's commitment and help.
        I must also add a thank you to my father, who would have been here
    sitting right next to Matt if he were alive today. I am so thankful for
    all my loving family members, who are watching today's proceedings from
    Michigan, California, Minnesota, and New Jersey.
        If confirmed, I would be honored to once again have the opportunity
    to serve at the State Department. For eight years, I served on the
    Executive Management Team at the United States Mission to the United
    Nations, serving at the pleasure of four different--in fact, very
    different-- U.S. Ambassadors.
        I know personally how stressful the arrival of a new Ambassador can
    be for Embassy and Consulate staff. With your consent, I look forward
    to making that transition a smooth and enjoyable process for the many
    courageous and patriotic Americans serving their country throughout
    Germany.
        If confirmed, I will seek to deepen and strengthen the historic
    relationship between Washington and Berlin. Our two great nations share
    an unbreakable bond, and I look forward to strengthening these ties
    while championing the values of diversity, transparency, and fairness.
    In addition to the Embassy in Berlin and the five Consular Offices in
    Frankfurt, Munich, Dusseldorf, Hamburg and Leipzig, Germany is also
    home to more than 30,000 American men and women serving in the U.S.
    military. If confirmed, I will make their safety and security a top
    priority.
        This past Sunday, the German people went to the polls and exercised
    their right to a representative government in a free and fair election.
    Chancellor Merkel is now negotiating to form a new government. Whatever
    the makeup of the new German governing coalition, I look forward to
    representing the American people as we prepare deepen our powerful and
    unbreakable bond with the German people.
        As Ambassador, I would commit to broadening cooperation surrounding
    our shared goals of security and prosperity for both nations. As we
    seek to remain competitive and safe in an everchanging world, we must
    look to strengthen those elements of friendship which have so greatly
    benefited both nations. We must increase our trade and economic
    relationships, expand our information sharing, and find new, innovative
    ways to strengthen our alliance and further the interests of peace
    around the world.
        But, knowing that freedom is not free, I will commit to working
    with the Chancellor and the new governing coalition to increase the
    pace at which Germany moves to meet its commitments to NATO.
        But in doing so, I will reinforce to the German people our nation's
    commitment to a strong, united West. No other nation will disrupt the
    important bond we share with one of our strongest, most dependable
    global allies.
        I am honored to be here today at the pleasure of the President, and
    I thank you for your time. I look forward to answering your questions
    and hearing your suggestions.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Grenell.
        Our next nominee is Ms. Jamie McCort. Ms. McCourt is the
    President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to France. Ms.
    McCourt is an entrepreneur, an attorney, and has founded
    leading entrepreneurial enterprises in Los Angles and Boston.
    She is a former co-owner, President and CEO of the Los Angeles
    Dodgers. She also serves as an adjunct professor at the UCLA
    Anderson School of Management. Ms. McCourt possesses a unique
    global perspective, having lived and worked both domestically
    and abroad in numerous industries, including sports, law,
    finance, education, and real estate. Ms. McCourt?

      STATEMENT OF JAMIE McCOURT, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
     AMERICA TO THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND
    WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
        PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
                         PRINCIPALITY OF MONACO

        Ms. McCourt. Thank you, Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member
    Murphy, and members of the committee. It is my great honor to
    be here today as President Trump's nominee to be the United
    States Ambassador to France and Monaco. I am extraordinarily
    grateful to the President for this opportunity to serve the
    American people as his envoy to our oldest and certainly one of
    our closest allies.
        Knowing I have not made this journey alone, I would like to
    take a moment to express my gratitude to my parents who are
    first-generation Americans, born and raised in Baltimore,
    Maryland, as was I, and to my four best start-ups, my four
    boys, Drew, Travis, Casey, and Gavin, two of whom are here
    today.
        As the first person in my family to attend college, I
    received a B.S. in French here at Georgetown University with a
    year at La Sorbonne in Paris, a J.D. from University of
    Maryland School of Law and ultimately an M.S. in management
    from the MIT/Sloan School of Management. And as you said, I
    have been an adjunct professor teaching leadership at UCLA/
    Anderson Business School of Management. I obviously believe
    education is the great equalizer.
        I believe in the opportunity to succeed through hard work,
    determination, and initiative. In other words, I believe in the
    American dream. Therefore, I am deeply honored to be here and
    incredibly touched to have the opportunity, if confirmed, to
    give back to and serve my country.
        This year marks the 100th anniversary of the U.S. entry
    into World War I. Beginning in 1917, American and French
    soldiers fought side by side and died together in defense of a
    free and peaceful Europe.
        President Trump's visit to Paris in July as President
    Macron's guest of honor during the National Day celebrations,
    commemorating the centennial anniversary of this U.S. entry
    into the war, was a vivid reminder of that sacrifice in defense
    of our common values.
        A few decades later, in 1941, the United States went to war
    again, and Americans once more fought and died to defend and
    liberate European allies. One of those soldiers was my uncle,
    killed in action at the age of 27, leaving behind two young
    babies.
        Having grown up listening to my mostly stoic father
    tearfully reminisce whenever he spoke of his older brother, and
    having been extremely close to my grandmother, I have always
    felt a special connection to Europe and to the purpose for
    which my uncle gave his life. The thought of serving as an
    ambassador in Europe, therefore, is particularly personal for
    me and my family, and it would be the greatest honor of my life
    if confirmed for this position.
        Following World War I and World War II, America's alliance
    with France has only grown stronger as we, together with France
    and our other allies, founded NATO to ensure a secure, free,
    and prosperous future for our descendants.
        If confirmed, I pledge to do everything in my power to
    continue to nurture our crucial alliance with France, and
    together we will address challenges to our global security,
    including ensuring a strong and capable NATO alliance,
    combating terrorism, hastening the defeat of ISIS, countering
    Russian malign influence, stepping up pressure on North Korea,
    and improving nuclear security.
        In fact, France is our most capable and willing ally in
    support of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS in Syria and
    Iraq through air strikes, aircraft carrier deployments, and
    training of operational forces on the ground; through Defeat-
    ISIS efforts in Libya; and through its lead in sub-Saharan
    Africa where it combats violent extremism and illicit
    trafficking through Operation Barkhane.
        France is in support of countering Iran's malign activities
    including development of nuclear weapons capabilities and
    advocates for security policy reform at the EU level, leading
    efforts to tighten boarder security and promote better
    information sharing among member states to meet evolving
    terrorist threats. France, along with Germany, participates in
    the Normandy format to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the
    conflict in eastern Ukraine.
        As well, France is a key partner in America's prosperity,
    and if confirmed, I will work assiduously to promote American
    exports to France and French investments in the United States.
        Today, France is the fifth largest investor in the U.S. and
    our eighth largest trading partner. French investment in the
    U.S. supports approximately 574,000 jobs. Over $1 billion in
    commercial transactions take place every single day between our
    two countries.
        As someone who has long been involved in business ventures
    myself, including as the co-owner, President and CEO of the Los
    Angeles Dodgers, as well as through my investments in high-
    value real estate, biotech ventures, technology start-ups, and
    even art, I would like to further expand this relationship to
    provide new business opportunities.
        Additionally, if confirmed, I look forward to nurturing our
    relationship with the Principality of Monaco and working
    together with His Serene Highness Prince Albert and his
    government to further our joint objectives. Monaco has been a
    trusted partner for the United States in advancing our shared
    interest in a secure and prosperous world.
        Moreover, the Department of State's highest calling is to
    protect U.S. citizens abroad. The horrific terror attacks in
    France that claimed the lives of innocent people and injured
    countless others, including Americans, are a stark reminder of
    our overarching duty to protect our citizens.
        If confirmed, I will consider my primary responsibility to
    ensure the safety and security of the embassy community and of
    all U.S. citizens in France and Monaco. I assure you our
    mission and its staff will have no higher priority.
        If confirmed, I will lead the mission to do everything
    possible to support French efforts to prevent another tragedy.
    To this end, I will seek to deepen U.S.-French counterterrorism
    cooperation and information sharing so that violent extremists
    in Europe will not be able to threaten the U.S. homeland.
        In closing, the U.S. partnership and alliance with France
    is a cornerstone of our cooperation with Europe.
        Drawing on the strength of the entire U.S. Government,
    including the dedicated officers of our U.S. Foreign Service
    and the many talented individuals representing multiple
    agencies of our government in France, I would, if confirmed,
    work every day to advance our mutual interests in a secure and
    prosperous world.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. I look forward to answering your questions, and if
    confirmed, I look forward to working with all of you to further
    enhance the relationship between the United States and France
    and Monaco.
        [Ms. McCourt's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Jamie McCourt

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the
    committee, it is my great honor to be here today as President Trump's
    nominee to be the United States Ambassador to France and Monaco. I am
    extraordinarily grateful to the President for this opportunity to serve
    the American people as his envoy to our oldest and certainly one of our
    closest allies.
        Knowing I have not made this journey alone, I would like to take a
    moment to express my gratitude to my parents, who are first-generation
    Americans, born and raised in Baltimore, Maryland, as was I, and to my
    four best start-ups, my four boys, Drew, Travis, Casey, and Gavin.
        As the first person in my family to attend college, I received a
    B.S. in French at Georgetown University, with a year at La Sorbonne in
    Paris, a J.D. from University of Maryland School of Law and ultimately
    a M.S. in Management from the MIT/Sloan School of Management and having
    been an adjunct professor teaching leadership at UCLA/Anderson School
    of Management, I obviously believe education is the great equalizer.
        I believe in the opportunity to succeed through hard work,
    determination and initiative; in other words, I believe in the American
    Dream. Therefore, I am deeply honored to be here and incredibly touched
    to have the opportunity, if confirmed, to give back to and serve my
    country.
        This year marks the 100th anniversary of the U.S. entry into World
    War I. Beginning in 1917, American and French soldiers fought and died
    together in defense of a free and peaceful Europe.
        President Trump's visit to Paris in July as President Macron's
    guest of honor during the National Day celebrations, commemorating the
    centennial anniversary of the U.S. entry into the war, was a vivid
    reminder of that sacrifice in defense of our common values.
        A few decades later, in 1941, the United States went to war again,
    and Americans once more fought and died to defend and liberate European
    allies. One of those soldiers was my uncle, killed in action at the age
    of twenty-seven, leaving behind two young babies.
        Having grown up listening to my mostly stoic father tearfully
    reminisce about his older brother, and having been extremely close to
    my grandmother, I have always felt a special connection to Europe and
    to the purpose for which my uncle gave his life. The thought of serving
    as an ambassador in Europe is, therefore, particularly personal for me
    and my family, and it would be the greatest honor of my life if
    confirmed for this position.
        Following World War I and World War II, America's alliance with
    France has only grown stronger as we, together with France and our
    other allies, founded NATO to ensure a secure, free, and prosperous
    future for our descendants.
        If confirmed, I pledge to do everything in my power to continue to
    nurture our crucial alliance with France, and together we will address
    challenges to our global security, including ensuring a strong and
    capable NATO alliance, combatting terrorism, hastening the defeat of
    ISIS, countering Russian malign influence, stepping up pressure on
    North Korea, and improving nuclear security.In fact, France is our most
    capable and willing ally in support of the Global Coalition to Defeat
    ISIS in Syria and Iraq through air strikes, aircraft carrier
    deployments, and training of operational forces on the ground; through
    Defeat-Isis efforts in Libya; and through its lead in Sub-Saharan
    Africa where it combats violent extremism and illicit trafficking
    through Operation Barkhane.
        France is in support of countering Iran's malign activities
    including development of nuclear weapons capabilities, and advocates
    for security policy reform at the EU level, leading efforts to tighten
    border security and promote better information sharing among member
    states to meet evolving terrorist threats. France, along with Germany,
    participates in the Normandy format to negotiate a peaceful resolution
    to the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
        As well, France is a key partner in America's prosperity, and if
    confirmed, I will work assiduously to promote American exports to
    France and French investment in the United States.
        Today, France is the 5th largest investor in the U.S. and our 8th
    largest trading partner. French investment in the U.S. supports
    approximately 574,000 American jobs. Over $1 billion in commercial
    transactions take place every day between our two countries.
        As someone who has long been involved in business ventures myself,
    including as the Co-Owner, President and CEO of the Los Angeles
    Dodgers, as well as through my investments in high-value real estate,
    biotechnology ventures, technology start-ups, and even art, I would
    like to further expand this relationship to provide new business
    opportunities.
        Additionally, if confirmed, I look forward to nurturing our
    relationship with the Principality of Monaco, and working together with
    His Serene Highness Prince Albert and his government to further our
    joint objectives. Monaco has been a trusted partner for the United
    States in advancing our shared interest in a secure and prosperous
    world.
        Moreover, the Department of State's highest calling is to protect
    U.S. citizens overseas. The horrific terror attacks in France that
    claimed the lives of innocent people, and injured countless others,
    including Americans, are a stark reminder of our overarching duty to
    protect our citizens.
        If confirmed, I will consider my primary responsibility to ensure
    the safety and security of the Embassy community, and of all U.S.
    citizens in France and Monaco. I assure you our Mission and its staff
    will have no higher priority.
        If confirmed, I will lead the Mission to do everything possible to
    support French efforts to prevent another tragedy. To this end, I will
    seek to deepen U.S.-French counterterrorism cooperation and information
    sharing so that violent extremists in Europe will not be able to
    threaten the U.S. homeland.
        In closing, the U.S. partnership and alliance with France is a
    cornerstone of our cooperation with Europe.
        Drawing on the strength of the entire U.S. Government, including
    the dedicated officers of our U.S. Foreign Service and the many
    talented individuals representing multiple agencies of our government
    in France, I would, if confirmed, work every day to advance our mutual
    interest in a secure and prosperous world.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. I
    look forward to answering your questions and, if confirmed, I look
    forward to working with all of you to further enhance the relationships
    between the United States and France and Monaco.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. McCourt.
        Last but not least, our final nominee is Mr. Edward
    McMullen, Jr. Mr. McMullen is the President's nominee to be the
    U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Mr. McMullen
    has served in public policy, political, and business positions
    for over 30 years. He is currently President of McMullen Public
    Affairs, a full-service advertising and corporate public
    affairs company. His firm's clients have included several
    Fortune 100 companies. Mr. McMullen has been appointed to serve
    on key South Carolina statewide boards and commissions. Mr.
    McMullen?

    STATEMENT OF EDWARD T. McMULLEN, JR., OF SOUTH CAROLINA, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
      STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SWISS CONFEDERATION, AND TO SERVE
    CONCURRENTLY AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
              AMERICA TO THE PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN

        Mr. McMullen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Johnson,
    Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the committee.
        I would also like to thank Senator Graham for his kind
    introduction. He is a good friend and I am thankful he took the
    time to be here.
        It is an honor and quite humbling to be with you today as
    the President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to
    Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Thank you for this opportunity
    to offer my thoughts and to answer any questions that you may
    have.
        There are many who have joined me in this journey, and I
    would like to express my love and thanks to my wife of 28
    years, Margaret Ann, who is here today; our two children,
    Thomas and Katherine are in Charleston and Los Angeles with
    career and college commitments; and my parents, in-laws,
    extended family and friends, including my Hampden-Sydney
    College professors, all of whom selflessly inspired me in ways
    that made today possible.
        I consider it a great privilege, if confirmed by the
    Senate, to represent our country in Switzerland and
    Liechtenstein to articulate the President's and Congress'
    positions on pressing international issues, and foster, at
    every opportunity, improved diplomatic relations and deeper
    economic and cultural connections. Happily, in the case of
    Switzerland and Liechtenstein, we build on a very strong
    foundation.
        In 1995, I visited Switzerland for the second time, after
    being selected to be a part of the American-Swiss Foundation's
    young leaders program. I joined an accomplished group of young
    Americans and Swiss business and political leaders who inspired
    my interest and love for this impressive country and her
    people. The program was comprehensive, and participants
    interacted directly with Swiss businesses and government, from
    the highest level CEOs to important government officials.
        Please allow me to offer a few observations about
    Switzerland. Since I come from the private sector, I will start
    with a private sector fact that I hope you will find as
    impressive as I do.
        Switzerland is the seventh largest direct investor in the
    United States, this from a country the size of Maryland and a
    population of 8 million people. This one fact tells us a lot
    about Switzerland, not least of all that the Swiss have found a
    great formula for success. But this also tells us that Swiss
    companies are creating jobs in the United States and that there
    is extensive and mutually beneficial economic activity between
    our countries, and I look forward to having the opportunity to
    build on that, if confirmed by the Senate.
        However, our ties are not only economic. Switzerland is a
    constitutional republic. Its constitution is modeled on ours.
    We share common values, including respect for rule of law and
    the notion that government is responsible to the people.
    Switzerland is neutral, but it is a natural friend because of
    the values and constitutional principles that we share. To the
    extent there are areas of dispute and conflict, we share a
    common vocabulary for its resolution.
        This is an area where the Swiss excel. In international
    relations, Swiss good offices have proved vitally important
    over and over. It is important that the U.S. work closely with
    Switzerland in addressing a wide variety of international
    challenges.
        One final observation. Switzerland is an acknowledged
    superpower in both applied and basic research. It is not an
    accident that European nuclear research entity, CERN, and its
    Hadron collider are located in Switzerland, or that the Swiss
    have shrewdly placed a research-centric consulate literally
    halfway between Harvard and MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts. If
    confirmed, I will work to build ever closer ties between the
    United States, Swiss, and Liechtensteiner communities,
    particularly in the research area, particularly in promoting
    also apprenticeships between our three countries.
        I recognize that a key role for the U.S. Ambassador is to
    explain American foreign policy as it is defined by the
    President. Part of doing that, if confirmed, will be to reach
    out and directly communicate with Swiss officials, business
    people, and citizens. I am confident my prior experience in
    public relations and communications will prove helpful, and I
    commit to you that I will devote the time and energy necessary
    to mastering the details of my job. I also commit to ensure
    that, if confirmed, the concerns of this committee will be
    heard and respected.
        Before closing, I would like to note that, if confirmed, I
    will eagerly draw on the strength of the entire U.S.
    Government, including the devoted officers of our U.S. Foreign
    Service and the many talented individuals representing multiple
    agencies of our federal government. While serving as part of
    our mission in Switzerland, I would, if confirmed as
    Ambassador, endeavor to deepen our partnership so as to respond
    effectively to regional and global challenges.
        I am profoundly grateful for the opportunity to serve our
    great country in a new and demanding capacity. Mr. Chairman,
    members of the committee, thank you, and I would be very
    pleased to answer any questions.
        [Mr. McMullen's prepared statement follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Edward T. McMullen, Jr.

        Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the
    committee, It is an honor and quite humbling to be with you today as
    the President's nominee to be the US Ambassador to Switzerland and
    Liechtenstein. Thank your for this opportunity to offer my thoughts and
    to answer any questions you may have.
        There are many who have joined me in this journey and I would like
    to express my love and thanks to my wife of 28 years, Margaret Ann, who
    is here today--our two children, Thomas and Katherine are in Charleston
    and Los Angeles with career and college commitments, and my parents,
    in-laws, extended family and friends including my Hampden-Sydney
    College professors, all of whom selflessly inspired me in ways that
    made today possible.
        I consider it a great privilege, if confirmed by the senate, to
    represent our country in Switzerland and Liechtenstein to articulate
    the President's and Congress' positions on pressing international
    issues, and foster, at every opportunity, improved diplomatic relations
    and deeper economic and cultural connections. Happily, in the case of
    Switzerland and Liechtenstein, we build on a strong foundation.
        In 1995, I visited Switzerland for the second time, after being
    selected to be a part of the American-Swiss Foundation's young leaders
    program. I joined an accomplished group of young Americans and Swiss
    business and political leaders who inspired my interest and love for
    this impressive country and her people. The program was comprehensive,
    and participants interacted directly with Swiss businesses and the
    government--from the highest level CEOs to important government
    officials.
        Please allow me to offer a few observations about Switzerland.
    Since I come from the private sector, I'll start with a private sector
    fact that I hope you will find as impressive as I do:
        Switzerland is the seventh largest direct investor in the U.S.,
    this from a country the size of Maryland and a population of 8 million.
    This one fact tells us a lot about Switzerland, not least of all that
    the Swiss have found a great formula for success. But this also tells
    us that Swiss companies are creating jobs in the U.S. and that there is
    extensive and mutually beneficial economic activity between our
    countries; I want to help build on that.
        However, our ties are not only economic. Switzerland is a
    constitutional republic. Its constitution is modeled on ours. We share
    common values including respect for rule of law and the notion that
    government is responsible to the people. Switzerland is neutral, but is
    a natural friend because of the values and constitutional principles we
    share. To the extent there are areas of dispute and conflict, we share
    a common vocabulary for its resolution.
        This is an area where the Swiss excel. In international relations,
    Swiss ``good offices'' have proved vitally important over and over. It
    is important the U.S. work closely with Switzerland in addressing a
    wide variety of international challenges.
        One final observation--Switzerland is an acknowledged superpower in
    both applied and basic research. It's not an accident that the European
    nuclear research entity, CERN, and its Hadron collider, are located in
    Switzerland-or that the Swiss have shrewdly placed a research-centric
    consulate literally halfway between Harvard and MIT in Cambridge,
    Massachusetts. If confirmed, I will work to build ever closer ties
    between the U.S./Swiss and Liechtensteiner research communities,
    particularly in promoting apprenticeships between our countries.
        I recognize that a key role for the U.S. Ambassador is to explain
    American foreign policy as it is defined by the President. Part of
    doing that, if confirmed, will be to reach out and directly communicate
    with Swiss officials, business people, and citizens. I am confident my
    prior experience in public relations and communications will prove
    helpful and I commit to you that I will devote the time and energy
    necessary to mastering the details of my job. I also commit to ensure
    that, if confirmed, the concerns of this committee will be heard and
    respected.
        Before closing, I would like to note that if confirmed, I will
    eagerly draw on the strength of the entire U.S. government, including
    the devoted officers of our U.S. Foreign Service and the many talented
    individuals representing multiple agencies of our federal government.
    While serving as part of our Mission in Switzerland, I would, if
    confirmed as Ambassador, endeavor to deepen our partnership so as to
    respond effectively to regional and global challenges.
        I am profoundly grateful for the opportunity to serve our great
    country in a new (and demanding) capacity. Mr. Chairman, members of the
    committee, thank you, and I would be pleased to respond to any
    questions.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. McMullen.
        I want to thank all of you for your opening statements.
        I have got just kind of a basic opening question here, and
    I will start with Congressman Hoekstra. If confirmed for this
    position, can you tell me really what your top priority will be
    as Ambassador to the country you will be representing?
        Mr. Hoekstra. The top priority would be making sure that
    the post in The Hague is a very effective, functioning team, to
    make sure that the other priorities that we are working on,
    whether it is economic cooperation and development between us
    and The Netherlands, national security cooperation, and those
    types of things, fighting the war on extremism, that we can
    effectively execute each of those three missions. But the
    bottom line is we need an effective team working together in
    The Hague.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. Buchan?
        Mr. Buchan. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        As we all know, Spain has been a tremendous ally for a very
    long time to America.
        My priorities would be, first and foremost, to protect
    American people in Spain. Then security and economic prosperity
    are two areas I would like to work on, as well as cultural and
    arts. But I do think there is a lot to do in both security and
    particularly economic prosperity, and those would be my two
    primary focuses, as well as anything else the administration
    would ask me to do.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. Grenell?
        Mr. Grenell. Thank you, Senator.
        My top priority is going to be security and safety for
    embassy and consular staff, first and foremost. After that, I
    think the German-U.S. relationship is so strong that I want to
    further the ties in every area, whether it be economic
    prosperity, information sharing, human rights. I think I am
    lucky in that this bond that we have with the Germans is very
    strong, and I want to make sure that we make it even stronger.
        Senator Johnson. Ms. McCourt?
        Ms. McCourt. For certain, the very top priority is to
    ensure the safety of those in the mission and then all
    Americans in all of France, and also to prevent, to the extent
    possible, and to work towards preventing anything happening to
    the U.S. homeland.
        That said, it is obvious counterterrorism and countering
    global security issues is of the utmost importance, including
    supporting NATO, and thereafter promoting trade and investment,
    which I know is high on the administration's agenda.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. McMullen?
        Mr. McMullen. Senator, I think continuing to build on the
    Swiss-Liechtenstein-U.S. relationship is critical. And in doing
    that, if you look at the economic side with jobs, the President
    has made job creation a major component of his administration.
    Swiss investment in the U.S. with 480,000 jobs, many of which
    are high tech, great jobs that pay well over $100,000 in
    salary--I think this is an area that we really can expand. And
    I look forward to Swiss business, Liechtensteiner business, and
    investing in the U.S., continuing that investment and building
    on it.
        Senator Johnson. So let us go down the line again in terms
    of what is the top area of cooperation economically with those
    countries? Congressman Hoekstra?
        Mr. Hoekstra. Well, the Dutch cooperate with us on a number
    of areas, in terms of the economy, whether it is agricultural
    issues, technology issues, water management, and those types of
    things. Those are the areas where we have cooperated and I
    think provide an opportunity for additional investment,
    additional exploration.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. Buchan?
        Mr. Buchan. Thank you, Senator.
        You know, the Spaniards have been very active investing in
    banking, construction, consumables, et cetera. It would be my
    goal to continue to work along those industries. And I think in
    particular there is an opportunity in energy, and that is an
    area that I would really like to pursue.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. Grenell?
        Mr. Grenell. I would say the first two are energy,
    specifically liquid natural gas, and expand the auto trade. As
    you know, Senator, there is an enormous German trade surplus,
    and I look forward to the Commerce Department coming out with a
    report later on that trade deficit report, which would give us
    a lot more information.
        Senator Johnson. Ms. McCourt?
        Ms. McCourt. France has a broad goods and services reach,
    and I would say that certainly it reaches into the air space
    and the military space, the IT space, the pharma space, and
    definitely increasingly in the energy space.
        Senator Johnson. Mr. McMullen?
        Mr. McMullen. Mr. Chairman, I think trade with Switzerland,
    for a small country the size of Maryland, is pretty impressive.
    And when you look at the types of trade, it is pharmaceuticals,
    aerospace, gold, chemicals, and something that Americans seem
    to enjoy, their Rolex and their Patek Philippes. So I think
    that is one of the great Swiss assets that we have got, and it
    is a major trading opportunity for the U.S.
        Senator Johnson. Well, thank you. I have efficiently used
    my time. Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I enjoyed all of your opening comments. Again, I appreciate
    your willingness to serve.
        Ms. McCourt, let me start with you. Russia used very
    familiar cyber espionage tactics to try to manipulate France's
    recent national election, tactics that we saw employed here in
    the United States in 2016. Unfortunately, nearly half of U.S.
    voters today do not believe that Russia interfered in the 2016
    election, largely because our President regularly calls reports
    of that interference a hoax.
        So I wanted to ask you two questions. One, what is your
    personal view of the extent of Russia's interference in the
    2016 election? Do you believe it happened? And if so, what do
    you think that we can do with France to make sure that it does
    not happen again either here or in France?
        Ms. McCourt. Thank you for your question, Senator.
        By all accounts from multiple intelligence agencies, it
    appears that Russia attempted to interfere with our elections.
    That is my personal view.
        As to what can be done about it in terms of working with
    France, I believe we need to leverage our information sharing.
    We need to share watch lists. We need to deal with anything
    that comes across our way that further enhances relationships
    so that we can figure out where these things are coming from.
    And the cyber issue is a huge issue.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you for that response.
        I would add to that having a coordinated strategy of
    repercussions for Russian individuals and Russian entities that
    have tried to interfere in both of our elections. I think that
    will be a key point of cooperation with the French as well.
        Mr. Grenell, you and I had the chance to talk about this
    subject, and I want to bring it up in open session. You have
    had a lot of experience that prepares you for this very
    important role of being Ambassador to one of the United States'
    key transatlantic allies. But there are few professions that
    probably prepare you worse for being a diplomat than being a
    cable news commentator. You, in that role or connected to that
    role, have said some very inflammatory things that will be
    brought with you, whether you like it or not, as you seek to
    represent the United States of America in Germany.
        In particular, there is a litany of very derogatory
    comments about women's personal appearances in your portfolio.
    I am not going to read through them, but they include
    derogatory comments about personal appearances of Hillary
    Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Calista Gingrich, Rachel Maddow.
        Do you regret making these statements? And do you
    understand the concern some of us have about these inflammatory
    statements coming with you as you seek to represent the United
    States as a whole in Germany?
        Mr. Grenell. Thank you, Senator, for that question and for
    the chance and opportunity to speak to it.
        First of all, let me say I never want to be mean. I am not
    that guy. It is certainly never my intentions to hurt anyone's
    feelings. Anybody who knows me knows that I am a very caring
    person and very sensitive person. And I also appreciate good
    humor. Unfortunately, there are times where what was intended
    to be humorous turned out to be not so humorous.
        Again, that was never my intention, and I regret that and
    want to make sure that you understand that I view my career in
    two different phases: one, for almost 16 years as a U.S.
    official working for State and local in international work.
    That includes 8 years at the UN. In that capacity, I understood
    that when you are speaking as a U.S. official, it is not your
    opinion that you are pushing, but it is a well thought-out U.S.
    policy. I can simply say that going back into the State
    Department, I look forward to taking on that role again where
    it is a well thought-out U.S. policy not my personal opinion.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Grenell.
        Permit me to ask one quick question of Mr. Buchan.
        You rightly referenced the important counterterrorism work
    that we have to do with Spain. Do you have any thoughts in your
    preparation for this role about the importance of information
    sharing within Europe with respect to terrorist threats and the
    importance of the United States pressing the Europeans to talk
    to each other in a much more coordinated way to make sure that
    the information that we are ultimately getting is the result of
    a collaborative process. The bilateral relationship is
    important, but pressing our European partners to work better in
    coordination, especially those like Spain that are under a
    direct counterterrorism threat, seems important as well. I
    wanted to raise that issue with you to see if you had
    considered it.
        Mr. Buchan. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        What I do know is that the information sharing between
    Spain and the United States is quite strong. Again, they have
    been a tremendous ally and friend. So I believe that
    relationship is there. Certainly in all situations, there is
    room for improvement.
        To the extent that the administration or Senators such as
    yourself view this as a high priority, of course, I will do my
    best to execute on that.
        As far as specifics between Spain and the rest of Europe,
    candidly I have not had privy to that information at this point
    in time. But if it is important to people in the administration
    and people in this room, we certainly will make it a top
    priority.
        And again, thank you for that question.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And congratulations to each of the nominees. Not only is it
    a real honor to carry the title of ambassador, should you be
    confirmed, but you are also going to work with great people.
        And I will tell you something that I always do when I
    travel. I go to missions and I ask to meet with first and
    second tour Foreign Service officers without the Ambassador
    present. So these are people who are new in their career at the
    State Department. This is what I say to them. I say
    congratulations. You have gotten a job that is really hard to
    get. What will make the difference between you staying at this
    job and making a career out of it or leaving after a few years?
    And then I do not have to say anything more, and we have about
    a 2-hour discussion that is fascinating. Not anybody has yet
    said you got to change out my ambassador. That is going to be
    make or break.
        They instead bring up all kinds of issues. And a lot of
    them kind of go to an issue that I hope you will all be mindful
    of if you are confirmed, and that is they say to me some
    version of this. It was really hard to get this job, and I had
    to go through pretty intense security vetting to do it. And now
    I am in the job but I get micromanaged. So like to order five
    pencils, I have to take a lie detector test. If you trusted me
    enough to vet me to do the job, trust me enough to do the job.
    And I think you have this great group of people. The sky is the
    limit in terms of of what they can do and the effectiveness,
    and they sometimes feel really weighted down by the kinds of
    things that often happen in large organizations. So just please
    recognize the quality of the people you have in your various
    posts and let them be all they can be.
        I am going to confine my question to Mr. Buchan because
    this U.S.-Spain relationship is really important to me too, and
    you have a really great background for this position. There is
    a 501(c)(3) organization called the U.S.-Spain Council that was
    created in the 1990s, and the tradition is that the U.S. chair
    is a Senator and the Spanish chair is an industrialist.
    Currently I am the U.S. chair, completing my fourth and final
    year as chair. The Spanish chair, Jose Manuel Entrecanales, is
    the CEO of Acciona, which is a large Spanish infrastructure
    firm.
        It was created at a time when the relationship had
    challenges. Spain was having fairly common street protests and
    riots about whether they should stay in NATO. And over the
    course of the 25 years of the organization, it has really built
    up to be a very effective organization. We just had our annual
    meeting this past weekend in Williamsburg, and we had Secretary
    Mattis talking about the future of NATO. We had the Spanish
    American chef Jose Andres talking about shared culture. It has
    really turned into something strong.
        The U.S. Ambassador to Spain always participates. The King
    and Queen of Spain often participate. And so I would just hope
    to see you in your capacity as Ambassador, Mr. Buchan, should
    you be confirmed, in future years' meetings.
        And then really just one question. I think it is an
    opportunity, a really important one, for the U.S. and Spain
    right now. I know Prime Minister Rajoy was with the President
    yesterday in the Oval Office. By all accounts, that meeting
    went well.
        And the opportunity that I think is a shared one is Puerto
    Rico. So obviously, Spain and the United States both have deep,
    deep historical connections to Puerto Rico. Spain--through the
    settlement in the 1530s, Puerto Ricans are Americans and have
    been since the early 1900s. Puerto Ricans volunteer and serve
    in our military to a degree virtually more than just about any
    other State, patriotic Americans who are suffering one of the
    worst humanitarian crises in any part of this country probably
    in our history.
        There is going to be a tremendous need to rebuild Puerto
    Rico, infrastructure, hospitals, electricity, ports, airports,
    roads. Spaniards are excellent at infrastructure. The chair of
    the U.S.-Spain Council is an infrastructure guy. One of the
    three topics that we had this weekend in Williamsburg was about
    infrastructure. Virginia does public-private partnerships in a
    really interesting way. I did it when I was Governor. And often
    it was the Spaniards who were the contracting firms and the
    Australians who would figure out how to finance the deals, and
    we would do these projects in Virginia.
        I think there is a critical humanitarian need to really be
    firm in our commitment to the Americans in Puerto Rico and to
    help rebuild. And I think the Spaniards not only have expertise
    but have a real deep cultural interest in this, and there might
    be some wonderful opportunities right out of the gate for a
    U.S. Ambassador to work together to help forge partnerships to
    do it. And I just wanted to put that on the table and say I
    think there is going to be a great opportunity immediately, and
    I would love to work together with you on a matter like that,
    should you be confirmed.
        Mr. Buchan. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        I too agree that there is a great opportunity here. We can
    certainly address the human needs. It is all about building
    bridges in opinion and making the human connection. And this
    sounds like a great idea. We know that some of the largest
    construction and infrastructure firms in the world are based in
    Spain. We also know that some of those are based in the United
    States. So I look forward to working with you and whomever else
    on this fantastic idea. And thank you for that.
        Senator Kaine. Great. Thank you so much.
        Thanks, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Johnson. Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        And congratulations to each of you on this nomination.
        Jamie McCourt I have known for decades and her background
    is very diverse. She brings a life of very, very interesting
    and I think instructive life experience that can help her be a
    very good Ambassador for our country to France. One of her
    sons--she talked about her four sons, her start-ups. One of
    them was an intern in my office 10 years ago. So I have known
    the family for a long time.
        So I guess my first question I will just throw to you
    because you are arriving just as President Macron is really
    beginning his presidency and saying that he wants to
    reinvigorate the EU, that he wants to reexamine its
    institutions. People on this committee do believe in a strong
    EU-American partnership. It has been basically the cornerstone
    of civilization since World War II.
        Can you talk about what you think the role of the United
    States can be in partnering with France to strengthen the EU in
    the years ahead?
        Ms. McCourt. First, Senator, thank you for those wonderful
    words. I hope I live up to it, should I be confirmed.
        And second, yes, I would love to address your question. I
    think where we share a lot of value and values is with free
    trade, and I know that President Macron is a strong advocate of
    free trade within the EU and puts a lot of pressure on others
    in the EU in that regard, and I think that is incredibly
    helpful.
        I think that there is a great respect for goods trade,
    services, capital, and all of the things that we also care
    about. And I think that it is very important that we work
    together to ensure that there is a very healthy trade between
    the EU and the United States.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.
        Mr. Grenell, Russia has an increasingly aggressive military
    posture. They are in violation of the INF agreement. This
    increased tension is something that is obviously going to
    require U.S. and German partnership in order to deal with this
    changing Putin era of defense view of our relationship. Can you
    give us some sense of how you perceive the INF issue, what you
    would encourage the Germans to do in response to those
    violations, and how you might think that we could achieve that
    in a partnership between our country and the Germans?
        Mr. Grenell. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        I would first start by saying I spent 8 years at the U.N.
    working with the EU-3 and Germany very closely. So the Germans,
    the British, and the French I think are very keen on working
    together. Despite the issues that the EU are going through
    right now, I think we can rely on those three to really
    confront the Russia issue. I have been very encouraged by
    Chancellor Merkel even through this election with the possible
    coalition that is forming. They are all united, no matter what
    the coalition comes out to be, that Russia must be stopped,
    that the NATO alliance, that the European alliance is crucial.
    I look forward to working with the Germans to strengthen that.
    I know we have had some issues and I know Congress has some
    very specific issues on NATO spending, and I look forward to
    working with the Germans to increase that as well.
        Senator Markey. Could you speak specifically to this INF
    issue, however, which is a cornerstone of security in the
    European theater?
        Mr. Grenell. Sure. Senator, I look forward to working with
    the team at the German mission. I look forward to working with
    the State Department on this issue. This is one issue that we
    have not been fully briefed on, and what I would want to do is
    have a very well thought-out U.S. policy on that.
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Markey.
        Senator Murphy does have a couple extra questions.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Just a
    few additional questions.
        Congressman Hoekstra, good to see you. I would like to
    think that I set a trend here. I got to introduce my 2012
    Senate opponent before the committee that was considering her
    nomination to be the Administrator of the SBA. And so I was
    glad to have Senator Stabenow here with you today giving you a
    similar ringing endorsement.
        Here is my only question for you. I mentioned in my opening
    remarks that our unique partnership with Europe--and The
    Netherlands is clearly an important ally in Europe--is based on
    interests and values. And The Netherlands have some of the most
    progressive laws on LGBT rights in the world. Your personal and
    political views on that subject might not match up with those
    that are enshrined in the law there. Can you just speak to that
    issue and the concern that some of us may have about sending an
    ambassador who may bring with him or her a record on an issue
    that is very important your host country views you may not
    share?
        Mr. Hoekstra. Yes. I mean, the Dutch and the United States
    share a tradition of defending human rights, the value, the
    dignity of every individual. And so while my personal views may
    differ from where the Dutch have moved in terms of their public
    policy, the bottom line is my personal respect and value that I
    have for every single human being I think matches the Dutch
    very, very well. We may differ on some political processes or
    some political implementation of those values, but the
    fundamental respect for every individual is consistent. If
    confirmed, my job as the Ambassador is not to go and try to
    influence those. It is to respect the decisions that they have
    made, that they believe are most appropriate for their country.
    And I will respect their decisions.
        Senator Murphy. Well said. Thank you.
        Mr. Grenell, one final question on policy not on style. But
    one of the constant challenges in our relationship with Germany
    is making sure that they both walk the walk and talk the talk
    on the issue of energy independence. Ultimately Russia's
    ability to manipulate continental affairs in Europe is related
    to their continued ability to send large amounts of petroleum
    products into Europe. And one of the ways they are seeking to
    tighten that grip is a new pipeline called Nordstream II that
    would essentially allow them to circumvent Ukraine, thus
    frankly increasing their leverage over Ukraine, decreasing
    Ukraine's potential leverage over Russia.
        I just want to ask if you are familiar with this product
    and how you see advocacy on the issue of stopping Nordstream II
    as part of your mission.
        Mr. Grenell. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        Yes, I am familiar with this issue and I view it very much
    as a security issue. I think we can really make the case that
    having a broader energy policy for the Germans and for all of
    Europe is better for security. I look forward to making that
    case, working with the State Department. And I know the mission
    in Berlin is focused on it as well.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        Again, I want to thank all of our witnesses, your
    willingness to serve, your families. Being Ambassador of the
    United States to these nations is a critical job. You need to
    represent American values to those countries, but it is also
    important that you recognize you have to represent their
    viewpoint back to the United States. It is really a two-way
    street.
        So I was struck in my meetings with all of you--and I
    appreciate the time you took--that you have a great affinity
    for the countries that you have been nominated to represent.
    Many of you speak fluently the language, which is going to be
    extremely helpful. So I do commend President Trump on five, I
    think, very qualified decent human beings that are going to be
    America's representatives as Ambassadors to these nations. So
    again, thank you for your willingness to serve and sacrifice.
        With that, the hearing record will remain open for 2 days
    until September 29th at 5:00 p.m. for the submission of
    statements and questions for the record.
        This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Peter Hoekstra by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Human rights have been an important focus throughout my
    career. On my overseas trips, I would meet frequently with and advocate
    on behalf of those individuals and groups who face discrimination in
    their countries. Some of these included the Coptic Christians in Egypt
    and Chaldeans in Iraq. I also met secretly on occasion with these
    Christian communities because of the risk to them to meet with me
    publicly.
        Since then, the conditions of Chaldeans have deteriorated
    significantly with the surge of ISIS in Iraq. I would like to believe
    that meeting with these Christians provided encouragement to them--they
    knew the U.S. Congress was interested in their situation.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the
    Netherlands today? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in the
    Netherlands and, working in partnership with the Dutch, to promote
    human rights around the globe? What do you hope to accomplish through
    these actions?

        Answer. Chapter 1 of the Constitution of the Netherlands codifies
    many human rights, and the Netherlands is signatory to all relevant
    international human rights instruments. In practice the Netherlands is
    a strong advocate of human rights globally. However, as in many
    countries, challenges remain.
        The most significant human rights issue is increasing societal
    animosity and discrimination against members of certain ethnic and
    religious minority groups, particularly Muslim immigrants from North
    Africa, Turkey, and the Middle East, and rising anti-Semitism. There
    are also concerns about discriminatory rhetoric from far-right
    political party leaders and members. If confirmed, I will seek ways to
    cooperate with the Government of the Netherlands on these issues, as
    the Netherlands is also seeking ways to address these challenges. I
    will also work with my staff in our Mission to see what creative
    programming we can bring to bear in our outreach activities to promote
    religious tolerance and equality.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Netherlands in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The Government of the Netherlands is a global leader in
    addressing human rights issues at home and around the world, and I
    commend their recent efforts such as their new national campaign
    featuring well-known personalities to ``knock down'' discrimination,
    and enhancements to their national action plan to counter
    discrimination, including stronger security for Jewish and Muslim
    communities. Countering societal discrimination in particular is a
    challenge for many countries, as it involves changing beliefs and
    attitudes toward other groups which are sometimes deep-rooted and often
    sparked by a lack of knowledge of the other. Building more
    communication channels and interfaith cooperation is a critical part of
    this, as well as economic and social integration. If confirmed, I look
    forward to supporting the Netherland's efforts in dealing with this
    challenge; one that is occurring in many countries, where there has
    been an increase in migrants fleeing the violence and conflict in their
    home countries.

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

        Answer. Yes. I recognize the value of meeting with civil society--
    not only to encourage those involved in this vital part of society but
    to also gain a better understanding of the dynamics, context, and
    environment related to a particular issue. Like many of our diplomatic
    missions overseas, the staff at our Mission The Hague already knows the
    critical role that civil society as a whole, including faith community
    members and leaders, plays in promoting human rights and
    accountability. Civil society engagement is a key part of Mission
    engagement with host countries around the world, and if confirmed, I
    would facilitate and strongly support this. As a member of the
    Executive Committee of the Netherlands American Foundation, I am
    fortunate to be in a position to reach out easily to NGOs here in the
    United States that may be involved or interested in the Netherlands.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Netherlands to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted?

        Answer. We are not aware of such cases in the Netherlands, but if
    confirmed I would engage, together with my embassy team, to address any
    cases of persons possibly unjustly targeted should such occasions
    arise.

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

        Answer. I will support my team in the Mission in the Netherlands in
    implementing the provisions outlined in the Leahy Law, which requires
    vetting of security force units including police and military who
    receive assistance from the United States. If there is credible
    information that a security force unit or individual committed gross
    violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible units and individuals do not receive U.S.
    assistance and assisting their respective governments in bringing them
    to justice.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Dutch Government officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to ensuring our Mission remains engaged
    on these issues. As Secretary Tillerson has said, American leadership
    requires moral clarity. We are strongest when our values and those of
    our allies are aligned. No one should have to live in fear, worship in
    secret, or face discrimination because of his or her beliefs. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that engagement on human rights and good
    governance remains an integral component of our mission.

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

        Answer. Diversity is one of the things that makes America great.
    Throughout my career, both as a member of the House of Representatives
    and in the private sector, I have worked to ensure the organizations I
    led reflected the diversity of our country and upheld the principals of
    equal opportunity. If confirmed, I would uphold the same principles of
    equality and equal opportunity throughout Mission the Netherlands. As I
    stated in my testimony, I have a fundamental respect for every
    individual, and if confirmed, I will demonstrate that as Ambassador.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I understand the critical importance of ensuring Mission
    the Netherlands remains a welcoming and inclusive environment. If
    confirmed, I will not only lead by example, demonstrating my own
    commitment to diversity and inclusiveness, but I will also work with my
    Deputy Chief of Mission and Country Team to ensure that all Mission the
    Netherlands supervisors uphold equal employment opportunity principles.
    I will also direct our Mission managers responsible for hiring and
    recruitment to ensure that Embassy The Hague and Consulate General
    Amsterdam remain diverse and inclusive workplaces where all team
    members have an equal opportunity to achieve success.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Netherlands?

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

        Question 13. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report. I am committed to ensuring that my official
    actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain
    vigilant with regard to my ethics obligations.

        Question 14. Unity with European partners on Russia sanctions is
    critical to their success. What is your diplomatic plan to build
    support within the Netherlands for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    the Netherlands to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and their
    implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative and
    consultative approach with the Netherlands on sanctions, and I will
    continue to seek feedback from the Dutch, who have been reliable
    partners on Russia sanctions.
        The Dutch are steadfast on Russian sanction issues, and we will
    continue to coordinate closely on these sanctions, which support our
    important, common work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, opposing
    the Russian occupation of Crimea, and preventing future meddling by
    Russia in foreign elections-while also remaining vigilant against
    unintended consequences for our partners. Close coordination with
    allies such as the Netherlands is crucial for the sanctions to achieve
    their ultimate goal of changing the Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 15. How will you seek to boost resilience to Russian
    meddling within Dutch institutions and civil society? What assistance
    priorities will you push with Dutch counterparts to shore up resilience
    elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign of disinformation and
    malign influence activities to undermine core institutions of the West
    and to weaken faith in the democratic and free-market systems. Given
    the nature and breadth of Russia's campaign, it is important for the
    United States not only to pursue a whole-of-government approach but
    also work closely with Allies to expose and counter these campaigns.
        The Netherlands has first-hand experience of Russian malign
    influence. The Dutch intelligence service AIVD publically confirmed
    Russia tried to influence the March 2017 Dutch elections by spreading
    fake news, though Dutch intelligence found that Russia did not succeed
    in ``substantially influencing'' the election process. The Netherlands
    shares our concerns about ongoing Russian disinformation campaigns and
    malign influence activities across the region. If confirmed, I will
    make it a priority to work to strengthen our coordination with the
    Netherlands to detect and counter these activities that seek to
    undermine democratic institutions and principles.

        Question 16. If the United States withdraws from the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action without evidence of a material breach, how
    do you anticipate that the Netherlands will respond based on statements
    from the past few weeks as well as EU statements?

       Do you believe that the best policy for the United States, if we
            walk away from the nuclear agreement with Iran, is to impose
            sanctions on European companies and banks that continue to do
            business with Iran?
       What national security priorities other than Iran could be
            negatively impacted by tensions in the transatlantic alliance
            stemming from unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States will continue to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by Netherlands
    and all of our European partners. I cannot prejudge the outcome of the
    administration's review in terms of sanctions implications or how
    Netherlands will respond.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, close
    coordination with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one
    of my highest priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with the
    Netherlands to ensure the effectiveness of any measures to prevent Iran
    from obtaining a nuclear weapon, steps to combat Iran's malign
    activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile program and
    support for terrorism, and other U.S. national security priorities.

        Question 17. International cooperation to address climate change is
    a top priority for the Netherlands. The U.S. is historically, across
    multiple past administrations, a constructive partner with the
    Netherlands and other European allies on addressing climate change
    through multilateral forums including the UN.CCC and the Paris
    Agreement, the IPCC, G20, G7, the GEF and GCF. Given the President's
    antipathy towards international cooperation on climate change, how do
    you intend to approach this issue that the Netherlands' leaders care
    deeply about?
        As one of the lowest lying nations in the world, the Netherlands is
    highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, namely sea level
    rise. In light of this risk, the Dutch lead the world in engineering
    solutions to sea level rise and have created climate change adaptation
    technologies that the Dutch can export and develop around the world.
    How will you approach discussing climate change action and investment
    in a country that is experiencing the very real and present threats
    from climate change, as a representative of an administration that very
    plainly denies the existence of this threat and is actively defunding
    federal investments in science and technology that could help the Dutch
    and others better understand the threat of climate change? What lessons
    do you think the U.S.'s most climate vulnerable communities can learn
    from the Dutch's experience and investments?

        Answer. The administration supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. The President determined the terms of our
    current engagement in the Paris Agreement did not balance those
    factors, and on June 1, he announced the intent to withdraw from the
    Paris Agreement. As the President has indicated, he is open to re-
    engaging in the Paris Agreement if the United States can identify more
    favorable terms. The United States respects the efforts of those
    countries that continue to participate in the Paris Agreement.
        At the G20 Leaders' Summit in Hamburg, Germany, the United States
    joined the other G20 members in reiterating a collective commitment to
    mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, including through increased
    innovation in sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and
    working towards low greenhouse-gas emission energy systems. The Dutch
    are proactively addressing rising sea levels through innovative
    technologies and initiatives, and they have successfully turned their
    expertise into opportunities for Dutch companies. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with Dutch interlocutors and our European allies to
    seek common ground and develop a way forward on this important issue.
        Finding ways to bring together Dutch engineering and water
    management solutions and U.S. technology and innovation presents a
    profound opportunity to enhance both of our countries efforts in this
    arena. Many state and local governments have already sought out Dutch
    expertise on water management, and many low lying areas in the United
    States could benefit from adapting Dutch solutions to mitigate the
    effects of sea level rise. I will make it a priority to build on
    existing relationships and identify new opportunities for collaboration
    between our countries to harness innovation and technology
    breakthroughs to combat climate change and its effects.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Richard Duke Buchan III by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

        Question 1. Have you employed or paid any workers (including but
    not limited to farmhands, housekeepers, nannies, gardeners, handymen,
    drivers, caretakers) that you have become aware may not have had legal
    documentation or for whom taxes were not properly withheld? If yes,
    please provide details and an explanation of the issue.
        Answer. No, to the best of my knowledge.

        Question 2. Have you paid all legally required employer taxes for
    any workers you have employed in the previous 10 years?
        Answer. Yes, to the best of my knowledge.

        Question 3. What are the most important actions you have taken in
    your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has
    been the impact of your actions?

        Answer. Human rights and democracy are not just ideas but
    fundamental values that have shaped our society and my life. My family
    taught me to always respect the honor and dignity of everyone around
    me. Everybody must be treated equally. No one should face
    discrimination, especially not because of race, sex, religion, age,
    disability, national origin or any other status. I also believe in
    American democracy and its eight tenets: individual worth, individual
    freedom, equality, popular sovereignty, majority rule, minority rights
    and limited government. It is these democratic values that enable
    people to control their own lives, which is the most basic human right.
        While these values are natural and self-evident, they must be
    nurtured. That's why I believe in inclusion. I have always promoted
    diversity in the businesses that I have worked for and owned. That's
    also why my family has long provided meaningful support to educational
    institutions such as Harvard University that fervently promote human
    rights and democracy, to organizations whose good works include
    educating young girls in impoverished countries, and to church
    missions. I have also volunteered in electoral politics in an effort to
    get more people involved in our democratic elections.
        Although it is difficult to measure the impact of my actions, I
    believe they have been positive. If confirmed, I will continue to
    advance human rights and democracy as Ambassador to Spain.

        Question 4. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Spain today?

       What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
            confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Spain and
            Andorra?
       What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?
       If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response?
       What challenges will you face in Spain and Andorra in advancing
            human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Spain and Andorra are strong partners in advancing human
    rights around the world. Nevertheless, some important challenges
    remain. In Andorra, issues persist regarding the rights of workers to
    bargain collectively. Andorran law does not provide sufficient
    protection from anti-union discrimination. Access for persons with
    disabilities is another area where improvements can be made.
        In Spain, the recent European refugee and migration challenge has
    brought to light reports concerning the denial of access to asylum and
    forced returns of asylum seekers by police. Human trafficking,
    including labor and sex trafficking, remains a prominent concern, as
    well as gender-based violence and continued societal discrimination
    against members of racial, religious, and ethnic minorities, persons
    with disabilities, and members of the LGBTI community. However, Spain's
    strong actions in the area of human rights have been essential in
    addressing these concerns. For example, the Barcelona administration
    launched a 28-point action plan in January 2017 to address rising anti-
    Muslim sentiment. Spain also earned a Tier 1 ranking in the State
    Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report, a mark of the
    Government's full commitment to combat human trafficking, as outlined
    in the report.
        If confirmed, I am committed to continuing Mission Spain/Andorra's
    engagement with Spanish and Andorran officials to combat all forms of
    intolerance and to strengthen respect for human rights. I would also
    look forward to strengthening Mission Spain/Andorra's programs in
    combating human trafficking and corruption, addressing human rights
    abuses against refugees and migrants, and promoting good governance. If
    confirmed, I will strongly support the Department of State's ongoing
    work with these European partners.

        Question 5. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Spain and Andorra?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with
    a broad spectrum of society among European publics, including human
    rights activists, civil society, religious groups, and the
    organizations that represent them.

        Question 6. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Spain to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted?

        Answer. I am not aware of such cases in Spain or Andorra, but if
    confirmed, I would certainly engage with Spanish and Andorran
    authorities to address cases of persons unjustly targeted when such
    occasions arise.

        Question 7. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Mission continues to vet
    thoroughly all individuals and units nominated to participate in U.S.-
    funded security assistance activities, in accordance with the Leahy
    law. If there are findings of credible information regarding gross
    violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible parties do not participate in U.S.-funded
    training and will assist their respective governments to bring them to
    justice.

        Question 8. Will you engage with Spanish and Andorran officials on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. I am committed to ensuring our Mission remains engaged on
    these issues. As Secretary Tillerson has said, American leadership
    requires moral clarity. We are strongest when our values and those of
    our allies are aligned, and when we hold our rivals accountable for
    human rights abuses at home. If confirmed, I will ensure that
    engagement on human rights, civil rights, and governance remains an
    integral component of our Mission.

        Question 9. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service?

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a diverse and inclusive team across Mission
    Spain, and will communicate that this is a priority for me as the
    Ambassador. If confirmed, I will urge the Mission to reflect our whole-
    of-mission commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion. In keeping
    with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, I will ensure
    all supervisors have access to and avail themselves of opportunities to
    receive regular formal training and regular guidance on EEO principles,
    diversity, and inclusion to sensitize them to these important issues
    and maximize diverse talents in our workforce.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Spain or Andorra?

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

        Question 13. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. Since my OGE financial disclosure statement dated April
    2017, there have not been material changes in my overall financial
    assets and income. In June 2017, I invested in an assisted living and
    memory care facility located in the Southeastern United States for the
    amount of $3.9 million that will have an asset value of approximately
    $20 million. I am committed to ensuring that my official actions will
    not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain vigilant with
    regard to my ethics obligations.

        Question 14. Russia Sanctions: Unity with European partners on
    Russia sanctions is critical to their success. What is your diplomatic
    plan to build support within Spain for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    Spain to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and their implementation.
    The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative and consultative
    approach on sanctions, and I will continue to seek feedback from Spain,
    which has been a steadfast partner on Russia sanctions.
        My goal is to ensure these sanctions support our important, common
    work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring control of Crimea
    to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia in foreign
    elections-while also remaining vigilant against unintended consequences
    for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our many foreign
    policy priorities related to Europe as the U.S. Government and the EU
    implement these sanctions, including our commitment to promoting
    European energy security. Close coordination with our allies is crucial
    to enabling the sanctions to achieve their ultimate goal: imposing
    costs on Russia sufficient to change the Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 15. Russian Malign Influence: How will you seek to boost
    resilience to Russian meddling within Spanish institutions and civil
    society? What assistance priorities will you push with Spanish
    counterparts to shore up resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign of disinformation and
    malign influence activities to undermine core institutions of the West
    and to weaken faith in the democratic and free-market systems. This
    campaign is aggressive, coordinated, and involves the entire Russian
    Government. The United States should continue to work closely with its
    Allies and partners, such as Spain, to enhance collective resilience
    against these threats. Given the nature and breadth of Russia's
    campaign, it is important for the United States not only to pursue a
    whole-of-government approach but also work closely with Allies such as
    Spain to expose and counter these campaigns. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with the Spanish Government to support this effort.

        Question 16. If the United States withdraws from the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action without evidence of a material breach, how
    do you anticipate that Spain will respond based on statements from the
    past few weeks as well as EU statements?

       Do you believe that the best policy for the United States, if we
            walk away from the nuclear agreement with Iran, is to impose
            sanctions on European companies and banks that continue to do
            business with Iran?
       What national security priorities other than Iran could be
            negatively impacted by tensions in the transatlantic alliance
            stemming from unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by Spain and
    all of our European partners. I cannot prejudge the outcome of the
    administration's review in terms of sanctions implications or how Spain
    will respond.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with Spain to ensure
    the effectiveness of any measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a
    nuclear weapon, steps to combat Iran's malign activities more broadly,
    including its ballistic missile program and support for terrorism, and
    other U.S. national security priorities.

        Question 17. International cooperation to address climate change is
    a top priority for Spain. The U.S. is historically, across multiple
    past administrations, a constructive partner with Spain and other
    European allies on addressing climate change through multilateral
    forums including the UN.CCC and the Paris Agreement, the IPCC, G20, G7,
    the GEF and GCF. Given the President's antipathy towards international
    cooperation on climate change, how do you intend to approach this issue
    that Spain's leaders care deeply about?

        Answer. The administration supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. The President determined the terms of our
    current engagement in the Paris Agreement did not balance those
    factors, and on June 1, he announced the intent to withdraw from the
    Paris Agreement. As the President has indicated, he is open to re-
    engaging in the Paris Agreement if the United States can identify more
    favorable terms. The United States respects the efforts of those
    countries that continue to participate in the Paris Agreement.
        At the G20 Leaders' Summit in Hamburg, Germany, the United States
    joined the other G20 members in reiterating a collective commitment to
    mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, including through increased
    innovation in sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and
    working towards low greenhouse-gas emission energy systems. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with Spanish interlocutors and our
    European allies to seek common ground and develop a way forward on this
    important issue.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Richard Duke Buchan III by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1. If confirmed, do you commit to discuss consistently
    with the Spanish Government the U.S. position on the Castro regime?

       If confirmed, would you encourage the Spanish Government to
            consider similar measures to isolate the Castro regime?

        Answer. Human rights in Cuba remain a significant concern.
    President Trump's new Cuba policy is an important step in the right
    direction to put pressure on the Government to address these troubling
    issues.
        If confirmed, I will advocate for the official U.S. position on
    Cuba consistently with the Spanish Government and will encourage it to
    make human rights a priority issue in its dealings with the Cuban
    Government.

        Question 2. If confirmed, do you commit to create and maintain a
    dialogue with the Spanish Government on the need to oppose the anti-
    democratic Maduro regime?

       If confirmed, would you encourage the Spanish Government to
            consider similar measures to isolate the Maduro regime?

        Answer. Venezuela's further slide away from democracy is deeply
    troubling, and the July 30 Constituent Assembly elections imposed on
    the Venezuelan people undermine their right to self-determination.
    Spain is an important partner in pushing back against the Maduro
    regime's abuses of power. Spain has been a strong voice in Latin
    America and within the EU for sanctions and other measures.
        If confirmed, I look forward to coordinating closely with Spain on
    additional steps to address the crisis in Venezuela. Already, Spain has
    actively worked with us and with EU partners on additional measures
    similar to those already implemented by the United States. If
    confirmed, I will encourage Spain to continue leading within the EU on
    this issue.

        Question 3. If confirmed, do you commit to discuss consistently
    with the Spanish Government the U.S. position on the Castro regime?

       If confirmed, would you encourage the Spanish Government to
            consider similar measures to isolate the Castro regime?

        Answer. Human rights in Cuba remain a significant concern.
    President Trump's new Cuba policy is an important step in the right
    direction to put pressure on the Government to address these troubling
    issues.
        If confirmed, I will advocate for the official U.S. position on
    Cuba consistently with the Spanish Government and will encourage it to
    make human rights a priority issue in its dealings with the Cuban
    Government.

        Question 4. If confirmed, do you commit to create and maintain a
    dialogue with the Spanish Government on the need to oppose the anti-
    democratic Maduro regime?

       If confirmed, would you encourage the Spanish Government to
            consider similar measures to isolate the Maduro regime?

        Answer. Venezuela's further slide away from democracy is deeply
    troubling, and the July 30 Constituent Assembly elections imposed on
    the Venezuelan people undermine their right to self-determination.
    Spain is an important partner in pushing back against the Maduro
    regime's abuses of power. Spain has been a strong voice in Latin
    America and within the EU for sanctions and other measures.
        If confirmed, I look forward to coordinating closely with Spain on
    additional steps to address the crisis in Venezuela. Already, Spain has
    actively worked with us and with EU partners on additional measures
    similar to those already implemented by the United States. If
    confirmed, I will encourage Spain to continue leading within the EU on
    this issue.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Richard Grenell by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. In the roughly eight years I spent as the Head of Press and
    Public Diplomacy at the United States Mission to the U.N. I
    consistently raised the issue of human rights, highlighted the abuses
    of authoritarian regimes, and advocated for the rights of gays and
    lesbians around the world. In particular, I sought out ways to support
    international organizations concerned about gay and lesbian equality in
    countries throughout Africa and the Middle East who were petitioning
    the U.N. for greater action. I regularly met with foreign diplomats
    based at the U.N. or visiting the U.N. who were gay, to understand
    their issues and concerns and to learn from them as to what the U.N.
    and specifically the U.S. could do to help them. I regularly
    highlighted to senior State Department officials in Washington, DC the
    stories of violence endured by gays and lesbians in other countries and
    regularly requested that State Department spokespeople publicly condemn
    the violence. The impact of my regular and continued advocacy is still
    unknown. While I have seen some actions taken to condemn egregious
    violence, I still believe more can be done to promote equality for gays
    and lesbians in foreign countries. As a foreign policy commentator, I
    have also spoken about and written numerous articles condemning
    autocracies, such as Venezuela and Russia, and advocating for America
    to prioritize democracy promotion.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Germany today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Germany and,
    working in partnership with Germany, to promote human rights around the
    globe? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

       If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response? What challenges will you face in Germany in
            advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Germany has a strong overall record of protecting human
    rights at home and is a valuable partner in defending human rights
    around the globe. One of the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Germany is the integration of asylum seekers, refugees, and migrants
    who have arrived in Germany over the past several years. The influx of
    such a large number of asylum seekers and refugees has exacerbated
    tensions within society; consequently, extremism and xenophobia have
    been an increasingly significant problem, including attacks on ethnic
    non-Germans. The German Government has taken steps to counter such
    extremism and xenophobia, and the authorities continue to implement
    measures to facilitate the integration of the recently-arrived refugees
    and migrants. There have also been reports of anti-Semitic and
    homophobic attacks, discrimination of persons with disabilities, and
    unfair treatment of Muslim women wearing headscarves in the workplace.
    We saw progress on this front when the Bundestag voted on June 30 to
    amend Germany's civil code to legalize same-sex marriage. Also positive
    is the fact that legal recourse is available to women who feel they
    have been treated unfairly or denied employment for their religious
    dress.
        If confirmed, I will use every opportunity to promote the message
    of the importance of diversity and human rights, including the rights
    of LGBT individuals, migrants, minorities, women, and persons with
    disabilities. Germany is already a global leader in advancing human
    rights and democracy around the world and it regularly raises concerns
    both publicly and in its bilateral and multilateral engagements with
    foreign governments, including with Iran, Russia, China, and Venezuela.
    Berlin also frequently coordinates with Washington in supporting United
    Nations resolutions and U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) statements that
    highlight human rights. If confirmed, I intend to continue this close
    partnership with Germany in advocating for human rights throughout
    Europe and the world.

        Question 3. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Germany?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to working with human rights,
    civil society groups and NGOs to advance U.S. priorities, including
    human rights. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to meet
    with experts in these areas in both the United States and Germany.

        Question 4. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Germany to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with German authorities to press
    countries around the world to address cases of key political prisoners
    and persons otherwise unjustly targeted.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Embassy continues to vet
    thoroughly all individuals and units nominated to participate in U.S.-
    funded security assistance activities, in accordance with the Leahy
    law. If there are findings of credible information regarding gross
    violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible parties do not participate in U.S.-funded
    training and will assist their respective governments to bring them to
    justice.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Germans on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue the U.S. Mission's
    strong partnership with the German Government and German civil society
    to engage on matters of human rights, civil rights and governance.

        Question 7. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff members who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented
    groups in the State Department?

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will commit to promoting, mentoring, and
    supporting staff members from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented
    groups. I will make it a priority to foster a diverse and inclusive
    team at our Mission and encourage all supervisors to take available
    courses on EEO principles, diversity, and related issues. I will lead
    by example and articulate my desire to hear diverse opinions and
    diverse backgrounds. I will also visibly lead public diplomacy events
    with outreach to gays and lesbians in Germany, including in immigrant
    communities.

        Question 8. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Germany?

        Answer. Neither I, nor any member of my immediate family, has any
    financial interests in Germany.

        Question 11. I understand that you have written many articles and
    op-eds over the past eight years on foreign policy issues, including
    with respect to Moldova. Did you receive any payment or any other form
    of compensation for your writings on Moldova? If so, who provided those
    payments? Was any compensation you received on behalf of, or provided
    indirectly, by a foreign government, foreign political party, foreign
    organization, or foreign national?

        Answer. I have written numerous personal opinion pieces on foreign
    policy and national security issues over the years. I have also
    expressed my views and opinions through television interviews. A small
    number of these opinion pieces and interviews have related to Moldova,
    primarily to highlight Russia`s campaigns of misinformation, propaganda
    and meddling around the world. Russian interference in other countries'
    domestic affairs has been a consistent theme in my work, including my
    work to highlight examples in Turkey, Ukraine, Montenegro, Poland,
    Georgia, Estonia, and with Radio Free Europe and Voice of America. I
    did not receive any compensation for that work. I believe strongly in
    confronting threats to democracy, and all of those views were my own
    opinion.

        Question 12. Did anyone request or direct you to write op-eds on
    Moldova? If so, who? Was any request made on behalf of a foreign
    government, foreign political party, foreign organization, or foreign
    national? If not, what motivated you to write the op-eds?

        Answer. No, the op-eds that you are referring to--like all of the
    op-eds I have written or the personal opinions I have expressed
    publicly--reflect my informed views and ideas and not anyone else's.
    Russian meddling in Central and Eastern Europe has been a constant
    theme in my work; and current events have borne out my long-held views.
    My motivation in writing or speaking on any particular subject is
    because I think it is important. Additionally, I am heartened to see
    how important the subject of Russian meddling has become with the U.S.
    media and with Americans.

        Question 13. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. No. There have been no material changes to my financial
    assets, income, or any other information since the date I signed the
    OGE financial disclosure form.

        Question 14. Russia Sanctions: Unity with European partners on
    Russia sanctions is critical to their success. What is your diplomatic
    plan to build support within Germany for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    Germany to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and their implementation.
    The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative and consultative
    approach on sanctions, and I will continue to seek feedback from our
    allies, who have been steadfast partners on Russia sanctions.
        My goal is to ensure these sanctions support our important, common
    work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring control of Crimea
    to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia in foreign
    elections-while also remaining vigilant against unintended consequences
    for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our many foreign
    policy priorities related to Germany as I contribute to the U.S.
    Government's implementation of these sanctions, including our
    commitment to promoting European energy security and encouraging
    interoperability in NATO weapons systems. Close coordination with our
    German allies is crucial to enabling the sanctions to achieve their
    ultimate goal: imposing costs on Russia sufficient to change the
    Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 15. How will you seek to boost resilience to Russian
    meddling within German institutions and civil society? What assistance
    priorities will you push with German counterparts to shore up
    resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia uses a constellation of approaches, overt and
    covert, to influence the policies of other governments and undermine
    domestic stability in Europe. Russia seeks to weaken European unity and
    erode faith in democratic institutions. A Europe whole, free, and at
    peace is in the interests of the United States. Efforts to disrupt
    democratic processes and weaken unity directly and negatively affect
    U.S. interests and security, while institutionalized respect for human
    rights, good governance, and rule of law contributes to long-term
    stability. By promoting our shared democratic values, and by holding
    our European partners accountable to their commitments and the rule of
    law, the United States strengthens our partners' capabilities to
    mitigate vulnerabilities to malign influences and counter threats to
    their security and sovereignty. The approach to this must be
    comprehensive and whole-of-government, and the Department of State has
    a critical role to play in addressing this threat.
        The German Government has become increasingly concerned about
    Russian interference in its politics. If confirmed, I will prioritize
    efforts to build and strengthen Germany's resilience against Russia's
    efforts to undermine these democratic processes, including through
    exchanges of information and best practices, as well as programming for
    the German public. Secretary Tillerson has been clear that he views as
    the highest priorities for U.S. assistance those areas of Central and
    Eastern Europe affected by pressure from the Russian Federation. We
    will work with our German partners to continue ongoing assistance
    efforts and engagements that seek to build and reinforce the rule of
    law, support democratic institutions, promote human rights, and drive
    economic development in vulnerable countries in Europe.

        Question 16. If the United States withdraws from the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action without evidence of a material breach, how
    do you anticipate that Germany will respond based on statements from
    the past few weeks as well as EU statements?

        Answer. German authorities at various levels have underscored
    publicly the importance Germany places on the JCPOA. The administration
    is currently conducting a review of the JCPOA and our broader approach
    to Iran. While that review is ongoing, the United States will continue
    to implement its JCPOA commitments, and expects Iran to do the same. In
    addition, the United States seeks to ensure strict implementation of
    the JCPOA, a goal shared by Germany and all of our European partners. I
    cannot prejudge the outcome of the administration's review in terms of
    sanctions implications or how Germany will respond.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, close
    coordination with Germany will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one
    of my highest priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with
    Germany to ensure the effectiveness of any measures to prevent Iran
    from obtaining a nuclear weapon, steps to combat Iran's malign
    activities more broadly, including its ballistic missile program and
    support for terrorism, and other U.S. national security priorities.

        Question 17. Do you believe that the best policy for the United
    States, if we walk away from the nuclear agreement with Iran, is to
    impose sanctions on European companies and banks that continue to do
    business with Iran?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States will continue to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our German
    partners. I cannot prejudge the outcome of the administration's review
    in terms of sanctions implications.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, close
    coordination with Germany will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one
    of my highest priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with our
    German partners and the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of
    any measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to
    combat Iran's malign activities more broadly, including its ballistic
    missile program and support for terrorism.

        Question 18. What national security priorities other than Iran
    could be negatively impacted by tensions in the transatlantic alliance
    stemming from unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and its broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States will continue to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by our German
    partners.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, close
    coordination with Germany will be crucial. Germany remains key to
    addressing any number of other pressing international issues, including
    combatting terrorism and addressing the threat from North Korea. Our
    German partners want to work with us to address these challenges, and
    if confirmed, I will focus on ensuring the United States and Germany
    remain in lockstep on these issues.

        Question 19. International cooperation to address climate change is
    a top priority for Germany. The U.S. is historically, across multiple
    past administrations, a constructive partner with Germany and other
    European allies on addressing climate change through multilateral
    forums including the UNCCC and the Paris Agreement, the IPCC, G20, G7,
    the GEF and GCF. Given the President's antipathy towards international
    cooperation on climate change, how do you intend to approach this issue
    that Germany's leaders care deeply about?

        Answer. The administration supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. The President determined the terms of our
    current engagement in the Paris Agreement did not balance those
    factors, and on June 1, he announced the intent to withdraw from the
    Paris Agreement. As the President has indicated, he is open to re-
    engaging in the Paris Agreement if the United States can identify more
    favorable terms. The United States respects the efforts of those
    countries that continue to participate in the Paris Agreement.
        At the G20 Leaders' Summit in Hamburg, Germany, the United States
    joined the other G20 members in reiterating our collective commitment
    to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, including through increased
    innovation in sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and
    working towards low greenhouse-gas emission energy systems. The United
    States has a strong record of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions through
    technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship. We will continue to be a
    world leader in innovation, particularly the development of next-
    generation energy technology.
        The United States will send a delegation to the United Nations
    Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 23rd annual Conference
    of the Parties (COP23) in November in Bonn and plans to continue to
    participate in negotiations related to the Paris Agreement--including
    those to develop guidance for the Paris Agreement--in order to protect
    U.S. interests. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Germany
    and our European allies to seek common ground and develop a way forward
    on this important issue.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                  Jamie McCourt by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As a Board member of Business Executives for National
    Security (BENS) since 2011, I have taken several field visits to
    countries affected by human rights issues. In 2012, we visited Myanmar.
    The goal of this trip was to learn firsthand about the challenges
    facing the country by focusing on political reforms, Myanmar's
    relationship to China, and the effectiveness of U.S. sanctions on
    Myanmar.
        Also in 2015, I joined BENS on a trip to the Republic of Korea.
    This trip focused on the ROK-US alliance, the security situation on the
    Korean Peninsula, human rights issues past and present, the Japan-Korea
    relationship and the ROK economy.
        I have also served on UNCEF's Southern California Regional Board
    since 2013 and support UNCEF's National Board. I traveled with the U.S.
    Fund for UNCEF to the Middle East where I visited the Za'atari refugee
    camp in Amman, Jordan. During this visit I was able to observe UNCEF
    programs in action and speak directly to the refugees to see what their
    most pressing needs were for additional help. After Jordan, we traveled
    to Israel to review the status and future of UNCEF's role there as
    well.
        I am also a supporter of AIPAC, whose mission is to strengthen,
    protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance
    the security and protect the democracies of the United States and
    Israel. In 2014, I attended the AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington,
    D.C. One of the main seminar topics was the status of the Middle East's
    Jewish refugees. Following the conference, I had the opportunity to
    travel back to D.C. for a private meeting at the AIPAC offices to
    further the conversation and to learn more about AIPAC's programs.
        In addition, as a proud supporter of Israel and the Jewish
    community, I was extremely honored to receive the Scopus award in
    December of 2006. It is the highest humanitarian honor given by the
    American Friends of the Hebrew University.
        In January of 2011, I traveled to Ethiopia to visit the Ethiopian
    Children's Fund (ECF) School in the Village of Aleltu for the
    groundbreaking of the Gelila Assefa Puck Vocational Training Center.
    Gelila and Wolfgang Puck are close friends and I was pleased to support
    this very worthwhile project. The vocational training center, which
    opened in 2013, provides those who have graduated from the ECF School
    with additional training toward a career.
        I have supported Human Rights Watch (HRW) since being introduced to
    the organization by a very close friend who is the Co-Chair of the LA
    Committee and a member of the International Board of Directors, as well
    as by other friends who are officers of the organization. I have also
    had private conversations with Ken Roth, the Executive Director of HRW.
        During the past several years, I have given a keynote address on
    financial self-sufficiency at many of the top graduate business schools
    including Harvard, Columbia and MIT. I am a strong advocate for
    education and a passionate supporter of financial self-sufficiency for
    women.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    France and Monaco today? What are the most important steps you expect
    to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in France
    and Monaco, and, working in partnership with your host government, to
    promote human rights around the globe? What do you hope to accomplish
    through these actions?

       If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response? What challenges will you face in France and
            Monaco in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy
            in general?

        Answer. Respect for human rights is a core American value. There
    should be no room for hate crimes against members of vulnerable
    communities such as religious minorities, LGBTI individuals, migrants,
    or persons with disabilities. Although both France and Monaco have
    strong records on human rights, generally speaking, if confirmed, I
    will strongly support the Department of State's ongoing work with our
    French and Monegasque partners to combat all forms of intolerance and
    to strengthen respect for human rights.
        America's alliances are strongest when our values and those of our
    allies are aligned. The United States has been diligent in encouraging
    its allies, including the French, to remain firmly committed to our
    shared democratic principles and rule of law. If confirmed, I will work
    in partnership with France to speak up against restrictions on civil
    society and free expression, discrimination against members of minority
    groups, and steps that undermine the independence of the judiciary or
    otherwise may threaten the foundations of constitutional order.

        Question 3. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in France and Monaco?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with
    a broad spectrum of society in the United States, France, and Monaco,
    including human rights NGOs, civil society, religious groups, and the
    organizations that represent them.

        Question 4. Will you and your Embassy actively engage with relevant
    governments in France and Monaco to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly detained in their states?

        Answer. I am not aware of such cases in France and Monaco, but if
    confirmed, I would certainly engage with French and Monegasque
    authorities to address cases of persons unjustly targeted when such
    occasions arise.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Embassy continues to
    implement the provisions of the Leahy law. If there are findings of
    credible information regarding gross violations of human rights, we
    will take the necessary steps in accordance with the law and Department
    policy.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the people of France and Monaco on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and accountable governance as
    part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. I am committed to ensuring our Embassy and Consulates in
    France remain engaged on these issues. As Secretary Tillerson has said,
    American leadership requires moral clarity. If confirmed, I will ensure
    that engagement on human rights, including civil rights, and governance
    remain integral components of our mission.

        Question 7. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service?

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a diverse and inclusive team within Mission
    France and communicate this as a priority for me as the Ambassador. If
    confirmed, I will urge the Mission to reflect our commitment to
    promoting diversity and inclusion.
        Further, in keeping with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on
    diversity, if confirmed, I will ensure all supervisors at all of our
    posts in France have access to and avail themselves of opportunities to
    receive regular formal training and regular guidance on EEO principles,
    diversity, and inclusion to sensitize them to these important issues
    and maximize diverse talents in our workforce.

        Question 8. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in France and Monaco?

        Answer. Potential conflicts involving any financial interests of
    mine have been addressed by the ethics officials of the Department of
    State and by the Office of Government Ethics and have been resolved in
    my ethics agreement. As for members of my immediate family, my adult
    sons have an interest in a professional football (soccer) team in
    Marseilles. I have no financial interest of any kind in the team. I
    will remain vigilant with regard to my ethics obligations and am
    committed to ensuring that my actions will not give rise to a conflict
    of interest.

        Question 11. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report. I am committed to ensuring that my official
    actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain
    vigilant with regard to my ethics obligations.

    Russia Sanctions
        Question 12. Unity with European partners on Russia sanctions is
    critical to their success. What is your diplomatic plan to build
    support within France for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. Maintaining transatlantic unity on sanctions has been a key
    component of U.S. policy towards Russia. If confirmed, I commit to
    working closely with France to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and
    their implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative
    and consultative approach on sanctions, and I will continue to seek
    feedback from France, which has been a steadfast partner on Russia
    sanctions.
        My goal will be to ensure these sanctions support our important,
    common work in resolving the conflict in eastern Ukraine, restoring
    control of Crimea to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia
    in foreign elections-while also remaining vigilant against unintended
    consequences for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our
    many foreign policy priorities related to France as I contribute to the
    U.S. Government's implementation of these sanctions, including our
    commitment to promoting European energy security and encouraging
    interoperability in NATO weapons systems. Close coordination with our
    French allies is crucial to enabling the sanctions to achieve their
    ultimate goal: imposing costs on Russia sufficient to change the
    Russian Government's behavior.

    Russian Malign Influence
        Question 13. How will you seek to boost resilience to Russian
    meddling within French institutions and civil society? What assistance
    priorities will you push with French counterparts to shore up
    resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign of disinformation and
    malign influence activities to undermine core institutions of the West
    and to weaken faith in the democratic and free-market systems. This
    campaign is aggressive, coordinated, and involves the entire Russian
    Government. The United States should continue to work closely with its
    Allies and partners to enhance collective resilience against these
    threats. Given the nature and breadth of Russia's campaign, it is
    important for the United States not only to pursue a whole-of-
    government approach but also work closely with Allies to expose and
    counter these campaigns.
        If confirmed, I will promote cooperation with our Allies to build
    resilience in France and all NATO countries, as well as address
    vulnerabilities in Ukraine, Georgia, and the Western Balkans. I will
    push for the continuation of programs that promote the protection of
    human rights, build and reinforce the rule of law, support democratic
    institutions, and promote economic development in France and elsewhere
    in Europe. Furthermore, I will work closely with France on
    implementation of the Countering America's Adversaries Through
    Sanctions Act to maintain unity on implementation of sanctions in order
    to further exert economic pressure on Russia to modify their aggressive
    behavior.

        Question 14. If the United States withdraws from the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action without evidence of a material breach, how
    do you anticipate that France will respond based on statements from the
    past few weeks as well as EU statements?

       Do you believe that the best policy for the United States, if we
            walk away from the nuclear agreement with Iran, is to impose
            sanctions on European companies and banks that continue to do
            business with Iran?
       What national security priorities other than Iran could be
            negatively impacted by tensions in the transatlantic alliance
            stemming from unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA?

        Answer. French authorities at various levels have underscored
    publicly the importance France places on the JCPOA. The administration
    is currently conducting a review of the JCPOA and our broader approach
    to Iran. While that review is ongoing, the United States continues to
    implement its JCPOA commitments, and expects Iran to do the same. In
    addition, the United States seeks to ensure strict implementation of
    the JCPOA, a goal shared by France and all of our European partners. I
    cannot prejudge the outcome of the administration's review in terms of
    sanctions implications or how France will respond.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with France will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with France to ensure
    the effectiveness of any measures to prevent Iran from obtaining a
    nuclear weapon, steps to combat Iran's malign activities more broadly,
    including its ballistic missile program and support for terrorism, and
    other U.S. national security priorities.

        Question 15. We've seen France make leadership on climate action a
    central tenet of their foreign policy. This has been exemplified
    through the leadership they've shown on the issue through the Paris
    Agreement/G20/G7. Leaders from France have not been shy about raising
    climate change with President Trump and have publicly expressed
    frustration over the U.S. retreat from leading on this issue. What will
    you do to reassure France that the U.S. can be counted on as a strong
    leader and partner on climate action?

        Answer. The administration supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. The President determined the terms of our
    current engagement in the Paris Agreement did not balance those
    factors, and on June 1, he announced the intent to withdraw from the
    Paris Agreement. As the President indicated in his June 1 announcement
    and subsequently, he is open to re-engaging in the Paris Agreement if
    the United States can identify terms that are more favorable.
        The United States respects the efforts of those countries that
    continue to participate in the Paris Agreement. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with French interlocutors and our European allies to
    seek common ground and develop a way forward on this important issue.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Edward T. McMullen, Jr. by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. While my career has been in business, I have dedicated much
    of my personal time to charitable efforts ensuring opportunities for
    those less fortunate. One example, relevant to human rights concerns we
    have around the world, is the treatment of prisoners.
        I have worked for 20 years as a mentor and donor to empower young
    low income adolescents in need. I began teaching an entrepreneurship
    class to students in the South Carolina Juvenile Justice prison. Most
    were low income minority offenders whose families offered no direction.
    These students, some of our state's most serious youth offenders, were
    acting with rage and living a life surrounded by drugs and weapons.
        I developed a curriculum specific to helping these students have a
    mentor and skills that would build their self-respect. I taught them
    basic math and investment skills and then progressed to helping them
    start a business, all while they were incarcerated. I spent many
    hours--as long as they needed--to teach them and provide a true
    opportunity for rehabilitation. I personally funded some of their
    concepts and helped them see how hard work and ideas can change their
    lives. The resulting benefit of this work was watching these young and
    angry lost children become, over time, motivated, informed and eager
    entrepreneurs who could leave the prison with hope and opportunity.

        Question 3. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Switzerland and Liechtenstein today? What are the most important steps
    you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy
    in Switzerland and Liechtenstein, and, working in partnership with your
    host government, to promote human rights around the globe? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

       If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response? What challenges will you face in Switzerland
            and Liechtenstein in advancing human rights, civil society and
            democracy in general?

        Answer. Switzerland and Liechtenstein each have a strong record on
    human rights and we are important partners in addressing human rights
    challenges around the world based on the common values we share. The
    State Department's annual Human Rights Report lists challenges these
    countries face, including instances of discrimination against minority
    groups, and, if confirmed, I will continue to raise these issues.
    However, a larger part of our human rights work with Switzerland and
    Liechtenstein is our common efforts to advance human rights around the
    globe.
        Human rights are a core value Switzerland advocated for
    multilaterally and bilaterally. Swiss efforts played a role in the
    releases of Chibok girls from Boko Haram in Nigeria in October 2016 and
    May 2017. Switzerland also holds regular human rights consultations
    with China, Russia, Iran, Vietnam, Cuba, Indonesia, and Tajikistan. In
    addition, the Government maintains a separate human rights strategy as
    part of the Foreign Ministry's wider strategic agenda.
        We face numerous challenges in this work. Human rights issues
    around the world often seem intractable. Switzerland and the United
    States will sometimes have different areas of emphasis or different
    approaches to a problem. If confirmed, I will continue our work with
    Switzerland to ensure our efforts are coordinated, and that we achieve
    more together than we would have separately, such as with respect to
    major sporting organizations based in Switzerland. Ensuring that we
    keep lines of communication open will maximize our impact.

        Question 3. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Switzerland and Liechtenstein?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with
    a broad spectrum of civil society in Switzerland and Liechtenstein,
    including human rights activists and religious groups, and the
    organizations that represent them.

        Question 4. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Switzerland and Liechtenstein to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will engage Swiss and Liechtensteiner
    authorities and call on them to enlist their assistance in the
    resolution of cases involving victims of politically-motivated
    prosecution around the world in a fair and timely manner, respecting
    human rights and fundamental freedoms, including all the protections
    and fair trial guarantees necessary for their defense.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department continues to
    thoroughly vet all individuals and units nominated to participate in
    U.S.-funded security assistance activities, in accordance with the
    Leahy law. If there are findings of credible information regarding
    gross violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible parties do not participate in U.S.-funded
    training and will assist their respective governments to bring them to
    justice.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the Swiss on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and accountable governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue the U.S. Mission's
    strong partnership with the Swiss Government and civil society to
    engage on these topics.

        Question 7. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the State Department?

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a diverse and inclusive team at Embassy
    Bern and communicate this is a priority for me as the Ambassador. If
    confirmed, I will also urge the Embassy to reflect our whole-of-mission
    commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion. In keeping with
    Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, I will ensure all
    supervisors at the Embassy have access to and avail themselves of
    opportunities to receive regular formal training and regular guidance
    on EEO principles, diversity, and inclusion to sensitize them to these
    important issues and maximize diverse talents in our workforce.

        Question 8. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Switzerland and/or Liechtenstein?

        Answer. My investment portfolio includes diversified mutual funds
    that may have investments in Switzerland and Liechtenstein. However,
    investments in diversified mutual funds are exempt from the conflicts
    of interest rules. I will divest my interests in any future investments
    the State Department Ethics Office deems necessary to avoid a conflict
    of interest. I am committed to ensuring that my official actions will
    not give rise to a conflict of interest, and I will remain vigilant
    with regard to my ethics obligations.

        Question 11. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report. I am committed to ensuring that my official
    actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain
    vigilant with regard to my ethics obligations.

        Question 12. Russia Sanctions: Unity with European partners on
    Russia sanctions is critical to their success. What is your diplomatic
    plan to build support within Switzerland for stronger sanctions on
    Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    Switzerland to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and their
    implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative and
    consultative approach on sanctions, and I will continue to seek
    feedback from Switzerland, which has been a partner on ensuring
    Switzerland is not used to evade Russia sanctions.
        The administration's goal is to ensure that sanctions support our
    important, common work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, restoring
    control of Crimea to Ukraine, and preventing future meddling by Russia
    in foreign elections-while also remaining vigilant against unintended
    consequences for our partners. I will likewise remain mindful of our
    many foreign policy priorities, including our commitment to promoting
    European energy security, related to Europe as the U.S. Government and
    the EU implement these sanctions, and Switzerland works to prevent
    their circumvention through entities based in Switzerland. Close
    coordination with our partners is crucial to enabling the sanctions to
    achieve their ultimate goal: imposing costs on Russia, sufficient to
    change the Russian Government's behavior.

        Question 13. Russian Malign Influence: How will you seek to boost
    resilience to Russian meddling within Swiss institutions and civil
    society? What assistance priorities will you push with Swiss
    counterparts to shore up resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia is engaged in a campaign of disinformation and
    malign influence activities to undermine core institutions of the West
    and to weaken faith in the democratic and free-market systems. In
    Europe, the United States is seeking to reduce vulnerabilities,
    strengthen democratic institutions, eliminate corruption, and diversify
    energy supplies. The effects of Russian pressure continue to be
    greatest in the neighboring states of Ukraine and Georgia, where Russia
    undermines the sovereignty and territorial integrity of those
    countries. The Western Balkans are also increasingly a target, as
    Russia is trying to block the Euro-Atlantic integration of the region.
    It is important our assistance deter Russian aggression against these
    countries as well as encourage reforms in them to eliminate fraud and
    abuse and reorient their economies away from Russian economic pressure.
        If confirmed, I will promote cooperation with our partners to build
    resilience in Switzerland. I will push for the continuation of programs
    that promote the protection of human rights, build and reinforce the
    rule of law, support democratic institutions, and promote economic
    development in vulnerable countries in partnership with Switzerland.
    Furthermore, I will work closely with Switzerland as I contribute to
    the U.S. Government's implementation of the Countering America's
    Adversaries Through Sanctions Act to maintain unity on implementation
    of sanctions in order to further exert economic pressure on Russia to
    modify its aggressive behavior.

        Question 14. If the United States withdraws from the Joint
    Comprehensive Plan of Action without evidence of a material breach, how
    do you anticipate that Switzerland will respond based on statements
    from the past few weeks as well as EU statements?

       Do you believe that the best policy for the United States, if we
            walk away from the nuclear agreement with Iran, is to impose
            sanctions on European companies and banks that continue to do
            business with Iran?
       What national security priorities other than Iran could be
            negatively impacted by tensions in the transatlantic alliance
            stemming from unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA?

        Answer. The administration is currently conducting a review of the
    JCPOA and our broader approach to Iran. While that review is ongoing,
    the United States continues to implement its JCPOA commitments, and
    expects Iran to do the same. In addition, the United States seeks to
    ensure strict implementation of the JCPOA, a goal shared by Switzerland
    and our European partners. I cannot prejudge the outcome of the
    administration's review in terms of sanctions implications or how
    Switzerland will respond.
        Regardless of the outcome of the administration's review, unity
    with Europe will be crucial. If confirmed, it will be one of my highest
    priorities to ensure that we closely coordinate with Switzerland to
    ensure the effectiveness of any measures to prevent Iran from obtaining
    a nuclear weapon, steps to combat Iran's malign activities more
    broadly, including its ballistic missile program and support for
    terrorism, and other U.S. national security priorities.

        Question 15. International cooperation to address climate change is
    a top priority for Switzerland and Liechtenstein. The U.S. is
    historically, across multiple past administrations, a constructive
    partner with Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and other European allies on
    addressing climate change through multilateral forums including the
    UNCCC and the Paris Agreement, the IPCC, G20, G7, the GEF and GCF.
    Given the President's antipathy towards international cooperation on
    climate change, how do you intend to approach this issue that
    Switzerland's and Liechtenstein's leaders care deeply about?

        Answer. The administration supports a balanced approach to climate
    policy that lowers emissions while promoting economic growth and
    ensuring energy security. The President determined the terms of our
    current engagement in the Paris Agreement did not balance those
    factors, and on June 1, he announced the intent to withdraw from the
    Paris Agreement. As the President has indicated, he is open to re-
    engaging in the Paris Agreement if the United States can identify more
    favorable terms. The United States respects the efforts of those
    countries that continue to participate in the Paris Agreement.
        At the G20 Leaders' Summit in Hamburg, Germany, the United States
    joined the other G20 members in reiterating a collective commitment to
    mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, including through increased
    innovation in sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and
    working towards low greenhouse-gas emission energy systems. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with Swiss and Liechtensteiner
    interlocutors and our European allies to seek common ground and develop
    a way forward on this important issue.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                        TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2017 (a.m.)

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker,
    chairman of the committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Corker, Gardner, Young, Portman, Cardin,
    Coons, Kaine, Markey, and Booker.

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

        The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order.
        There will be some Senators here in a moment to introduce
    our distinguished nominee, but they wanted us to go ahead and
    get started. We typically give them the courtesy of going first
    so they can move on to other business.
        So, Mr. Juster, it is a pleasure to welcome you here today
    and we are glad that you are the nominee to be our next
    Ambassador to India.
        As one of the two largest democracies in the world, the
    United States and India share a strategic interest in promoting
    and maintaining stability in the region.
        Just last week, Secretary Mattis met with Prime Minister
    Modi in New Delhi, underscoring the importance of our two
    countries' growing security cooperation. As these talks
    highlighted, the United States and India continue to work
    closely together to promote stability and economic development
    in Afghanistan, confront terrorist threats, and preserve
    freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean and the South China
    Sea.
        In recent years, the United States and India have partnered
    together with regional players, including Japan and Australia,
    to address regional and global differences. These partnerships
    are critical to preserving rule of law principles that form a
    basis for economic and political stability throughout the
    region.
        Nearly a decade ago, the U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement
    was heralded as the beginning of a new era in our relationship.
    While there has been steady progress in relations between
    Washington and Delhi, the aspirational nature of the civil
    nuclear deal has left both countries struggling to meet
    unrealistic expectations. I know we talked at length about that
    yesterday.
        In particular, I remain frustrated by the slow pace of
    Indian reforms in the economic sphere. American companies
    continue to face barriers to Indian market access, including
    high tariffs and strict localization policies. The companies
    that are able to enter the Indian market often counter
    compulsory licensing requirements and lax intellectual property
    protections. The foreign investment environment remains
    unpredictable and even large-scale contracts are subject to
    alteration or cancellation without cause. Clearly, the economic
    playing field is not even.
        Additionally, the space for civil society in India
    continues to shrink as Hindu nationalism rises and
    international NGOs face undue scrutiny.
        I also remain concerned about the scale of India's human
    trafficking problem, including bonded labor. The State
    Department's Trafficking in Persons report ranks India as a
    tier 2, citing the government's record of investigations and
    prosecutions as being disappointingly low.
        Mr. Juster, you will be in a unique position to shape the
    U.S.-India relationship for the coming years. It will be
    important to continue progress on security cooperation,
    including in new areas like North Korea, as you seek a level
    playing field for American companies.
        I urge you to pursue an open and candid dialogue with our
    Indian counterparts about the roadblocks in our relationship.
    The time is long overdue for breaking the cycle of expectation
    and disappointment, and I look forward to hearing your vision
    for normalizing U.S.-India relations.
        Thank you.
        Senator Warner, we typically ask Senators to go first as a
    courtesy and do our opening comments after. We went ahead and
    began because we understood you might be as much as 10 minutes
    late. So Senator Cardin will give his comments, and then we
    will introduce you. But typically we bend over backwards.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. And I know that Senator Warner wanted to
    listening to my opening comments. It is wonderful to have
    Senator Warner here. I know at least one of his conflicts
    because the Senate Finance Committee is also meeting on
    business taxes. So I promise to give a short opening comment.
        I do want to first, Mr. Chairman, if I might, note that
    this is one of, I think, three hearings we are having this week
    on nominations. And speaking on behalf of the Democrats--and I
    mean this as a compliment--we are following the path that you
    set in the last Congress in considering President Obama's
    hearings in our committee. You did it in a very timely way. You
    facilitated those hearings as quickly as we could have them.
    And I have instructed our staff and particularly our ranking
    members of the subcommittees that will be holding two
    additional hearings that we want to accommodate, as quickly as
    possible, President Trump's nominees particularly for key
    positions and ambassadorships. And we have done that, and I
    want to thank our ranking members.
        I do want to just note one disappointment if I might, and
    that is we were not able to proceed this week on the nominee
    for South Sudan, which is a career person. South Sudan is in a
    critical situation. I think it is important that we have a
    confirmed ambassador as quickly as possible for that country
    considering the urgency of the humanitarian crisis in the
    country that exists.
        So we are going to continue to work very closely with you
    and try to get as many of these nominees' hearings as possible.
    We had hoped that the Trump administration would submit them to
    us in a more timely way. They are now bunched up, but we will
    do everything we can to advance these nominees.
        And to Mr. Juster, it is a pleasure to have you here. I
    enjoyed our conversation. You bring incredible credentials, and
    I acknowledge that. And I had a very good meeting with you, and
    I very much appreciated our opportunity to talk about many of
    the issues that confront India.
        The chairman has already mentioned that the United States
    and India are the two largest democracies in the world. Our
    relationships have grown stronger over time. But there are
    still challenges, and the chairman mentioned several of those
    challenges. He mentioned the commerce issues, which are real
    challenges as to how we are going to advance the commerce
    issues. He also mentioned trafficking, which is a significant
    problem in India. No question about it. There are also other
    human rights challenges in that country, including the
    registration laws that can be used inappropriately including
    areas of India that, because of their federalism system--and I
    was very impressed with your knowledge of the challenges of
    India as a democratic country in dealing with the problems. The
    central government cannot handle some of the issues in such a
    large country.
        But we need to do better. We need to work together to deal
    with the human rights struggles, with the commerce issues.
    Security cooperation has been pretty strong. And, of course, we
    also have the challenges that deal with their neighbors that
    bring up why it is so important that we all work together.
        So my plea is that work with this committee. We share the
    same goals. We share the same desires. And I think Congress and
    the mission--working together we can advance the partnership
    and even make it stronger.
        It is a pleasure to have you here, and I thank your family
    for being willing to share your talent with this country.
        The Chairman. I want to thank you again for being here, and
    certainly we are always honored to have Senators, but
    especially Senator Warner who we work with very, very closely.
    I know he has got very big demands on his time. Sorry you had
    to sit through our opening comments for a moment, but we do
    thank you for coming in to introduce our nominee who we are all
    very impressed with. Thank you, and if you would go ahead and
    say whatever it is you wish to say and leave and get on to
    Intelligence or Finance or some other committee. Again, thank
    you for being here today. We very much appreciate it.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. MARK WARNER,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA

        Senator Warner. Thank you, sir. Chairman Corker, Ranking
    Member Cardin, members of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee, thank you for the opportunity allowing me to
    introduce my friend, Ken Juster.
        I would note, Mr. Chairman, you and I having worked
    together for so long, knowing your punctuality, I would reflect
    for the record that I did get here at 10:04. So that was still
    pretty good to----
        The Chairman. That is about a 15-minute improvement for
    you. [Laughter.]
        Senator Warner. [continuing] I am here for a couple of
    reasons. One, as co-chair of the Senate India Caucus, this
    appointment is very important. My co-chair, Senator John
    Cornyn--he has got another meeting this morning, but he wanted
    to make sure that he conveyed to the committee as well his
    strong support for Ken's nomination. So clearly both of us from
    the Senate India Caucus support this.
        I will also acknowledge that Ken and I went to law school
    together. He did slightly better than I at law school. We had
    different focuses. But he has had an extraordinarily
    distinguished career.
        And as you have mentioned, this relationship between the
    two world's largest democracies is absolutely critical. Ken has
    worked on U.S.-India relations for more than 16 years. He has
    held leadership positions in a number of important
    organizations: Freedom House, where he worked on human rights
    works; the Asia Foundation, where he worked on development
    issues; the University of Pennsylvania Center for Advanced
    Study of India; and the U.S.-India Business Council.
        He has also worked on our bilateral relations inside the
    Federal Government because from 2001 to 2005, Ken was the Under
    Secretary of Commerce for the Bureau of Industry and Security.
    In that capacity, he was at the intersection of business and
    national security issues, including strategic trade controls,
    imports and foreign investments that obviously affect U.S.
    security. During that time, he founded and chaired the U.S.-
    India High-Tech Cooperation Group and was a key architect in
    the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership.
        I think both you and the ranking member have outlined some
    of the challenges: human trafficking, other issues around
    building strong democratic institutions in India. I would point
    out on the security side, we continue to make great strides.
    One of the things I think that is extraordinarily important--
    and Ken and I talked about this as he prepped for this
    meeting--we have seen the trade relationship grow from about
    $10 billion to $115 billion. We expect that to grow to $500
    billion over the next few years.
        So because of his distinguished career, I think Ken will
    serve our Nation well, and again, let me reiterate both my and
    John Cornyn's strong bipartisan support as co-chairs of the
    India Caucus. And I think the President could not have made a
    better choice.
        And I appreciate again the chair and the ranking member for
    my opportunity to introduce who I hope you will soon confirm on
    a speedy basis.
        The Chairman. Thank you, and thanks for your leadership on
    so many issues relative to India.
        With that, Mr. Juster, I know you have some family members
    here that you cherish. You are welcome to introduce them and
    begin your testimony. If you could keep it to about 5 minutes,
    that would be great. Any written documents you have will be
    entered into the record, without objection.

       STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH IAN JUSTER, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
               STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA

        Mr. Juster. Thank you. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member
    Cardin, and members of the committee, it is a great honor to be
    with you today as President Trump's nominee to be U.S.
    Ambassador to the Republic of India. I would like to express my
    gratitude to the President and the Secretary of State for the
    confidence and trust they have placed in me to take on this
    important position.
        I would also like to thank Senator Warner for that very
    kind introduction.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with each of you to
    advance our strategic partnership with India, a relationship
    that is critical to promoting U.S. national security and
    economic interests.
        I am very pleased to be joined this morning by my mother,
    Muriel Juster, who recently celebrated her 90th birthday; my
    cousins, Emily Randall and Cindy Camp; and several close
    friends. Other members of my family were unable to attend, but
    I greatly appreciate their support. I regret that my father,
    the late Howard Juster, is not here with us. He would have been
    very proud to see me testify before this committee.
        Over the years, I have been fortunate to be involved in a
    range of matters relating to India both in government and the
    private sector. The remarkable evolution of U.S.-India
    relations truly has been a bipartisan undertaking and has
    benefited from strong leadership and support in the Congress.
        As Under Secretary of Commerce during the first term of the
    Bush administration, I worked closely with officials in
    Washington and in New Delhi on this effort. With India's
    Foreign Secretary, we formed the High Technology Cooperation
    Group to identify and remove tariff and non-tariff barriers to
    commerce in this sector. Working with my colleagues in the U.S.
    Government, we also developed an initiative known as the Next
    Steps in Strategic Partnership. This initiative provided a road
    map for expanded cooperation with India in civil nuclear
    activities, civil space programs, and high technology trade.
    And the success of this effort laid the foundation for the
    civil nuclear agreement.
        When I returned to the private sector in 2005, I remained
    involved in a variety of U.S.-India business and policy issues.
    If confirmed, I believe that my familiarity with government
    officials, business people, and academic and think tank leaders
    in both countries will enhance my ability to represent the
    United States.
        From my perspective, the first priority of a U.S,
    Ambassador is to promote U.S. interests and be an exemplary
    representative of the U.S. Government and the American people.
    If confirmed, I will join with the dedicated men and women who
    work at our mission in India in protecting our homeland and
    advancing the interests and welfare of nearly 800,000 American
    citizens present in India at any given time. I also will strive
    to ensure the safety and well-being of our mission employees
    and their families.
        As has been mentioned, India and the United States share
    common values and a commitment to democracy, pluralism, and the
    rule of law. The administration firmly believes that a strong
    India and a strong U.S.-India relationship are in America's
    interest. India's role in the Indo-Pacific region and globally
    will be critical to international security and economic growth
    over the course of this century.
        There are many elements of our effort to expand and enhance
    the strategic partnership between our countries. One key pillar
    is to deepen defense and security cooperation, building on the
    U.S. recognition of India as a major defense partner. Together,
    our countries seek to ensure freedom of navigation, overflight,
    and commerce, and advance a rules-based democratic order
    throughout the Indo-Pacific region.
        If confirmed, I also look forward to engaging my
    counterparts in India to strengthen our cooperation on the most
    pressing challenges to regional security and global peace, from
    the DPRK's destabilizing pursuit of nuclear weapons to the
    growing threat that all forms of terrorism pose to our people.
    In addition, I will make it a priority to work closely with New
    Delhi to promote security and stability in Afghanistan, where
    India already has provided billions in economic support.
        In the economic sphere, Prime Minister Modi has undertaken
    important reforms, including the landmark Goods and Services
    Tax, though there is more to be done. If confirmed, I look
    forward to identifying ways that the United States can be a
    partner in these reform efforts to the mutual benefit of our
    business communities and our citizens.
        India's 1.3 billion people and its rapidly expanding middle
    class represent a significant market opportunity for U.S. goods
    and services. As the former Deputy Assistant to the President
    for International Economic Affairs, I appreciate the imperative
    to expand free, fair, and balanced trade. We will pursue that
    goal by working with India to improve and expedite regulatory
    processes, ensure that technology and innovation are fostered
    and protected, and increase market access for U.S. firms.
        A critical element in realizing the potential of our
    economic relationship will be to elevate our energy ties so
    that more natural gas, clean coal, crude oil, and renewable
    technologies are available to fuel India's growth and support
    U.S. jobs.
        In addition, we will seek to strengthen our collaboration
    in a number of other important areas including, as mentioned by
    the chairman and the ranking member, human rights and
    trafficking in persons, law enforcement cooperation, science
    and technology, space, health, and agriculture.
        As we move forward in these efforts, an essential
    foundation of our relationship is our people-to-people ties.
    There are nearly 4 million India Americans living in the United
    States, a community that exemplifies the spirit of innovation,
    entrepreneurship, and strong values that our countries share.
    If confirmed, I will continue to emphasize our public diplomacy
    efforts in India, including our educational and cultural
    exchanges.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. I look forward to working with you and other Members of
    Congress on the important role that you play in the U.S.-India
    relationship. I welcome your questions.
        [Mr. Juster's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Kenneth I. Juster

        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
    committee, It is a great honor to be with you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Republic of
    India. I would like to express my gratitude to the President and the
    Secretary of State for the confidence and trust they have placed in me
    to take on this important position. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with each of you to advance our strategic partnership with
    India--a relationship that is critical to promoting U.S. national
    security and economic interests.
        I am very pleased to be joined this morning by my mother, Muriel
    Juster; my cousins, Emily Randall and Cindy Camp; and several close
    friends. Other members of my family were unable to attend, but I
    greatly appreciate their support during this process. I regret that my
    father, the late Howard Juster, is not here with us. He would have been
    very proud to see me testify before this committee.
        My father was an architect and avid photographer. In 1966, when I
    was 11 years old, my mother and he traveled to India. I still have
    vivid memories of the many photographs he took there. That trip sparked
    my interest in this vast and diverse country and its people.
        In more recent years, I have been fortunate to be involved in a
    range of matters relating to India, in both government and the private
    sector. The remarkable evolution of U.S.-India relations truly has been
    a bipartisan undertaking, and has benefited from strong leadership and
    support in the Congress. Building on the trip that President Clinton
    took to India in March 2000, President Bush and Prime Minister Vajpayee
    committed in November 2001 to transform the relationship between our
    two countries--the world's oldest and largest democracies.
        As Under Secretary of Commerce during the first term of the Bush
    administration, I worked closely with officials in Washington, D.C. and
    New Delhi on this effort. With India's Foreign Secretary, we formed the
    High Technology Cooperation Group to identify and remove tariff and
    non-tariff barriers to commerce in this sector. Working with my
    colleagues in the U.S. Government, we also developed an initiative
    known as the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership. This initiative
    provided a roadmap for expanded cooperation with India, through a
    series of reciprocal steps, in civil nuclear activities, civil space
    programs, and high-technology trade--three of the most contentious
    issues in our relationship at the time. The success of this effort laid
    the foundation for the historic civil nuclear agreement and our broader
    partnership.
        When I returned to the private sector in 2005, first as an
    executive at a technology company and then as a partner at an
    investment firm, I remained involved in a variety of U.S.-India
    business and policy issues. This included serving on the Boards of the
    Asia Foundation, the U.S.-India Business Council, and the University of
    Pennsylvania's Center for the Advanced Study of India, as well as
    participating periodically in the Aspen Institute's U.S.-India
    Strategic Dialogue and other relevant forums. If confirmed, I believe
    that my familiarity with government officials, business people, and
    academic and think tank leaders in both countries will enhance my
    ability to represent the United States in India and advance our
    bilateral relationship.
        From my perspective, the first priority of a U.S, Ambassador is to
    promote U.S. national interests and be an exemplary representative of
    the U.S. Government and the American people. If confirmed, I will join
    with the dedicated men and women who work at our Mission in India in
    protecting our homeland and advancing the interests and welfare of the
    nearly 800,000 American citizens present in India at any given time--
    either living there or visiting. I also will strive to ensure the
    safety and well-being of our Mission employees and their families.
        The Trump administration fully appreciates India's long and rich
    history. India and the United States share common values and a
    commitment to democracy, pluralism, and the rule of law.
        The administration views India as a leading power and a true
    friend, whose influence internationally is important and growing. A
    strong India and a strong U.S.-India relationship are in America's
    interest. India's role in the Indo-Pacific region and globally will be
    critical to international security and economic growth over the course
    of this century. The administration will build on the excellent meeting
    that President Trump and Prime Minister Modi had in June of this year
    in seeking to deepen our partnership for the benefit of the people of
    both countries, and in the interest of shaping a freer, more secure,
    and more prosperous world.
        There are many elements of our effort to expand and enhance the
    strategic partnership between our two countries and advance common
    objectives. One key pillar is to deepen defense and security
    cooperation, building on the U.S. recognition of India as a Major
    Defense Partner.Together, our countries seek to ensure freedom of
    navigation, overflight, and commerce, and advance a rules-based,
    democratic order throughout the Indo-Pacific Region.
        If confirmed, I also look forward to engaging my counterparts in
    India to strengthen our cooperation on the most pressing challenges to
    regional security and global peace, from the DPRK's destabilizing
    pursuit of nuclear weapons to the growing threat that all forms of
    terrorism pose to our people. In addition, I will make it a priority to
    work closely with New Delhi to promote security and stability in
    Afghanistan, where India already has provided billions of dollars in
    economic support and is a longstanding partner for peace.
        In the economic sphere, Prime Minister Modi has undertaken
    important reforms, including the landmark Goods and Services Tax. His
    government has liberalized foreign direct investment in several sectors
    and is working to improve the ease of doing business. If confirmed, I
    look forward to identifying ways that the United States can be a
    partner in these reform efforts, to the mutual benefit of our business
    communities and our citizens.
        India's 1.3 billion people and its rapidly expanding middle class
    represent a significant market opportunity for U.S. goods and services.
    As the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic
    Affairs during the first five months of the administration, I
    appreciate the imperative to expand free, fair, and balanced trade
    between the United States and India. We will pursue that goal by
    working with the Government of India to improve and expedite regulatory
    processes; ensure that technology and innovation are fostered and
    protected; and increase market access for U.S. firms.
        A critical element in realizing the potential of our economic
    relationship will to elevate all aspects of our energy ties, so that
    more natural gas, clean coal, crude oil, and renewable resources and
    technologies are available to fuel India's economic growth and
    inclusive development, as well as to support U.S. jobs.
        In addition, we will seek to strengthen our collaboration in a
    number of other important areas, including human rights and trafficking
    in persons, law enforcement, science and technology, space, health, and
    agriculture.
        As we move forward in all of these efforts, an essential foundation
    of our bilateral relationship is our people-to-people ties. There are
    nearly four million Indian Americans living in the United States--a
    community that exemplifies the spirit of innovation, entrepreneurship,
    and strong values that our two countries share. There also are over
    165,000 Indian students attending U.S. educational institutions.
    Collectively, they contribute more than $5 billion to the U.S. economy
    and support tens of thousands of American jobs. If confirmed, I will
    continue to emphasize our public diplomacy efforts in India, including
    our educational and cultural exchanges. These and other outreach
    activities are central to strengthening our partnership with the Indian
    government and its people, and advancing our foreign policy goals.
        Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I
    look forward to working with you and other Members of Congress on the
    important role that you play in the U.S.-India relationship. I welcome
    your questions.

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Senator Cardin?
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Juster, in our conversations, I
    underscored the importance of the relationship, and I think it
    is getting stronger. There are a lot of good things we could
    talk about, but I am going to spend my time dealing with
    challenges that we have between our two countries.
        First, although the chairman just walked out, in honor of
    our chairman, who has been the leader on trafficking issues on
    this committee, the largest democracy in the world--obviously,
    the numbers are going to reflect larger numbers. There are 18
    million people in India estimated in bonded labor, slavery.
    That number is unacceptable. There are regions of India that
    have significant problems in trafficking.
        How do you plan to make that a priority of our embassy to
    work with the Indian Government to address this issue?
        Mr. Juster. Well, thank you very much for that question,
    Senator Cardin.
        And I do want to emphasize that that will be a priority of
    mine. As you know, I have served as the head of Freedom House
    for 2 years and was on the board for 7 years. And so these
    issues are of great concern to me and of our government. And
    the Indians are also very concerned with this. If you read the
    vibrant Indian press and see civil society, they discuss these
    issues at great length. Nonetheless, especially at the state
    and local level, these problems persist, as indicated in our
    Trafficking in Persons report.
        We at the embassy, if confirmed, will take this as a very
    high priority. I know a lot of work is already being done in
    terms of public outreach, in terms of law enforcement
    cooperation, and it is something that I will, if confirmed, and
    am on the ground try to figure out the best interlocutors to
    move this forward. And again, it is not just going to be at the
    national level, but the state, the local level. It is meeting
    with NGOs, providing shelter for people who are victims.
        Sorry.
        Senator Cardin. Yes. I was going to say I hope you work
    with us on that. I agree with what you are saying.
        I just really want to respond. It is a democracy. There is
    ample press coverage of the trafficking issues. No question
    about it. The government gets a little bit defensive at times
    on these issues, and there is a federalism problem on the
    trafficking issues. So I hope that you will report back to us
    the progress that you have made and not just wait for the
    annual TIP reports but to work with us because India, being the
    largest democracy, what they do is very reflective of our
    ability with other countries to be able to get the type of
    progress that we expect.
        The other major human rights issue I just want to go into--
    and there is a lot we could go into--is working with NGOs,
    particularly those who may be restricted or prohibited by
    authorities under the new foreign NGO management law. It seems
    to me that our embassy can play a very important role in
    protecting the rights of civil societies and NGOs.
        Mr. Juster. Senator, first, let me reiterate, as I
    indicated in my statement, that I very much look forward, if
    confirmed, to working with you and other members of the
    committee on the whole range of issues that relate to India. I
    welcome visits from the committee and from other Members of
    Congress, and I certainly, when back in Washington, will seek
    out you and other members as well to report on these issues. So
    that is a very high priority.
        With regard to NGOs, there have been regulations that need
    to be enforced in an even and transparent way. I am concerned
    that it seems that some foreign NGOs seem to be singled out at
    times. I will, again, if confirmed, want to get a better handle
    on those issues on the ground, but certainly will be meeting
    with members of civil society. I was very active in civil
    society in this country, and a vibrant civil society is
    critical to a well functioning democracy. So that is, again, an
    important priority.
        Senator Cardin. And I will be sending--I send all our
    missions reminder letters of what the nominees said during
    confirmation hearings on advancing human rights. So expect
    that. And we would like regular reports on the progress being
    made in regards to advancing our values on human rights.
        Another potential problem could be the enforcement of
    sanctions most recently against Russia. We also, of course,
    have other sanction issues. And India has not been as strong as
    they could on enforcing sanction laws.
        How do you intend to represent the U.S. interests in
    India's compliance with sanctions?
        Mr. Juster. I am not familiar with what may be the
    specifics on the Russian sanctions and whether India is in
    compliance with those or not. But sanctions generally are
    something that are a part of U.S. law, and if that is the case,
    we will be seeking to enforce them very actively. I do know
    during the Iran process that India did comply with sanctions
    and did lessen its oil imports from Iran. And my understanding
    is they have been complying with the North Korea sanctions. But
    that is an issue, again, that would be something that we would
    take seriously. And again, on the Russian sanctions, I would
    need to dig in further on that, if confirmed.
        Senator Cardin. And the last area on challenges I want to
    just mention briefly is that during the Paris Climate
    negotiations, India was a partner with the United States in
    advancing the international agreement. Now that the U.S.
    position is not as clear as it was a year ago in regards to our
    participation on climate talks, that could be a real challenge
    for our India mission with the Indian Government.
        Can you just explain how you will deal with the
    international issues on climate, recognizing that India did
    make certain commitments based upon the U.S.'s requests?
        Mr. Juster. Well, even though the President has indicated
    that he is intending to withdraw from the climate agreement, he
    has also indicated his strong interest in clean air, clean
    technology, clean water. And the United States still has made
    very significant strides. And so I see working with India on
    this as a continued important priority. I know the Indians are
    very interested in expanding the role of renewables in their
    energy demand, and they too are very serious--Prime Minister
    Modi--about environmental concerns which are not insubstantial
    in the country. So I do not see the position we took at the
    climate agreement as affecting my desire, if confirmed, to be
    working with India on clean technology, renewables, and other
    efforts to improve the environment.
        Senator Cardin. I agree with that. I think India is very
    interested from the economic position, as well as from the
    environmental and international, the green energy sources. It
    is an economic issue in their country. A lot of this is our
    technology and shared technology. We have developed
    technologies together. So I think there really is a path
    forward without getting into the politics of membership--where
    we are from the White House. I would encourage you to do that.
    I think there is strong support on both sides of the aisle for
    us to improve those ties with India.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Yes, sir. Thank you. And I appreciate you
    bringing up the trafficking and modern slavery issue. We had a
    very good talk yesterday regarding that, and we understand the
    cultural issues that exist in India. But I know our ambassador
    nominee is very committed to that. But thank you for brining
    that up.
        Senator Portman?
        Senator Portman. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I
    appreciate your deferring as chair since we all have three
    committees going on at the same time here.
        The Chairman. Especially you. I think you have more
    committees than anyone in the Republican caucus. [Laughter.]
        Senator Portman. Thanks to you.
        The Chairman. Yes, sir.
        Senator Portman. Thanks for giving me the great honor of
    being on this committee, which I love.
        And, Ken, thank you for your willingness to step forward.
    You have got an amazing background, Commerce Department,
    National Security Council, most recently State Department, your
    background with the nongovernmental groups and leadership roles
    you have played in them.
        As you know from our conversations, I am very eager to
    expand our relationship with India. I think it is a tremendous
    opportunity. When I was U.S. Trade Representative, we did start
    the U.S.-India trade policy dialogue. That was 2005. Since
    then, we have tripled our trade with India. And yet, it was
    from such a low starting point, that there is much more to be
    done.
        So I agree with what you said today about fair and balanced
    and free trade. I do continue to have deep concerns about
    market access for some of our products and services, and
    specifically in the intellectual property area that you and I
    talked about.
        Could you just share with the committee briefly some of
    your thoughts on how to level that playing field to ensure even
    more trade between our two great democracies?
        Mr. Juster. Thank you very much for that question, Senator
    Portman.
        Obviously, the economic issues have been a major concern of
    mine. When I was in the private sector, I was on the board of
    the U.S.-India Business Council. There is enormous potential in
    the economic sphere, but we have only begun to scratch the
    surface. We need to continue pressing forward, make sure that
    India adheres to its WTO obligations, and that we can push the
    range of economic issues, whether it be standards and non-
    tariff barriers, intellectual property. My hope is as more
    Indian entrepreneurs develop their own intellectual property,
    there will be a greater interest in the protections of it.
        One of my major priorities will be to be a strong advocate
    for U.S. business interests in India. And ultimately I would
    hope that the Indian community would see the economic
    relationship as a strategic asset and part of what can help
    develop our overall strategic partnership and something that is
    in the interests of both countries. And I think as Prime
    Minister Modi moves forward with his reform programs and as he
    seeks to have a high level of growth, it will become
    increasingly clear that U.S. companies can contribute to that,
    and removing some of these barriers to trade would be an
    accelerator in that growth process.
        Senator Portman. Well, thank you. And I agree with you. And
    I think on the reforms that he is pursuing, it helps to have
    the U.S. relationship and we can be a constructive partner in
    that.
        I also think from our perspective, India is an important
    counterweight to the influence that China has in the region,
    and that is not lost on this committee.
        You talked about trafficking. I appreciate your commitment
    to combating that. As you know, the chairman and ranking member
    have a real commitment to work with you on that, as do I.
        You mentioned in your brief testimony abduction of people.
    And let me raise this issue because it is a tricky one but
    really important. I think there are something like 80 cases
    right now of abductions of American kids in India. And it is
    part of our relationship that I think does not get enough
    focus. India has not yet signed the 1980 Hague Convention on
    International Child Abduction. By the way, there are something
    like 95 countries who have signed that, and India should sign
    it. And it basically provides an expedited mechanism to
    adjudicate these child custody disputes that arise and help
    return abducted kids to their rightful homes.
        As you know from our conversation, there are a number of
    Ohio cases, and one recent one is very compelling. And I need
    your commitment here today that you are going to help us both
    with the policy, which is to get India to sign the Hague
    Convention to have this mechanism, but also on these specific
    cases of Ohio kids who have been abducted.
        Could you speak about that briefly?
        Mr. Juster. Thank you for that question, Senator Portman.
        I cannot think of anything more heartbreaking than having a
    parent have their child abducted and not being able to visit
    them or have some resolution of the matter. I think it is also
    heartbreaking for the child who is involved. So this is a very
    serious issue.
        As you have indicated, the Indian Government is not a
    signatory to the Hague Convention. I do not know how likely it
    is that they may become one, but that is certainly, if
    confirmed, an issue that I would pursue. But even if they are
    not in that convention, it is important that there be some
    process for addressing and trying to resolve individual cases.
    And I do commit to you, as I did when we discussed that, your
    case or any other one will be one that I will take very
    seriously and try my best to resolve. I want to meet with the
    individuals who are involved in these and understand their
    stories and their side of the issue. Again, it will be an
    important--I know it is already important--concern for the
    mission in India.
        Senator Portman. Well, thanks for your personal commitment
    to that. It is frustrating when a U.S. parent gets an
    adjudication in India that is positive and yet cannot enforce
    it and, as you say, heartbreaking for that family and
    ultimately for that child.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you. Thanks very much for being here.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Mr. Juster, congratulations on the nomination. I look
    forward to supporting. You are very well qualified to do this
    job, this very important job.
        I was just in a hearing and left to come down here, a
    hearing in the Armed Services Committee, Secretary Mattis and
    General Dunford talking about our strategy in Afghanistan.
    Secretary Mattis just returned from a trip to India and
    Afghanistan where part of the visit was to thank the Indian
    Government for work that they are doing, especially on
    development in Afghanistan, very important work.
        The Indian-U.S. military-to-military relationship is a
    strong one now. India does more joint exercises with the United
    States than any other nation. And this is, obviously, primarily
    a mil-to-mil relationship, but talk a little bit about as
    Ambassador what you might be able to do to further and deepen
    these important security connections between our countries.
        Mr. Juster. Thank you, Senator Kaine. And as you said, that
    is a very important aspect of our overall partnership. In the
    military sphere, 10 years ago we had no sales of military
    equipment to India. We now have $15 billion. There is another
    $30 billion up for bid over the next 7 years, and the United
    States would like to play a strong role in that.
        One thing, therefore, that I would be doing, if confirmed
    as Ambassador, would be to advocate very strongly for the
    Indians to select U.S. manufacturers of equipment. Not only do
    I think it would be good for the military-to-military
    relationship, but it would be good for our trade balance and
    for our economic relationship at the same time.
        As you mentioned, India does more joint exercises than
    anyone else--that it does with the United States than any other
    country. I would want to continue that process. I know they
    just finished a very successful trilateral exercise with Japan
    as well, the Malabar exercise. So continuing those
    opportunities will be important.
        I would look to work closely with the commander in the
    Pacific Command, as well as the Central Command, because India
    straddles the border of those two commands. It is important, as
    you mentioned, that India play a very constructive role.
        It has been a partner of ours in trying to secure stability
    and security in Afghanistan and make that a peaceful place and
    to cooperate more broadly on counterterrorism issues.
        So I think there is a broad range of activities we can do,
    and it will be an important part of, if confirmed, my agenda
    overall, as I said from both a military perspective, also an
    economic perspective, and a broader sense of our strategic
    partnership.
        Senator Kaine. When I was last in India--it was I think
    October of 2014--and Senator King, who serves on the Armed
    Services and Intelligence Committee, and I went to see the
    Indian shipbuilding operation at the Mazagon Dock in Mumbai.
    And I would just encourage colleagues who visit India--they are
    really proud to show off what they have. And then subsequently
    the Indian military leadership has come and toured shipyards
    here, including the shipyard in Virginia. These kinds of
    exchanges I think can really deepen the relationship. So
    encourage visiting delegations to include a mil-to-mil
    component. I would ask you that.
        One of the areas where my constituents reach out to me
    occasionally about India is in the human rights area, and
    usually if they reach out to me, it is dealing with religious
    diversity and especially the treatment of religious minorities,
    especially Sikhs. Not being on the ground and investigating it
    myself, you know, I do not reach fixed conclusions about this.
    But talk a little bit about how you could use a position as
    Ambassador, if confirmed, to advance what really is and should
    be a shared goal of both of our great democracies of religious
    tolerance.
        Mr. Juster. As you mentioned, Senator, India has a great
    tradition of tolerance. It is a multi-religious country, and it
    has the values that we have in that area. Nonetheless, there
    are incidents that occur from time to time in the religious
    area that are troubling and that I would want to, if confirmed,
    work with the Indians on understanding better and seeking ways
    to improve that situation.
        I happened to run into yesterday on my way out of the
    meeting with Chairman Corker Senator Brownback who is going to
    be, if confirmed, the U.S. Ambassador for International
    Religious Freedom. And I urged him to visit India. I know that
    his predecessor had done so, and that is certainly something
    that he is very cognizant of. And it is important that we have
    that dialogue and pursue these issues. Again, if confirmed,
    part of the challenge is to find out the most productive way to
    pursue them and to find the right interlocutors and way to make
    these points.
        But India itself, as you know, has a very active civil
    society that raises these issues and discusses them. And
    ultimately as a democracy, they are going to have to come to
    grips with it. But we can play a very important role in terms
    of our viewpoints on them and our support in this area.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you. It is a great ally and an
    important relationship. And I congratulate you for your
    nomination.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Cardin?
        Senator Cardin. I want to follow up on Senator Kaine's
    point and that is trying to find mechanisms in which we can
    advance some of these discussions.
        India was a founding member of the Community of Democracies
    and the UN Democracy Fund. So they have a track record of
    international participation on human rights.
        When I was in India, I had suggested that we should
    institutionalize an exchange on human rights, as we have done
    with other countries where we have a regularly scheduled
    opportunity to have bilateral discussions on the advancement of
    human rights.
        There are many examples of countries which we have done
    this with. The one I think is perhaps is the most successful
    has been Vietnam where we have regularly scheduled human rights
    sessions with a country that we had significant issues with.
    And I think it was one of the reasons why Vietnam was selected
    as a country to participate in the TPP because we had made
    significant advancements on human rights and values so that we
    felt confident enough that we could enter into a trade
    agreement with Vietnam.
        India, of course, is on a different level, and it is not a
    comparison as to where they are on human rights. But it does
    show the value of having these types of scheduled exchanges. It
    is not one-sided. It is shared practices in which we, as the
    two largest democracies, could show our leadership globally on
    democracy and human rights issues.
        Would you consider that? I know I had support from the
    Government of India. They were interested in it. We did not
    pursue it to completion. And I would just ask that you look at
    that as a possible way to advance this agenda.
        Mr. Juster. Thank you, Senator Cardin. It is certainly an
    issue that I would be delighted, if confirmed, to look at and
    to explore and to understand what has occurred in terms of
    raising that issue with the Indians. As I mentioned, they are a
    democracy that grapples with these issues, and we have to
    figure out the most appropriate way to interact with them to be
    productive in advancing the perspective that we have. But I
    would be more than happy, if confirmed, to continue to look at
    that idea.
        Senator Cardin. And we will be glad to work with you on
    that because there are different levels on which they could be
    done. We are not looking at it as a challenge to India but more
    how we share best practices as the two largest democracies and
    where each of us can improve--we have concerns in our own
    country; they have concerns in their country--how we can
    support each other in advancing our global leadership on
    democracy and human rights. I think India has a proud history
    here and joining the United States would give both of us, I
    think, international credibility.
        I thank you and again thank you for your willingness to
    serve our country.
        The Chairman. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Corker and Ranking
    Member Cardin. And thank you for understanding the demands of
    many of us who have several different hearings to go between.
        So I appreciate the opportunity to question you and thank
    you for your ongoing dedication to public service, Mr. Juster.
    I understand your mother is here with you today. Ma'am, thank
    you for raising a wonderful young man who is dedicated to
    serving his country, and to the other members of your extended
    family who are with you.
        In April, Senator Merkley and I had an opportunity to
    travel to India. It was my first trip. He was returning, having
    been an intern in the State Department there, I think, 30 years
    ago. And we had an opportunity to see firsthand how our
    partnerships with the Indian Government help lift families and
    communities out of poverty and, in particular, help to empower
    women and girls. We also had a chance to talk about the
    strategic relationship between these two great, large
    democracies and how that might impact the strategic situation
    in the region. And although our strategic relationship is
    critical to the future of the region, we also sometimes
    overlook how far countries like India have come in fighting
    poverty and disease as a result of targeted interventions where
    USAID and innovative NGOs like CARE and the Gates Foundation
    and others have played a vital role.
        So I have introduced a bipartisan bill that would require
    the U.S. Government to develop a 10-year strategy to end
    preventable maternal and newborn deaths by 2035 and to leverage
    commitments from the private sector, nonprofits, and partner
    countries. And in previous iterations, it has included
    innovative financing vehicles.
        As Ambassador, how might you engage the Indian Government
    to help partner to prevent maternal and child deaths in India?
    And would you work with the private sector and innovative NGOs
    to try and make a significant difference in ending preventable
    maternal and child deaths?
        Mr. Juster. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        By all means, that is a very important issue. My
    understanding is that there is an active health dialogue
    already with India in that in the embassy there are
    representatives of several of our agencies, including the
    Center for Disease Control, that are involved in that. But
    also, as you mentioned, it is critical that the civil society
    and the private sector be involved. And, again, if confirmed,
    that is something I am comfortable and used to working with and
    would want to advance every avenue that we can to assist and
    work with the Government of India at the state local level to
    deal with what is a tragic issue, would be deaths from
    childbirth and, quite frankly, to deal with other health
    concerns that may arise and need to be dealt with as well. I
    know that tuberculosis has been an area where the embassy has
    worked with the Government of India on and other challenges as
    they arise. We want to do so.
        Senator Coons. Well, the very scale of India makes both, I
    think, morally compelling and challenging the opportunity to
    demonstrate interventions that can then have consequences not
    just on the Indian subcontinent but for the rest of the
    developing world. So my hope is that you will pursue that,
    assuming you are confirmed.
        The H1B visa program allows highly skilled foreign workers
    to come to the United States. And there are some in Congress
    who have been sharply critical of it. President Trump has been
    critical of it. The administration temporarily suspended so-
    called premium processing for H1B visas in early March, which
    led to some concern in India. And I have heard some expressions
    of concern from Indian headquartered companies that also
    operate in the United States. When I visited our embassy in New
    Delhi and walked to the visa line to see the process that is
    followed for folks seeking to come to the United States, I saw
    many Indians trying to come to the United States to study at
    our top universities or to contribute to our economy in Silicon
    Valley.
        But what is your opinion of the H1B program? How do you see
    it playing in the U.S.-India relationship? And will you work to
    support ongoing opportunities for highly skilled workers to
    come to the United States, if confirmed?
        Mr. Juster. Well, first, I would note that the embassy or
    the mission in India processes I believe more visas a year than
    any other mission in the world. I think it is well over a
    million. And it is an enormous effort, and part of that is to
    protect our homeland. It is also to facilitate getting
    qualified people to come to our country.
        As you know, the President in April issued an executive
    order for the administration to look into our overall visa
    policies, and that interagency process is not yet completed. So
    I am not really in a position to represent the administration
    on where they are.
        Obviously, the H1B visa has been an important part of the
    India-U.S. relationship. I think there is a consensus that it
    should be directed to high quality jobs, and I think that
    message, from my understanding, is being heard in India, as
    well as in the United States. But again, the actual details on
    what will be the final policy on H1B remain to be determined.
        Senator Coons. Well, thank you.
        One last question, if I might, Mr. Juster, just a parochial
    concern. When it comes to addressing trade imbalances, some are
    familiar with a high quality source of protein called chicken,
    which happens to be the major agricultural export of both the
    States of Delaware and Maryland, among many others. And the
    Indian market is one from which we have been effectively
    excluded for a number of years, and I would hope, if you are to
    be confirmed, to have the opportunity to pursue further with
    you a discussion about how we might access the Indian market
    for this tasty, high quality American agricultural export.
        Mr. Juster. Again, that is a troubling issue. Since 2006, I
    believe, there have not been any imports of poultry. There was
    a WTO case that the United States prevailed in, but in our
    view, India has still not complied with that. So this will be
    another of the trade and business issues that I, if confirmed,
    would be pursuing with the Indian Government.
        Senator Coons. Great. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Thank you so much for being here today. You and I had ample
    time yesterday to talk through numbers of issues.
        To your mother and two friends who have come today,
    typically when we have an extraordinarily well qualified
    person, there are very few people who come. It is usually when
    there is a controversial nominee that is here. So I want to
    second what Senator Coons said about raising a fine son. We are
    glad that someone of his ilk and qualifications and demeanor is
    going to be representing our country in India. I hope you will
    be swiftly confirmed.
        For the record, there will be questions that will be asked.
    We will keep the record open until the close of business
    Thursday. We will have a recess period, as you know, in
    between. But if you could answer those questions fairly
    quickly, it will expedite your confirmation.
        Again, thank you for your willingness to serve. Having
    dedicated, committed, intelligent people like you in these
    positions is very important to our country, and I thank you for
    your willingness.
        Mr. Juster. Thank you very much, Chairman Corker, and I
    will do my best to get those questions back to you as quickly
    as possible. And again, I want to reiterate my desire to work
    with all members of the committee on issues and to, if
    confirmed, welcome you to visit India and certainly continue
    our dialogue.
        The Chairman. I was a little too complimentary because now
    we have someone else. Would you like to ask a question?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief.
        Mr. Chairman, this committee has structured the portfolio
    that we work with a little bit differently than perhaps the
    State Department or the Department of Defense does. India is
    actually in a different subcommittee in this committee than the
    portfolio and how it is handled at the State Department. Would
    it be helpful if we had sort of a realignment on those issues?
        Mr. Juster. I do know that the State Department is looking
    at an overall set of organizational issues. I am not in a
    position to say what they will do overall. But I can tell you
    that I referred to the Indo-Pacific region. I certainly
    consider India critical to Asia, as well as to South Asia and
    Central Asia. I was mentioning earlier that one of the
    challenges is the military has a Pacific Command that goes
    right between the border of India and Pakistan, and part of the
    job of Ambassador and what I would do, if confirmed, would be
    to make sure I have a good relationship with both the Pacific
    Command and the Central Command. And I would make sure again,
    if confirmed, that I would be working closely with people who
    are involved in our Asian and East Asian policy as well as the
    South Asia. But as to how the Department may be organized, I am
    really not in a position to speak to that.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you for that. I think as the
    committee looks to reorganize in the next Congress, that is
    something that we might consider. So thank you.
        The Chairman. With that, the meeting is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have participated in human rights and democracy issues
    for many years. When I worked at the Department of State from 1989 to
    1993, I was one of the key officials involved in establishing and
    managing U.S. assistance programs to Central and Eastern Europe and the
    former Soviet Union. This included working with the National Endowment
    for Democracy (NED) and the American Bar Association's (ABA) legal
    assistance programs to advance the rule of law. I also developed the
    proposal that created the Citizens Democracy Corps, a nonprofit
    organization that mobilizes U.S. private sector expertise to assist the
    countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to
    build democratic institutions and free market economies. After leaving
    the U.S. Government early in 1993, I served during the 1990s and 2000,
    on a pro bono basis, as the outside legal counsel of the NED. I also
    joined the Advisory Board of the ABA's Central and East European Legal
    Initiative (CEELI). Subsequent to my service as Under Secretary of
    Commerce from 2001 to 2005, I became a Board Member of Freedom House in
    2009 and served as Chairman from 2014 to 2017.
        While the various organizations with which I have worked on human
    rights and democracy issues each has had a significant impact on
    conditions in other countries, one program at Freedom House that I
    would highlight, and which I emphasized as Chairman, is the Emergency
    Assistance Program. This assistance reaches frontline activists at
    their moment of greatest need, helping them survive attacks, giving
    them the means to resume their critical work and, in many cases,
    literally saving lives. During my time on the Board of Freedom House,
    this program provided assistance to approximately 3,000 human rights
    defenders.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    India? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in India? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. India has a rich heritage of cultural, ethnic, and
    religious diversity; a vibrant civil society; strong democratic
    institutions; and a tradition of adherence to the rule of law. However,
    as with many countries, India faces pressing human rights challenges.
    The most significant of these, as cited in the State Department's
    annual Human Rights Report, include instances of security force abuses;
    corruption, which contributes to ineffective responses to crimes,
    including against women, children, and historically disadvantaged
    groups; and societal violence based on gender, religious affiliation,
    or caste or tribe. Other significant human rights issues include
    disappearances, hazardous prison conditions, and instances of arbitrary
    arrest and detention. Trafficking in persons, including bonded and
    forced labor and sex trafficking, also remains a serious problem, as
    noted in the State Department's Trafficking in Persons Report.
        If confirmed, I will lead Mission India's engagement on human
    rights issues. I will commit to engaging openly and honestly on human
    rights with the full range of stakeholders, including, but not limited
    to, representatives of the Government, civil society and NGOs, and
    India's many faiths, castes, and tribes. I will ensure that Mission
    India fulfills its obligations to monitor and report on human rights
    issues and collaborate with the Indian Government and civil society to
    share best practices and promote programs and activities to raise
    awareness and support individuals and groups that have been victims of
    abuse. By engaging directly with the Government of India, I would hope
    not only to strengthen our bilateral cooperation to combat human rights
    challenges, but also to demonstrate global leadership as two leading
    democracies committed to supporting civil society and upholding
    democratic values, transparency, and the rule of law.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in India in advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. India has a longstanding tradition of pluralism, the rule
    of law, and protection of minority rights. However, as in many
    countries, uneven enforcement of civil liberty protections, corruption,
    lack of political will, and lack of capacity can, at times, undermine
    the enforcement of laws. If confirmed, I will lead Mission India's
    efforts to engage with the full range of stakeholders--from the
    Government, to victims, to civil society--so as to better understand
    the barriers to achieving justice for victims and how we can
    effectively engage to help prevent future abuses.

        Question 4. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    India to address cases of persons otherwise unjustly targeted by India?

        Answer. If confirmed, I and Mission India will engage with the
    Indian Government on such cases, and will voice our strong support for
    India's constitution, adherence to the rule of law, and due process.

        Question 5. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions
    of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities
    reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will lead and direct the Embassy's
    engagement with the Indian Government, as well as with human rights
    groups, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations in
    India and in the United States. I also will ensure that the Embassy
    continues to vet thoroughly all individuals and units nominated for
    U.S.-funded security assistance, in accordance with the Leahy Law. If
    we identify credible information indicating a gross violation of human
    rights, we will take the necessary steps in accordance with the law to
    ensure that responsible parties do not receive U.S.-funded assistance.
    We also will work with the Indian Government, where applicable, to
    identify any cases of individuals who should be or have been brought to
    justice in the interest of remediating units restricted from receiving
    assistance.

        Question 6. How will you approach human rights issues with the
    Indian Government? Will it be public, private, and will you engage
    local and state governments as well?

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to engaging the Government of
    India on human rights issues in a frank and open manner, including
    representatives of state and local governments as appropriate. While
    some of this engagement may be public, some undoubtedly will be in
    private government-to-government discussions. If confirmed, I intend to
    exercise my best judgment and discretion as Ambassador to determine the
    most appropriate and effective means of engagement to advance our
    priority to support human rights in India.

        Question 7. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service?

        Answer. My experience in government and in the private sector, as
    well as my involvement with non-governmental organizations, has given
    me the opportunity to build and be a part of high-level teams with
    diverse members. I am committed to the principles of diversity and
    equal employment opportunity. If confirmed, I will seek to foster a
    work environment that recognizes the contributions of all employees,
    and I will make sure they have information available about the
    Department's Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, foreign affairs
    affinity organizations, and opportunities specific to various groups.

        Question 8. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will strongly encourage all supervisors to
    take available courses on equal employment opportunity principles,
    diversity, leadership and management, and related issues. I also will
    urge supervisors to include unconscious bias and similar topics when
    they mentor junior colleagues. I will direct supervisors to provide
    opportunities, transparently and fairly, to all entry- and mid-level
    professionals. By providing time for professional development
    discussions to address diversity, I will highlight that this is a
    priority for the State Department as well as a priority for me as
    Ambassador.

        Question 9. If confirmed, how will you defend against conflicts of
    interest influencing Trump administration policies, particularly the
    status of President Trump's multiple active real estate projects in
    India? Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention (and the
    State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or U.S.
    actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the President's
    business or financial interests, or the business or financial interests
    of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 11. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in India?

        Answer. The State Department Ethics Office and the Office of
    Government Ethics have reviewed my assets and determined that none of
    my holdings pose a substantial risk of creating a conflict of interest
    during my service as Ambassador to India. I am committed to ensuring
    that my official actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest.
    I will divest my interests in any investments the State Department
    Ethics Office deems necessary in the future to avoid a conflict of
    interest, and will remain vigilant with regard to my ethics
    obligations.

        Question 12. Please describe your role as a board member for the
    company Gold Reserve Inc. During your time on the board, did Gold
    Reserve Inc. conduct any business in Venezuela? If so, what was the
    nature of that business?

        Answer. I served as a member of the Board of Directors of Gold
    Reserve Inc. from March 2015 to January 2017. Some brief background
    about Gold Reserve is necessary to understand my role on the Board.
    Gold Reserve acquired and began developing a gold and copper project in
    southeastern Venezuela in 1992 and, from 1992 to 2009, invested close
    to $300 million in acquisition, land exploration, development,
    equipment, and engineering costs. In April 2008, the Government of
    Venezuela arbitrarily revoked the previous authorization for Gold
    Reserve to proceed with construction of this project. Accordingly, in
    October 2009, Gold Reserve initiated an arbitration under the rules of
    the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes
    (ICSID) of the World Bank to obtain compensation for the losses caused
    by the actions of Venezuela. In September 2014, the ICSID Tribunal
    unanimously granted Gold Reserve an Arbitral Award totaling (i) $713
    million in damages, plus (ii) pre-Award interest, and (iii) legal costs
    and expenses, for a total of $740.3 million, with the Award also
    accruing post-Award interest. The Government of Venezuela did not
    comply with the Award and, instead, challenged its validity. This
    required Gold Reserve to initiate a series of legal actions to seek to
    enforce the Award and also provide the basis, if necessary, for
    attaching assets of the Government of Venezuela. Shortly thereafter,
    the senior partner of a firm that is a large shareholder of Gold
    Reserve, who knows me well, including my extensive prior legal
    experience in international arbitrations and the enforcement of
    arbitral awards, asked me if I would be willing to join the Board in
    order to help provide advice on their legal activities. The Board
    subsequently invited me to become a Director in March 2015.
        During my service as a Director, the Chairman of the Board, the
    CEO, and the President held periodic settlement discussions with
    representatives of the Government of Venezuela and eventually executed
    a settlement agreement. The settlement agreement included a schedule of
    payments by Venezuela for the Award plus interest and entering into an
    agreement for the formation of a jointly owned company to develop a
    gold and copper project on some of the original property plus an
    adjacent property. My role, and that of other members of the Board, was
    to advise on the settlement discussions and authorize and approve the
    settlement agreement. I never met with any Venezuelans during this
    process nor did I travel to Venezuela.

        Question 13. If confirmed, how do you plan on working with Indian
    leaders on improving market access in India to improve U.S.-India
    bilateral trade?

        Answer. U.S.-India bilateral trade has more than doubled in the
    past decade, from $45 billion in 2006 to more than $114 billion in
    2016. If confirmed, I will try to continue to build on that momentum.
    Working with the teams at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative,
    the Commerce Department, the State Department, and others in the
    interagency, I intend to bring all of Mission India's resources and
    expertise to bear on behalf of U.S. companies and their interests. It
    is also important to note that USTR, with participation from the State
    Department and the interagency, led a delegation to New Delhi on
    September 20 to press the India on the need for concrete outcomes at
    the upcoming Trade Policy Forum on October 26.

        Question 14. From your perspective, what are the biggest
    impediments to a fuller economic relationship with India?

        Answer. India embarked upon economic liberalization in 1991, and
    the growth that has followed has been impressive. However, further
    reforms are needed to sustain high growth. We have had a robust
    economic relationship with India for many years and have consistently
    engaged with the Government of India on the most significant
    impediments to a greater economic relationship, including tariff and
    non-tariff barriers to trade, constraints on access for U.S. companies
    to the Indian market, tax and regulatory policies, and insufficient
    intellectual property rights protection and enforcement. Despite these
    challenges, we believe India offers tremendous potential for increased
    trade and investment, and the United States is well positioned to
    partner with India to advance growth and prosperity for both our
    countries in the years ahead.

        Question 15. Please share your views on the importance of the
    sanctity of contracts between U.S. companies and the Indian Government.
    What steps will you take to ensure that contracts between U.S.
    companies and the Indian Government are honored?

        Answer. As a lawyer, I place great value on contract sanctity, as
    it provides the legal certainty that companies need to engage with
    confidence in business transactions. Questioning the sanctity of
    contracts would undermine U.S. and global investor confidence and,
    ultimately, commercial relationships. I would note that Prime Minister
    Modi has made improving India's standing in the World Bank's Ease of
    Doing Business rankings a primary focus. The United States has
    consistently highlighted that the rule of law, dispute settlement, and
    contract enforcement are critical components of a robust, welcoming
    business climate. These are factors that U.S. and international
    companies consider when deciding whether to do business with India, and
    it is in India's interest to recognize and enforce contracts with the
    private sector. If confirmed, I will strongly advocate with the
    Government of India to ensure the sanctity of contracts.

        Question 16. Do you believe it was the right decision to withdraw
    from the Paris Accords? Do you agree with the scientific consensus on
    climate change that humans are an overwhelming cause of global warming?

        Answer. Given my understanding that the scientific literature
    identifies both human activity and natural variability as important
    influences on the climate, I believe there should be a balanced
    approach of being environmentally friendly and reducing emissions,
    while doing so in a manner that does not put at risk American
    prosperity. In announcing the administration's plan to exit the Paris
    Agreement, the President expressed concerns that this Agreement as
    currently written would harm the American economy and disadvantage
    American workers. The President also indicated that he is open to re-
    negotiating the Paris Agreement if the terms are more favorable to the
    United States. Nevertheless, the administration is committed to a clean
    environment, including clean air and clean water, and the United States
    continues to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through innovation and
    technology breakthroughs. The United States stands ready to work with
    other countries, including India, to help them access and use fossil
    fuels more cleanly and efficiently, and help deploy renewable and other
    clean-energy sources, given the importance of energy access and
    security to global peace, security, and prosperity.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                    Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator Jeff Flake

        Question 1. In its 2017 Action Report on International Parental
    Child Abduction (IPCA), the State Department identified 13 countries
    that ``demonstrated a pattern of noncompliance according to the
    criteria established in the law.'' One of the 13 countries identified
    is India, which is not a party to the Hague Convention. Approximately
    66 percent of cases filed with the State Department remain outstanding
    for longer than one year, and the State Department has identified India
    as being ``noncompliant'' with efforts to resolve these kinds of cases
    since 2014. In Arizona, there are at least two constituents with
    outstanding cases involving India.

       How do you plan to address the systemic non-compliance with the
            Indian authorities involved with IPCA cases?
        Answer. I take the issue of parental child abduction very
    seriously. If confirmed, I will encourage the Government of India to
    accede to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of
    International Parental Child Abduction. I and Mission India also will
    advocate with the Government of India for action to resolve pending
    abduction cases. In addition, we will engage civil-society groups and
    left-behind parents, both in India and the United States, on this
    important issue.

        Question 2. What mechanisms will you recommend the State Department
    employ in order to achieve resolutions to the outstanding cases?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the State Department's effort
    to employ a broad range of political and public diplomacy approaches to
    encourage India's accession to the Hague Convention and to resolve
    pending abduction cases. I believe consistent engagement will be needed
    to achieve progress in resolving abduction cases and moving toward a
    systemic resolution to this important issue.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. Child abduction is an issue that affects my
    constituents directly, and is particularly problematic when talking
    about India--a country that has not signed the 1980 Hague Convention,
    and is one of only 13 countries cited as non-compliant by the State
    Department in the 2017 Annual Report on International Child Abduction.
    Per that same report, the largest number of international abduction
    cases of New Jersey children involve India.
        If confirmed, how will you work towards the return of the many
    American children abducted to India? How will you negotiate India's
    accession to the 1980 Hague Convention or another bilateral agreement
    to resolve future child abduction cases between the United States and
    India?

        Answer. I take the issue of parental child abduction very
    seriously. If confirmed, I will encourage the Government of India to
    accede to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of
    International Parental Child Abduction. I and Mission India also will
    advocate with the Government of India for action to resolve pending
    abduction cases. In addition, we will engage civil-society groups and
    left-behind parents, both in India and the United States, on this
    important issue.

        Question 2. If India continues to be non-compliant, what steps
    would you take to hold their government accountable and continue to
    fight for the rights of the American Citizen parents left-behind?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's efforts to
    employ a broad range of political and public diplomacy approaches to
    encourage India's accession to the Hague Convention and to resolve
    pending abduction cases. I believe consistent engagement will be needed
    to achieve progress in resolving abduction cases and moving toward a
    systemic resolution of this important issue.

        Question 3. India remains on the USTR's Priority Watch list in the
    "Special 301" Report in 2017. Prime Minister Modi promised to promote a
    more fair, competitive, and transparent regulatory framework, but we
    have seen little tangible progress.

       What would you do to encourage Prime Minister Modi to improve
            governance structures in India that are affecting our U.S.
            businesses on a daily base? What would you do to raise the
            issue of IP protection and enforcement with the Indian
            Government?

        Answer. Strong protection and enforcement of intellectual property
    rights is essential to incentivizing and compensating American artists,
    inventors, and innovators for their ideas and creativity, and
    stimulating global economic growth. If confirmed, I will actively
    encourage Indian Government officials, in meetings and in public
    forums, to strengthen India's intellectual property rights regime so as
    to bring India's laws, regulations, and enforcement activities in line
    with global best practices. I would note that the U.S. Government
    maintains a robust dialogue with the Indian Government on intellectual
    property rights through the USTR-led Trade Policy Forum, among other
    bilateral mechanisms.

        Question 4. In particular, I have been tracking closely the case of
    New Jersey-based MCT Dairies that mistakenly sent a payment of more
    than $130,000 to Punjab National Bank in India in 2014 and is still
    waiting for their money to be returned.

       What would you do to ensure our U.S. Embassy is representing the
            interest of MCT and similar U.S. companies in India?

        Answer. I appreciate you bringing this matter to my attention. If
    confirmed, I will vigorously support and advocate for U.S. business
    interests abroad, including following up on this specific case.

        Question 5. Since 2005, we have raised these and many other issues
    regarding economic and trade barriers with India at the Trade Policy
    Forum, but we have seen limited results. Do you believe that this
    mechanism has served to advance U.S. economic interests or should it be
    reformed and how?

        Answer. U.S.-India bilateral trade has more than doubled in the
    past decade, from $45 billion in 2006 to more than $114 billion in
    2016. If confirmed, I will try to continue to build on that momentum.
    Working with the teams at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative,
    the Commerce Department, the State Department, and others in the
    interagency, I intend to bring all of Mission India's resources and
    expertise to bear on behalf of U.S. companies and their interests. It
    is also important to note that USTR, with participation from the
    Department and broader interagency, led a delegation to New Delhi on
    September 20 to press the Indian Government on the need for concrete
    outcomes at the upcoming Trade Policy Forum on October 26. I will be in
    a better position to assess the effectiveness of the Trade Policy Forum
    after I observe its meetings and activities.

        Question 6. I am troubled by India's crackdown on foreign aid to
    NGOs on suspicion of engaging in religious conversions. More than
    11,000 nongovernmental organizations have lost their licenses to accept
    foreign funds since Prime Minister Modi took office in 2014, starving
    important NGOs of access to financial resources. Many of these
    charities are American and have been providing vibrant services to the
    people of India for years.

       What can the US do to protect a vibrant civil society in India and
            respect for religious freedom?

        Answer. Under the Indian constitution, protections for freedom of
    conscience and belief are very strong. I believe it is important for
    India to uphold these constitutional safeguards, particularly for
    members of religious minorities, in keeping with the country's
    democratic values and history of pluralism and tolerance. I am aware of
    Indian regulations that have adversely affected the operations of a
    number of foreign-funded NGOs. If confirmed, this is an issue that I
    intend to examine carefully. I believe it is imperative that the
    Government of India protect space for civil society, and that all
    parties work together in a spirit of transparency.
        U.S. officials have frequently engaged with Indian Government and
    Indian civil society, including religious communities, to discuss
    religious freedom issues and to underscore the importance of religious
    tolerance. In December 2016, the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for
    International Religious Freedom visited New Delhi and discussed
    religious freedom, tolerance, and non-discrimination, and opportunities
    for greater U.S.-India collaboration. In addition, Mission India
    regularly organizes outreach events with the full range of minority
    communities and participates in religious holiday celebrations of many
    faiths. If confirmed, I intend to continue this active engagement.

                                   __________

        Responses to An Additional Question for the Record Submitted to
                  Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator John Barrasso

        Question 1. Since 2012, India has imposed an anti-dumping duty on
    imports of soda ash from the United States. The duty was set to expire
    July 3, 2017. Instead, it was extended by the Indian Government until
    July 2, 2018. U.S. domestic soda ash producers have expressed concern
    with the Indian Government's review of the legal justification for
    extending the soda ash duty. Specifically, U.S. soda ash producers have
    been troubled by the Indian Government's actions, which seem aimed at
    extending the duty, contrary to long-standing, standard practices.

       As the U.S. Ambassador to India, do you commit to assisting the
            U.S. soda ash industry to ensure the WTO-consistent application
            of India's anti-dumping laws and practices?

        Answer. If confirmed, one of my priorities as Ambassador will be to
    promote U.S. exports to India and seek to ensure that India complies
    with its WTO obligations. I would work closely with representatives of
    the U.S. Trade Representative, the Department of Commerce, and others
    on these issues. Collectively, we would seek to assist the U.S. soda
    ash industry with regard to its concerns about India's application of
    its anti-dumping laws and practices.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                  Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1. Disputes along the India-Pakistan border represent a
    potential flashpoint for conflict between two nuclear-armed neighbors.
    In April 2017, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley told
    reporters that the Trump administration would seek to "find its place
    to be a part of" efforts to de-escalate India-Pakistan tensions. The
    long-standing U.S. position on this matter has been that such issues
    should be resolved between India and Pakistan. What is your
    understanding of the administration's policy with regard to this issue?

        Answer. My understanding is that the administration's policy is
    consistent with the longstanding position that the United States
    supports bilateral efforts by India and Pakistan to resume dialogue and
    reduce tensions. With regard to Jammu and Kashmir, U.S. policy has not
    changed. The administration supports bilateral dialogue between India
    and Pakistan, with the two countries to determine the pace, scope, and
    character of that dialogue.

        Question 2. I have heard serious concerns from colleges in New
    Hampshire about the sudden and significant decline in student visas
    issued by U.S. consular officers in India beginning in 2016. Several of
    our schools have seen visa denial rates for their accepted students
    from India skyrocket to more than 90 percent. This has had a severe
    economic impact on these schools and their communities, and it damages
    America's reputation abroad. Foreign citizens who study at American
    colleges and universities not only make substantial contributions to
    local American communities, they also gain a broad understanding of our
    country and our people, which they bring back with them to their home
    countries. If confirmed, will you ensure that all visa applications
    received in India are carefully and appropriately adjudicated?

        Answer. My understanding is that approximately 166,000 Indian
    students studied in the United States in 2016. If confirmed, I will
    seek to ensure consistent and objective visa adjudication standards for
    all applications received in Mission India. I agree that foreign
    students contribute to the diversity of our education institutions,
    bring valuable skills and knowledge to our classrooms, and contribute
    to advancements in academic and vocational fields through their work
    and research. I will seek to ensure that those applicants who qualify
    for student visas receive them promptly, consistent with our
    responsibility to administer U.S. immigration law and ensure the
    integrity and security of our country's borders.

                                   __________

         Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                   Kenneth Ian Juster by Senator Jeff Merkley

        Question 1. In light of the current humanitarian crisis involving
    the Burmese Government's campaign of ethnic cleansing against the
    Rohingya, there are disturbing reports that some in the Indian
    Government are trying to expel up to 40,000 Rohingya refugees who have
    lived in India for more than a decade, having fled past campaigns of
    persecution. As Ambassador, would you advocate for India to turn its
    efforts to finding options to normalize the status of the resident,
    law-abiding Rohingya in a manner that would permit them to remain in
    India without fear of expulsion?

        Answer. I am aware of press reports regarding statements allegedly
    made by some Indian Government officials about Rohingya refugees who
    are currently living within India's borders. Senior U.S. Government
    officials have called for respect for the rights of the Rohingya people
    and are working closely with the United Nations, other international
    organizations, and the diplomatic community to try to bring an end to
    the crisis in Burma, which also is having a significant impact on the
    South Asia region. If confirmed, I will closely monitor the Rohingya
    refugee crisis and ensure that our Embassy supports the U.S.
    Government's ongoing commitment to helping the Rohingya people.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                        TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2017 (p.m.)

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Flake, Gardner, Young, Booker, and Coons.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

        Senator Flake. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee will come to order.
        Today the committee will consider the nominations of seven
    experienced career Foreign Service officers to be U.S.
    Ambassadors to African nations. On the first panel, we will get
    to meet the Ambassador nominees to Djibouti, Cameroon, and
    Niger. I was pleased to meet with each of you in my offices
    earlier or a couple of weeks prior. Thank you for making that
    effort of coming in.
        Now, while Djibouti faces high unemployment, poor health,
    and food insecurity concerns, Djibouti has stepped up as a key
    partner on security, countering violent extremism, regional
    stability, and humanitarian efforts. The United States has a
    base in Djibouti. My brother spent several months there just a
    couple of years ago. Small country, big base there. The U.S.
    has a base there. It is located in a country that also hosts a
    Chinese naval base.
        Cameroon is facing domestic political strains and regional
    security threats. It is an important partner in the fight
    against Boko Haram. Cameroon faces serious challenges with
    democracy and governance, as was evidenced this past weekend
    when the government attempted to silence political opposition
    by banning public meetings and travel to the region where
    marches were scheduled to take place.
        Niger faces explosive population growth that could result
    in food shortages. I learned in the visit to my office that I
    guess the birth rate there is close to seven kids per family.
    It almost sounds like where I grew up. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. I will tell my 10 siblings about that. But
    that was a surprise to hear.
        This year, Niger has received about $437 million in an MCC
    compact, with the compact to combat food in security through
    improved agriculture and water access. Although Niger has
    increased security threats on its borders, it has contributed
    to peacekeeping operations in other African countries.
        I want to thank each of you for your time and for sharing
    your expertise. And also a big thank you to family members who
    are here. I hope that you will introduce them.
        With that, I will turn to Senator Booker for any comments
    he has.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

        Senator Booker. I want to thank the chairman of the
    subcommittee for his great work and really valued partnership.
        I really want to thank each of you all for being here today
    and for your years of service to our country.
        I am a little frustrated, as I have expressed already in
    this committee, on the subcommittee as well, about us lacking a
    coherent Africa policy from this administration, especially
    dealing with some of the worst elements of human suffering,
    mass human suffering, on the planet earth right now. Food
    insecurity continues in South Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia. And I
    would want to take a moment right now just to say something
    about one of the countries that is not represented by
    ambassadorial candidates here, but that is South Sudan.
        This subcommittee, with the support and leadership of our
    chairman, held a hearing in July on the conflict and famine in
    South Sudan. I came to the conclusion that despite
    understandable frustration among witnesses and my colleagues
    with the leadership in South Sudan, frustrations borne from
    many legitimate reasons, but the U.S. should maintain its
    leadership and presence there. We can make a difference.
        I understand now there is a difference of opinion on the
    committee about how to move forward with a U.S. Ambassador to
    South Sudan. But I strongly, strongly believe that the U.S.
    should do all it can to ease the horrifying levels of human
    suffering in the country and work with the international
    community in a substantive way to bring about an end to the
    political crisis and to alleviate some of the suffering that is
    going on there that should disturb the conscience of all in
    humanity.
        But it is in that spirit, seeing you all before me, that I
    am eager to ensure that we have solid career service officers
    such as you who are nominated with us today and that you all
    are in place as quickly as possible in the field. You are the
    leadership, in my opinion, that we need. I want to thank you
    all for putting yourself forward. Your careers are
    extraordinary, and the posts that you are being nominated for
    give you the opportunity literally save lives, to literally
    help to influence the justice, and to bring about the values of
    democracy and make them real in people's lives. You are all
    going to countries that are important to many of our strategic
    priorities as a Nation in sub-Saharan Africa. Many are very,
    very tough postings, to countries like Cameroon and Mauritania
    that could either see democratic transitions or could be thrown
    into political crisis.
        If confirmed, many of you all will go to countries that
    represent critical challenges. And I want to say thank you.
    There are questions to be asked, therefore, about how the
    effects and implications of our defense-led foreign policy is
    going to manifest itself in these fragile states. Niger,
    Cameroon, Mauritania face insecurities from violent extremist
    organizations such as Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, Islamic Maghreb,
    and ISIS-West Africa which pose threats to the most vulnerable
    populations in those countries as well as to stability in the
    region.
        However, human rights concerns and abuses by state security
    forces, as well as through media and civil society crackdowns
    that are justified as national security prerogatives, may fuel
    other grievances and continue the cycle of violence.
        We must consider how to balance support for security
    assistance with humanitarian and development aid, especially as
    we see funding for security sector assistance become a
    disproportionate piece of the funding pie in sub-Saharan
    Africa.
        We ask that if you are confirmed, you remain in
    communication with us. It is critical that we have dialogue
    between your posts and our subcommittee. And let us know
    continuously about the challenges you face, what is working
    well, and how we can help you all be effective in your job,
    should you be confirmed.
        I look forward to hearing your testimony today and want to
    thank you again. And I want to say a special thank you as well
    to your family, some of whom are here right now. It is a
    tremendous sacrifice to make not only by individuals who are
    taking on these difficult posts, but as well as the family
    members who empower, their spouses, their parents, their
    brothers or sisters or family members, to do this job. With
    that, I turn it back over to the chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker. With that, we
    will turn to our nominees.
        The first nominee is Ambassador Larry Andre, who is
    currently Ambassador to Mauritania. We met 3 years ago when we
    went through this before. So it is nice to be here for the
    second round. He is an experienced Africa hand serving in
    Tanzania, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Guinea, Cameroon, and
    Nigeria. In addition, he has been director of the Office of the
    Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan and served as senior
    advisor to the Bureau of African Affairs.
        Our second nominee is Peter Barlerin, who most recently
    served as senior bureau official at the State Department's
    Bureau of African Affairs. Postings include Zaire, Madagascar,
    Oslo, Tokyo, Paris, of course, Washington, D.C., and Mali where
    he was Deputy Chief of Mission.
        Our third nominee, Eric Whitaker, most recently was Acting
    Deputy Secretary for East African Affairs. Prior assignments
    have included Chad, Djibouti, Kenya, Sudan, Mozambique, Mali,
    Ethiopia, and Uganda. We are confident that he has a good
    understanding of Africa issues.
        With that, we will recognize Mr. Andre.

    STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY EDWARD ANDRE, OF TEXAS, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
     BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
                   STATES TO THE REPUBLIC OF DJIBOUTI

        Ambassador Andre.  Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker,
    distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to come
    before you as President Trump's nominee to be the next United
    States Ambassador to the Republic of Djibouti. I am grateful to
    the President and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence in
    me. If confirmed, I will work with the committee and the
    Congress to advance U.S. interests.
        I am supported here today by my wife, Ouroukou Andre; by my
    father, Larry Edward Andre, Sr., and by his wife, Claudia
    Andre; my daughter, Ruhiyyih Rahman Andre, could not attend due
    to her responsibilities working for an American firm in the
    renewable energy sector in Kenya. She shares my enthusiasm for
    all that America and Africa can do together.
        Mr. Chairman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Thomas
    Shannon recently presented the administration's four main
    policy goals for Africa at the U.S. Institute for Peace. If
    confirmed, I will lead our team at Embassy Djibouti to further
    those four goals: advancing peace and security, countering the
    scourge of terrorism, increasing economic growth and
    investment, and promoting democracy and good governance.
        Since 2002, Djibouti has hosted the only enduring U.S.
    military installation in Africa, Camp Lemonnier. It is a
    crucial platform for our armed forces to advance security
    throughout the region. Serving as the headquarters of the
    Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, the installation is
    home to over 4,000 American soldiers. Ensuring the long-term
    viability and maximum operational flexibility of this important
    security presence is a key priority. If confirmed, I look
    forward to a highly productive and mutually supportive
    relationship with the commander of the Combined Joint Task
    Force.
        The Government of Djibouti counters terrorism beyond its
    borders by contributing peacekeeping troops to the African
    Union mission in Somalia in its fight against Al Shabaab. We
    help train and equip Djibouti's peacekeepers.
        As for increasing economic growth, the World Economic Forum
    recently listed Djibouti as the sixth fastest-growing economy
    in the world, with a GDP growth rate of 7 percent. Despite the
    small size of its market, this growth and Djibouti's strategic
    position present opportunities for U.S. business. If confirmed,
    I will lead our embassy team to further those opportunities for
    U.S. business.
        Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Djibouti's security
    and prosperity gains can best be protected in the long term by
    strong democratic institutions. To that end, Djiboutians need
    to develop a more competitive, transparent, and accountable
    political system. Next year's legislative elections will give
    us an opportunity to encourage further progress on key
    democratic institutions.
        Having spent my career serving at U.S. embassies in
    dangerous security environments, I feel deeply the
    responsibility of an ambassador toward all resident Americans
    and to all U.S. government employees. If confirmed, I will lead
    our team in Djibouti to take all necessary measures to promote
    the security of American citizens and of U.S. government
    colleagues.
        Finally, I close with a few words about my preparation for
    the great responsibility for which you are considering me. My
    career in Africa began 34 years ago as a fresh-out-of-college
    Peace Corps volunteer working and living in a small village in
    West Africa. As a diplomat since 1990, I have focused my career
    almost exclusively on Africa. As Ambassador to Mauritania since
    September 2014, I lead a highly productive interagency team
    engaged in advancing specific goals. We live up to our motto,
    ``One Mission, One Team.''
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I
    will look to you for counsel and support as I seek to build on
    the achievements of my predecessors and their teams in
    advancing an American-Djiboutian partnership based on shared
    values and shared interests. I welcome any questions you may
    have. Thank you very much for your kind consideration of my
    nomination.
        [Ambassador Andre's prepared statement follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Larry Edward Andre, Jr.

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and distinguished members of
    the committee, I am honored to come before you as President Trump's
    nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of
    Djibouti. I am grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson for
    their confidence in me. If confirmed, I will work with this committee
    and the Congress to advance U.S. interests.
        I am supported here today by my wife, Ouroukou Andre; by my father,
    Larry Edward Andre Sr. and his wife, Claudia Andre; and by my friends
    and colleagues. My daughter, Ruhiyyih Rahman Andre, could not attend
    due to her responsibilities working for an American firm in the
    renewable energy sector in Kenya. She shares my enthusiasm for all that
    Africa and America can accomplish together.
        Mr. Chairman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Thomas Shannon
    recently presented the administration's four main policy goals for
    Africa at the U.S. Institute of Peace. If confirmed, I will lead our
    team at Embassy Djibouti to further those four goals: advancing peace
    and security, countering the scourge of terrorism, increasing economic
    growth and investment, and promoting democracy and good governance.
        Since 2002, Djibouti has hosted the only enduring U.S. military
    installation in Africa, Camp Lemonnier. It is a crucial platform for
    our armed forces to advance security throughout the region. Serving as
    the headquarters of the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, the
    installation is home to over 4,000 American soldiers. Ensuring the
    long-term viability and maximum operational flexibility of this
    important security presence is a key priority. If confirmed, I look
    forward to a highly productive and mutually supportive relationship
    with the Commander of the Combined Joint Task Force.
        The Government of Djibouti counters terrorism beyond its borders by
    contributing peacekeeping troops to the African Union Mission to
    Somalia in its fight against al-Shabaab. We help train and equip
    Djibouti's peacekeepers.
        As for increasing economic growth, the World Economic Forum
    recently listed Djibouti as the sixth fastest-growing economy in the
    world, with a GDP growth rate of seven percent. Despite the small size
    of its market, this growth and Djibouti's strategic position present
    opportunities for U.S. business. If confirmed, I will lead our embassy
    team to further those opportunities.
        Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Djibouti's security and
    prosperity gains can best be protected in the long-term by strong
    democratic institutions. To that end, Djiboutians need to develop a
    more competitive, transparent, and accountable political system. Next
    year's legislative elections will give us an opportunity to encourage
    further progress on key democratic institutions.
        Having spent my career serving at U.S. embassies in dangerous
    security environments, I feel deeply the responsibility of an
    ambassador toward all resident Americans and to all U.S. government
    employees. If confirmed, I will lead our team in Djibouti to take all
    necessary measures to promote the security of American citizens and of
    U.S. government colleagues.
        Finally, I close with a few words about my preparation for the
    great responsibility for which you are considering me. My career in
    Africa began thirty-four years ago as a fresh-out-of-college Peace
    Corps Volunteer living and working in a small village in West Africa.
    As a diplomat since 1990, I have focused my career almost exclusively
    on Africa. As Ambassador to Mauritania since September 2014, I lead a
    highly productive inter-agency team engaged in advancing specific
    goals. We live up to our motto, ``One Mission, One Team.''
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I will
    look to you for counsel and support as I seek to build on the
    achievements of my predecessors and their teams in advancing an
    American-Djiboutian partnership based on shared values and shared
    interests. I welcome any questions you may have. Thank you very much
    for your kind consideration of my nomination.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Barlerin?

    STATEMENT OF PETER HENRY BARLERIN, OF COLORADO, A CAREER MEMBER
       OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
                     STATES TO REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON

        Mr. Barlerin. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, it is an
    honor to appear before you today as nominee to be the next U.S.
    Ambassador to the Republic of Cameroon. I thank President Trump
    and Secretary Tillerson for the trust they have placed in me by
    nominating me for this position.
        Thank you to my wife, Ines Rulis Barlerin, who is with me
    here today, as well as our sons, Sebastien and Maximilian, and
    our daughter, Ines Alexandra, who are here very much in spirit.
        I would also like to recognize my sister Joan and other
    family and friends present in this room and wish my mother and
    mother-in-law could be present here to have lived to see this
    day.
        It has been an honor to have had the opportunity to serve
    in an interim capacity as senior official in the Bureau of
    African Affairs for nearly half a year. The people of the
    Africa Bureau, including these two gentlemen, are an extremely
    hardworking, dedicated, and mutually supportive family. I
    cherish their confidence and friendship.
        Turning to Cameroon, the United States was one of the first
    to establish diplomatic relations with the country in 1960.
    Since 1962, nearly 4,000 Peace Corps volunteers have given
    their all there, and many I have talked to were all transformed
    by the experience.
        Cameroon is known as Africa in miniature because of its
    cultural diversity and because it has nearly all of the many,
    varied geographic features of the entire continent: active
    volcanoes, rainforest jungles teaming with wildlife, broad
    savannahs, and a beautiful coastline.
        Cameroon also faces a number of the same challenges as the
    rest of sub-Saharan Africa in terms of health, security, and
    governance. These challenges are somewhat holding back a
    country that is as full of potential as any other in Africa.
        On health, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
    provides treatment, care, and prevention to Cameroonians
    affected by HIV/AIDS. And as a Global Health Security Agenda
    Phase I country, Cameroon partners with the United States to
    strengthen its ability to prevent, detect, and respond to
    infectious diseases with pandemic potential. Finally, at the UN
    General Assembly last month, USAID Administrator Mark Green
    announced Cameroon would be a new focus country of the
    President's Malaria Initiative.
        On security, the United States is proud to support Cameroon
    and its Lake Chad basin neighbors in their effort to defeat
    Boko Haram and its offshoot, ISIS-West Africa. If confirmed, I
    will work to emphasize that security forces stand a much
    greater chance of defeating the enemy when they respect human
    rights and when they build trust with civilians. I would also
    seek to engage Cameroon to implement the Tripartite Agreement
    with Nigeria and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees on the
    treatment of Nigerian refugees.
        My experience in Africa has taught me that good governance
    is the single most important factor in the success or failure
    of a nation and that the ends do not justify all means. If
    confirmed, I would encourage the government to release peaceful
    protesters detained in connection with the situation in the
    Anglophone regions and urge all parties to commit to dialogue.
    Violence on anybody's part is not the solution.
        In spite of the challenges, Cameroon has achieved
    considerable progress in the brief period since its
    independence. If confirmed, I would seek to help build on that
    progress and would work with the government, the people of
    Cameroon, and our international partners to ensure that
    elections in 2018 are free, fair, and credible, as well as
    peaceful.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for
    this opportunity to appear before you. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with the committee and others in Congress to
    advance U.S. interests in Cameroon. I would be happy to answer
    any questions.
        [Mr. Barlerin's prepared statement follows:]

                   Prepared Statement by Peter Henry Barlerin

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee:
    It is an honor to appear before you today as nominee to be the next
    U.S.Ambassador to the Republic of Cameroon. I thank President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for the trust they have placed in me by nominating
    me for this position.
        Thank you to my wife Ines Rulis Barlerin, who is here with me
    today, as well as our sons Sebastien and Maximilian and our daughter
    Ines Alexandra, who are very much here in spirit. I would also like to
    recognize my sister Joan and other family and friends here today and
    wish my mother and mother-in-law could have lived to see this day.
        It has been an honor to have had the opportunity to serve in an
    interim capacity as senior official in the Bureau of African Affairs
    for nearly half a year. The people of the Africa Bureau are an
    extremely hard-working, dedicated, and mutually supportive family. I
    cherish their confidence and friendship.
        Turning to Cameroon, the United States was one of the first to
    establish diplomatic relations with the country in 1960. Since 1962,
    nearly 4,000 Peace Corps volunteers have given their all there, and the
    many I have talked to were transformed by the experience.
        Cameroon is known as Africa in miniature because of its cultural
    diversity and because it has nearly all of the many, varied geographic
    features of the entire continent--active volcanoes, rainforest jungles
    teeming with wildlife, broad savannahs, and a beautiful coastline.
        Cameroon also faces a number of the same challenges as the rest of
    sub-Saharan Africa, in terms of health, security, and governance. These
    challenges are somewhat holding back a country that is as full of
    potential as any other in Africa. If confirmed, I would do everything I
    can to help the government and the people of Cameroon to realize that
    potential.
        On health, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief provides
    treatment, care, and prevention to the many thousands of Cameroonians
    affected by HIV/AIDS. And as a Global Health Security Agenda Phase I
    country, Cameroon partners with the United States to strengthen its
    ability to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious diseases with
    pandemic potential. Finally, at the UN General Assembly last month,
    USAID Administrator Mark Green announced Cameroon would be a focus
    country of the U.S. President's Malaria Initiative.
        On security, the United States is proud to support Cameroon and its
    Lake Chad basin neighbors in their effort to defeat Boko Haram and its
    off-shoot, ISIS-West Africa. If confirmed, I will work to emphasize
    that their soldiers stand a much greater chance of defeating the enemy
    when they respect human rights, and when they have the trust of
    civilians. I would also seek to engage Cameroon to implement the
    Tripartite Agreement with Nigeria and the UN High Commissioner for
    Refugees on the treatment of Nigerian refugees.
        My experience in Africa has taught me that good governance is the
    single most important factor in the success or failure of a nation, and
    that the ends do not justify all means. If confirmed, I would encourage
    the government to release peaceful protesters detained in connection
    with the situation in the Anglophone regions, and urge all parties to
    commit to dialogue. Violence on anybody's part is not the solution.
        In spite of the challenges, Cameroon has achieved considerable
    progress in the brief period since its independence. If confirmed, I
    would seek to help build on that progress, and I would work with the
    government, the people of Cameroon, and our international partners to
    ensure that elections in 2018 are free, fair, and credible, as well as
    peaceful.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this
    opportunity to appear before you. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with the committee and others in Congress to advance U.S.
    interests in Cameroon. I would be happy to answer any questions.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Whitaker?

    STATEMENT OF ERIC P. WHITAKER, OF ILLINOIS, A CAREER MEMBER OF
         THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
                    STATES TO THE REPUBLIC OF NIGER

        Mr. Whitaker. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and
    distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to appear
    before you as President Trump's nominee for the United States
    Ambassador to the Republic of Niger. I deeply appreciate the
    confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State have
    shown in nominating me for this position. Thank you, members of
    the committee, for your consideration and for your ongoing
    attention to our relations with the nations of Africa. I look
    forward to working with Congress to advance our interests in
    Niger.
        I am supported here today by my brother Craig and regret
    that my late wife, Jonita, who was also a Foreign Service
    officer, is not here as well.
        Mr. Chairman, a former Peace Corps volunteer, I have served
    in 10 or our diplomatic posts in Africa, including Niamey,
    Niger, where I was Deputy Chief of Mission from 2008 to 2010. I
    also was fortunate to have the opportunity to serve as Deputy
    Chief of Mission in N'Djamena, Chad, to the east of Niger, and
    as Political Economic Chief in *Bamako, Mali to the West.
        During my career, I have served throughout several major
    challenges in Africa, including conflicts and military coups,
    refugee crises, droughts and floods, while also witnessing at
    the same time noteworthy economic growth and an expansion of
    democracy. If confirmed, I will draw upon my experience to
    expand the strong partnership between Niger and the United
    States of America as we continue to work together toward our
    mutual goals of combating extremism throughout the region,
    strengthening democratic governance and respect for fundamental
    freedoms, and fostering inclusive economic growth and
    prosperity.
        As a result of Niger's progress in developing democratic
    institutions, it was approved in 2016 for a $437 million
    Millennium Challenge Corporation compact, as you mentioned.
    This focuses on improving water management, agricultural
    productivity, and market access to improve incomes for small-
    scale farmers and pastoralists.
        Despite these achievements, however, Niger still faces
    great challenges. We are committed to supporting Niger's
    efforts to protect its borders, build capacity to interdict
    illicit goods, promote good governance and rule of law, and
    help return security and stability to northern Mali.
        Niger also continues to face serious humanitarian
    challenges, ongoing migration issues, and persistent food
    insecurity.
        Despite its own serious humanitarian situation, however,
    Niger has generously opened its door to over 57,000 Malian and
    106,000 Nigerian refugees. From fiscal year 2013 to date, the
    United States has provided over $225 million in emergency
    assistance to address food insecurity and to address the needs
    of Malian and Nigerian refugees hosted by Niger.
        The United States and Niger partner across a variety of
    programs to address the needs of Niger's most vulnerable
    people. This year USAID Administrator Green announced Niger as
    a new target country for the Global Food Security Strategy, and
    Niger also became a President's Malaria Initiative country.
        In fiscal year 2017, the United States is providing $61.5
    million in bilateral development assistance to Niger for
    programs supporting democracy, governance, health, education,
    nutrition, and agriculture. If confirmed, I will continue to
    encourage the Nigerien Government to implement economic reforms
    and develop the infrastructure needed to attract investment and
    promote trade, particularly with the United States.
        Overall, I will work to ensure that our bilateral
    partnership remains firmly rooted in our shared vision of
    security and prosperity. I will endeavor to assist in
    partnering for a democratic and prosperous Niger that respects
    human rights and provides economic opportunities for all.
        Through this partnership, I look forward to fulfilling my
    priorities of protecting American citizens and advancing U.S.
    national security interests in the Sahel.
        Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I
    would be most pleased to answer questions that you may have.
        [Mr. Whitaker's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Eric P. Whitaker

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Flake, and distinguished members of
    the committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's
    nominee for United States Ambassador to the Republic of Niger. I deeply
    appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of
    State have shown in nominating me for this position. Thank you, members
    of the committee for your consideration, and for your ongoing attention
    to our relations with the nations of Africa. Specifically, I look
    forward to working with Congress to advance our interests in Niger.
        Following service as a Peace Corps Volunteer in the Philippines,
    and thereafter in municipal management in city government in
    California, I began my Foreign Service career as a Vice Consul in
    Seoul, South Korea, twenty-seven years ago. I have since had the great
    fortune to serve in four regions of the world, including as a Leader of
    a Provincial Reconstruction Team in red-zone Baghdad, as a Foreign
    Policy Advisor to Combined Joint Task Force--Horn of Africa in
    Djibouti, and as a Refugee Coordinator in wartime Croatia. I have
    served in ten of our diplomatic posts in Africa, including Niamey,
    Niger, where I was Deputy Chief of Mission and Charge d'Affaires from
    2008 to 2010. I have also served as Deputy Chief of Mission in
    N'Djamena, Chad, to the east of Niger. My most recent assignments have
    been as Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, and as
    Director of East African Affairs in the Department of State's Africa
    Bureau.
        During my career, I have served throughout several major challenges
    in Africa, including conflict and military coups, refugee crises,
    drought and famine, and floods. More importantly, I have also witnessed
    noteworthy growth in democracies and economies driven by human capital.
    If confirmed, I will draw upon my experience to expand the strong
    partnership between Niger and the United States of America as we
    continue to work together towards our mutual goals of combating
    extremism throughout the region, strengthening democratic governance
    and respect for fundamental freedoms, and fostering inclusive economic
    growth and prosperity.
        Despite being one of the poorest countries in the world and its
    having some restrictions in freedom of expression, Niger has made
    significant progress in developing democratic institutions and
    combating corruption. In 2016, as a result of this progress, Niger was
    approved for its first Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact. MCC
    and the Government of Niger signed a $437 million compact focusing on
    improving water management and productivity, and strengthening market
    access, with the objective of improving the income and livelihoods of
    small-scale farmers and pastoralists, who make up the majority of the
    Nigerien population. If confirmed, I will work closely with the
    Nigerien government and civil society to continue this momentum for
    reform by promoting responsive democratic institutions, reliable
    government services, and the development of critical infrastructure.
        Despite these achievements, Niger still faces great challenges. The
    collapse of security in southern Libya and conflict in Mali and
    northeast Nigeria have placed Niger at a dangerous crossroads, as
    extremist groups and international criminal networks exploit porous
    borders and long-used smuggling routes to move people, weapons, and
    other contraband across the Sahel. Niger has also been a victim of
    terrorism from its border along the Lake Chad basin, where roughly 40
    women and children were abducted in July by Boko Haram.
        The United States and Niger share the common goal of countering
    terrorism and denying violent extremism an environment in which to take
    root. We are committed to supporting Niger's efforts to protect its
    borders, build capacity to interdict illicit goods, promote good
    governance and rule of law, and help return security and stability to
    northern Mali.
        Niger has invested its limited resources in combating the scourge
    of extremism, and has been a leader in the international response to
    al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), both by providing critical
    support for the peaceful political process and committing a battalion
    of ground troops to the African-led International Support Mission to
    Mali (AFISMA) and to the follow-on U.N. Multidimensional Stabilization
    Mission in Mali (MINUSMA). The United States has supported these troops
    by providing training, equipment, and logistical support.
        Niger is also a strong partner in our Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism
    Partnership (TSCTP), through which we are working together to increase
    security sector capacity, address underlying causes of radicalization,
    and amplify the voices of moderate leaders to positively influence
    populations potentially vulnerable to radicalization. For tactical and
    institutional capacity building, we are working to improve crisis
    response capabilities (SWAT) for Nigerien law enforcement. Current
    initiatives also work to build community resilience in the most
    vulnerable regions by working with local security actors to develop and
    exercise crisis response plans. In response to the growing threat by
    Boko Haram in 2015, the United States provided significant assistance,
    including armored personnel vehicles and logistical support. We also
    train and support our Ministry of Justice counterparts as they work to
    bring terrorism suspects to trial.
        If confirmed, I will seek to advance our already-strong security
    cooperation to further our shared goal of countering terrorism in the
    region and addressing the underlying drivers that fuel insecurity.
        On top of great security threats, Niger also continues to face
    serious humanitarian challenges, irregular migration issues, and
    persistent food insecurity. As threats spill over from neighboring Mali
    and Nigeria, markets have been disrupted and significant numbers of
    people have been displaced, sometimes hurting Nigerien livelihoods.
    Boko Haram and ISIS-West Africa continue to have a significant impact
    on the Lake Chad Basin, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in all
    four countries, including Niger. Yet, despite its own serious
    humanitarian situation, Niger has generously opened its doors to over
    57,000 Malian refugees and 106,000 Nigerian refugees. Economic and
    vulnerable migrants from West and Central Africa continue to use Niger
    as a transit country to Europe via Libya, in an effort to reach Europe.
    Furthermore, from Fiscal Year 2013 to date, the United States has
    provided over $225 million in emergency assistance to address food
    insecurity and the needs of Malian and Nigerian refugees.
        Recurrent shocks, including drought, flooding, and food price
    increases, have exacerbated deep poverty and recently resulted in food
    insecurity for over 1.8 million people. The United States and Niger
    partner across a variety of programs to address the needs of Niger's
    most vulnerable people. This year, USAID Administrator Green announced
    Niger as one of the 12 new target countries for the Global Food
    Security Strategy.
        We also coordinate with the Nigerien government to support its
    innovative programs to address food security, including the "3N
    Initiative" (Nigeriens Nourishing Nigeriens) that empowers local
    communities to work together to improve agricultural productivity.
    Thanks to this initiative, Niger has made significant progress in its
    fight against land degradation and reduced the proportion of people
    suffering from hunger by 50 per cent since 2011. For its inclusive
    design as well as its significant achievements, the 3N Initiative was
    recently recognized with the 2017 Future Policy Bronze Award, awarded
    by the World Future Council in partnership with the U.N. Convention to
    Combat Desertification. If confirmed, I look forward to supporting
    these efforts, leveraging these investments to promote U.S. interests,
    and exploring new areas of cooperation.
        In addition to addressing food insecurity, Niger must improve
    health indicators that place Niger at the bottom of most measures for
    wellbeing. It must generate sustainable economic growth to tackle high
    poverty rates. Rapid demographic growth driven by the highest fertility
    rate in the world threatens to overwhelm the government's ambitious
    plans for development. To address health indicators, USAID has selected
    Niger to be a Presidential Malaria Initiative country, with the aim to
    substantially reduce malaria's impact as the leading cause for death
    for children under the age of 5. In Fiscal Year 2017, the U.S. is
    providing $61.5 million in bilateral development- focused assistance to
    Niger for programs supporting democracy, governance, health and
    nutrition, and agriculture.
        To expand economic opportunity, Niger will need to diversify the
    economy, invest in infrastructure, and improve education. If confirmed,
    I will continue to encourage the Nigerien government to implement the
    economic reforms needed to attract investment and promote trade. I will
    also seek to build new relationships between Nigerien and American
    companies to create opportunities for trade that benefit both our
    countries.
        If confirmed, I will work to ensure that our bilateral relationship
    remains firmly rooted in our shared vision of security and prosperity.
    I will endeavor to assist in partnering for a democratic and prosperous
    Niger that respects human rights and provides economic opportunities
    for all. Through this partnership, I look forward to fulfilling my
    priorities of protecting American citizens and interests, advancing
    U.S. national security interests in the Sahel, and expanding mutual
    understanding between our citizens.
        Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I would be
    pleased to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you, all of you. Again, thank you to
    your family for being here as well.
        Mr. Andre, with regard to Djibouti, this is the first
    country where the United States and China both have military
    bases. What kind of challenges does that present? And how will
    that go?
        Ambassador Andre.  Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I note that General Waldhauser, the Commander of AFRICOM,
    recently pointed out that China's presence presents both
    opportunities and challenges. The challenge I will mention
    first, which is to safeguard with the Djiboutian authorities
    our basic rights, which have always operated in a manner that
    gives us full flexibility and maximum effectiveness. From all I
    have heard in my briefings, from all I have seen, the
    Djiboutian Government is motivated for its own purposes to see
    that that maximum effectiveness for Camp Lemonnier remains in
    place. So, of course, we will be on high alert to see if there
    is any attempt to curtail our base rights, but everything I
    have seen indicates that the Djiboutians would not want to go
    there.
        Now, General Waldhauser also mentioned opportunity. We do
    have shared interests, for example, in anti-piracy. Anti-piracy
    explains the presence of some of the other militaries there.
    About 10 percent of world trade, 8 percent of petroleum
    products move through the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, 18 miles long.
    It is a two-lane highway. So it really forces the traffic
    through a narrow point, and that is exactly where Djibouti is
    found with Yemen on the other side. And where we have shared
    interests, that is opportunity. Where not, we are on very much
    high alert.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        With regard to Cameroon, Mr. Barlerin, U.S. forces have
    trained with Cameroon security forces. There have been some
    alleged abuses in the security forces there. How are we dealing
    with that?
        Mr. Barlerin. Thank you, Senator.
        I have read the Amnesty International report carefully. And
    the embassy has interacted with the government at the highest
    levels to express concerns about alleged human rights
    violations. In the report, it also mentions that there was some
    awareness on the part of our forces far north of Cameroon. The
    commander of the Special Operations Command forward conducted
    an initial investigation into those allegations, did not find
    anything. General Waldhauser, the Commander of AFRICOM, has
    initiated a follow-on investigation led by a general officer,
    and that investigation is underway. Thus far, we have seen no
    evidence that any of our troops were aware of any violations of
    the Law of Armed Conflict.
        As you know, we are prohibited from training or working
    with any units that have been found to be guilty of--or
    suspected of committing gross violations of human rights, sir.
        Senator Flake. How important is our relationship with
    Cameroon with regard to the fight against Boko Haram?
        Mr. Barlerin. I would say it is extremely important.
    Cameroon pays a heavy price. They have approximately 2,000
    troops with the multinational joint task force, with other Lake
    Chad Basin countries, and they have another 2,000 troops with
    this rapid intervention battalion in the far north fighting.
    And we do training and equipping. We build the capacity of the
    Cameroonian security forces, not just the military but also the
    police and the judiciary. And we have a full range of support
    for their effort to fight Boko Haram and ISIS-West Africa.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Whitaker, you mentioned--obviously, there is a lot of
    security cooperation that we have in Niger, building a base
    there. You mentioned in your testimony the opportunity for more
    commercial engagement or trade. In what sectors is that
    possible?
        Mr. Whitaker. Regrettably, Mr. Chairman, the level of trade
    and investment with Niger is coming from quite a low base.
        Senator Flake. So anything is an improvement.
        Mr. Whitaker. Anything is an improvement and golden. And we
    look forward to working with representatives of the few
    American firms that do have agents and distributors present.
    That would include hosting them perhaps for quarterly business
    receptions to try to help them to do better business and to
    help them to work with Nigerien counterparts to improve the
    climate for trade. There may also be spin-offs with the MCC
    compact. There might be opportunities for U.S. firms to bid on
    infrastructure projects or American NGOs to bid on some of the
    community-level projects associated with that. So I look
    forward to working with them and doing consultations with the
    Department of Commerce, the Corporate Center for Africa, and
    others to try to improve the number of opportunities that we
    have in Niger.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. With your permission, I would like to defer
    my time for now to Senator Coons.
        Senator Flake. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Flake. Thank you,
    Ranking Member Booker. I appreciate your accommodating my
    schedule.
        Mr. Whitaker, good to see you again. Good to be with you,
    Mr. Barlerin and Mr. Andre. Thank you for your willingness to
    serve in three different countries on a continent where I think
    the U.S.-Africa relationship is critical and where developments
    in terms of the balance between security and economic
    partnership and cooperation, human rights, and the promotion of
    democracy is more important really than it has ever been.
        Our ongoing humanitarian assistance in countries from South
    Sudan to Nigeria to Somalia continues to save lives, and our
    aid and support of democracy has helped ensure relatively
    peaceful democratic transfers of power in countries like Ghana
    and The Gambia.
        Initiatives like Power Africa, the Young African Leaders
    Initiative, Feed the Future, PEPFAR, AGOA, all increase ties
    between the United States and Africans while promoting trade
    and investment, and are all examples of why the U.S.-Africa
    relationship has been and must continue to be bipartisan. These
    are initiatives across Republican and Democratic
    administrations, and we have been blessed by the engagement of
    Republican and Democrat leaders here in the Senate.
        So let me ask just a few quick questions, if I might, in
    particular about the violence in Cameroon and news reports
    today that something on the order of 17 protesters have been
    killed.
        As the co-chair of the Senate Human Rights Caucus, I am
    deeply concerned about the government's crackdown on human
    rights and civil liberties, especially in the Anglophone
    portions of Cameroon. Some of the reports from yesterday also
    report that there are dozens more peaceful protesters who have
    been arrested. I know you referenced this in your opening
    remarks.
        Do you intend to continue the longstanding U.S. policy of
    supporting the rule of law, supporting self-expression and free
    speech? And how will you use your role, if confirmed, to
    strengthen the U.S.-Cameroon relationship while also speaking
    for our core values?
        Mr. Barlerin. Thank you, Senator.
        Yes, I will uphold our current policy of strengthening rule
    of law in Cameroon. As you know, the Anglophone regions--the
    situation started back in October or November of last year when
    lawyers and teachers protesting what they perceived to be
    unfair treatment on the part of the Francophone majority and
    the government in Yaounde staged stay-at-home strikes. And the
    government responded with force and shut down the Internet and
    arrested a number of leaders, as well as peaceful protesters.
    Partly in response to efforts from the international community,
    including the United States, the UN and civil society
    organizations, they restored the Internet after 93 days of it
    being closed down.
        These demonstrations on Reunification Day that took place
    on Sunday--we deplore the loss of life. And we have expressed
    to the government that disproportionate use of force in these
    kinds of situations is not acceptable. And if confirmed,
    Senator, I promise you that I will carry that message forward.
        We have, at the same time, called on all sides to come to
    dialogue, to engage in a credible dialogue because these are
    longstanding issues, Senator, and they cannot be resolved
    overnight and certainly they cannot be resolved with violence.
        Senator Coons. Thank you.
        In all three of the countries to which you have been
    nominated to serve as Ambassadors, there is a delicate balance
    between complex security situations, supporting and partnering
    effectively with regimes that have at times been our important
    partners in counterterrorism work or in regional stability
    while also advocating for openness for democracy, for human
    rights. The practice of the regime in Cameroon of shutting off
    the Internet when things are said that they do not like is the
    sort of thing we cannot tolerate. But by the same token, in the
    fight against Boko Haram or in the fight against regional
    sources of instability, whether in the Horn or in the Sahel, we
    need to sustain our partnerships.
        If I could just ask briefly of all three of you, how will
    you balance the need to promote America's national security
    interests with America's core values of democracy, human
    rights, rule of law? If you might, Mr. Whitaker.
        Mr. Whitaker. Thank you, Senator.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with my country
    team to address the equilibrium of which you speak. I am
    delighted that Niger has qualified for an MCC compact. That
    itself says it has met a number of criteria on the so-called
    scorecard. It also tells us that they have passed the bar on
    corruption, which is a necessary precondition to that. I look
    forward to this as helping with governance and the agricultural
    sector where 83 percent of the country works. I think policy
    reforms that spin off that will be helpful.
        I am also delighted that the USAID program is wrapping up
    and that Congress has supported additional funding, $61.5
    million this fiscal year just ending. It is an increase from
    before, of which $5 million is for democracy and governance
    programming alone from $2 million the year before, $1 million
    the year before that. So we are in a good position in terms of
    an increase in resources. We will, of course, need to ensure
    that they are being used with accountability.
        But I look forward to working with our team to ensure that
    these things help improve health, education, the role of civil
    society in a democracy, respect for human rights. I am also
    pleased that we have a Department of Justice resident legal
    advisor working with law enforcement and the judiciary, as well
    as a regional security office that works with law enforcement
    training that includes respect for human rights.
        Furthermore, we have an active public diplomacy program
    that amplifies our message both private and public. So I look
    forward to helping to ensure that that balance is there, and I
    do take that very seriously. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Whitaker.
        I am well beyond my time, so I will leave it to the
    discretion of the chair whether to invite the other two
    nominees to finish or to move on.
        Senator Flake. Finish, briefly I am sure. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Barlerin. I will be brief. I would say that I have
    always stressed in my career to African government counterparts
    that in the long run, the ends and the means have to converge
    and that in the long run, protecting human rights and the
    fundamental freedoms of association and expression are the best
    way to ensure the stability of the country. And I will continue
    to do that in Cameroon.
        As you know, Senator, Cameroon is going to be facing
    elections in the fall of next year, and so I plan, if
    confirmed, to put together a good program with the Bureau of
    Democracy Rights and Labor, our Bureau of Conflict and
    Stabilization Operations, Africa Bureau, and the embassy team
    to support elections that are free, fair, and credible and
    peaceful.
        Senator Coons. You will have a busy year. [Laughter.]
        Ambassador Andre.  Senator, that is a question that I have
    considered a lot in my career. What I saw in wartime Sierra
    Leone was how a total lack of security led to outrageous human
    rights violations. What I saw in Kenya during the December 2007
    election and the violent aftermath was a democratic deficit
    leading to widespread violence and undermining security. So
    human rights and security are complementary. They are both
    required.
        What I have done in Mauritania for the last 3 years is,
    when necessary, speaking out publicly and at other times making
    specific points privately, but as a friend, as the U.S. is a
    friend of that country, explaining how we see the necessity of
    maintaining both security and progress on human rights.
        Djibouti will have legislative elections in 2018. That will
    be an opportunity to make progress in establishing democratic
    institutions. The American people through USAID are funding a
    $3 million program to develop civil society. Djibouti has an
    exceptionally weak civil society, and that is a necessary
    component of a robust democratic establishment.
        In the end, all of the security and economic gains that
    Djibouti has achieved can only be guaranteed over the long run
    by democratic institutions. And that is the message that I will
    be making to the Djiboutians.
        Senator Coons. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. You give an inch to Coons and he takes 4
    extra minutes. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. I was going to warn you when you gave that,
    you will never get it back.
        Senator Booker. No. I really am grateful for not only the
    chairman of this committee, but Senator Coons has been a friend
    who was the ranking member before me on this committee and has
    done an extraordinary job and continues to do in his
    leadership.
        I failed to say in my introductory remarks, Mr. Whitaker,
    that I am sorry we did not get a chance to meet and discuss
    this in person, but I understand that your wife, who was also a
    State Department Foreign Service officer, passed away in the
    field while you were here in D.C. And I just want to express
    not only my condolences but my deep appreciation, reverence,
    and honor that this country should extend to your wife. And I
    am sure my colleagues join me in that sentiment. Thank you very
    much.
        So Senator Coons really hit on a tension that I have been
    struggling with which, Ambassador Andre, you spoke to, which is
    the tension between human rights and humanitarian concerns,
    democratic principles and ideals, and our security concerns.
    And really since 9/11, 2 decades, we have been ramping up our
    spending on security concerns in the nations that you all
    represent. And my concern is that the democratic stability of
    these countries has not improved. One would argue in many cases
    democracy continues to erode or is on a precipice, as we see in
    Cameroon, for example, of potential disastrous concerns.
    Senator Coons has been yanking my ear over the last 24 hours or
    so about the challenges in Cameroon alone. And that is sort of
    what I worry about is that we are, as the State Department's
    posture now, especially with the administration's budget
    request, investing less in building civil society, investing
    less in the kind of State Department activities that provide
    security.
        There was a new UNDP study based on interviews with more
    than 500 recruits of violent extremism that found that over 70
    percent of the cases of government action, including the
    killing or arrests of a family member or friend, was the
    tipping point that prompted them to an extremist organization.
    I have listened to some of my more senior colleagues in open
    committee discuss what we are seeing in Yemen right now and our
    participation in many ways with the Saudis in what has been--I
    should not say our participation--what the Saudis are doing in
    indiscriminate bombing in many ways and creating a more
    unstable environment for future acts of terrorism or future
    recruits for terrorist organizations. And so I really do worry
    about the abuses right now that some of the security forces are
    engaging in against civilians and how they can be a powerful
    recruitment tool for terrorist organizations, which is an
    important consideration as the executive branch thinks about
    continuing security assistance for countries like Cameroon
    whose military has been implicated in torture.
        And so I want to ask--maybe, Mr. Barlerin, we will begin
    with you--in your position what can we be doing to ensure that
    U.S. security assistance does not enable much of this
    reprehensible abusive behavior by partner militaries who are in
    many ways fueling the long-term instability of their country,
    as well as the problems that we are trying to prevent. And what
    I am worried about is how the U.S. seems to be in some cases,
    as we have seen in Cameroon--you mentioned that you read the
    Amnesty International report. In some ways, it is casting a
    shadow over the American presence in Cameroon as well.
        Mr. Barlerin. Thank you, Senator.
        I cannot give you a perfect answer and I will not purport
    to try. But what I will promise you is that I will carry
    forward the same spirit, the same concerns, the same message
    that you have, if confirmed, and try my best to impress upon
    Cameroonian interlocutors the importance of respect for human
    rights and basic freedoms, fundamental freedoms.
        I will say that the Leahy amendment is like a vaccine for
    us because it prevents us from being mixed up with military
    units that are engaged with gross violations of human rights.
    So that has been, I think, a very helpful thing for us. And
    AFRICOM's investigations into the allegations of Amnesty
    International, I hope and I am confident, will clear any idea
    that the U.S. is somehow involved with something that is not
    correct.
        I would also like to just note that we are doing a lot more
    in the far north of Cameroon. Cameroon is host to a huge number
    of refugees, about 225,000 from the Central African Republic,
    about 93,000 from Nigeria. For a population that size of a
    fairly small economy, that is the equivalent of having about 8-
    plus million refugees in the United States of America in an
    economy that is facing serious challenges, as you mentioned.
        The USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives is working in
    the far north to build local capacity of opinion-makers, of
    expressing moderate messaging, of helping youth to resolve
    their differences in a peaceable manner. And then we provide a
    great deal of assistance. We are the leading assistance country
    for humanitarian assistance in that area to help the people of
    the far north of Cameroon get through this difficult time. So
    the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration provides a
    little over $13 million this year. USAID's Food for Peace
    provides about $18 million to $20 million of feeding. And then
    USAID's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance provides
    psychosocial support and other support for these communities.
        But let me stress that Cameroon has been and I hope will
    continue to be a good and a strong partner with us in facing
    these very serious challenges.
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much. And again, the
    dialogue between us is so important, especially as we set the
    budget for the State Department. And some of these
    organizations that you rightfully mentioned and gave highlight
    to--their resource needs is something that is important to help
    form our understanding of where we should be making
    investments.
        I am very conscious of another panel but, Mr. Whitaker, I
    do want to just press you a little bit, and then I will end and
    let Ambassador Andre escape my questioning. [Laughter.]
        Senator Booker. Sorry, Mr. Whitaker. Your brother is
    filming this. I want to give you a chance to--[Laughter.]
        Senator Booker.--really look good on camera.
        But Niger has got a really tough neighborhood, obviously,
    when it comes to Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, and then unrest in Mali
    and Libya. And so the intelligence and reconnaissance
    capabilities in the region are really--it is such an important
    mission.
        But there was a CNN article that described Agadez as
    becoming a tinderbox packed with migrants willing to risk
    everything, those who have spent all they had and failed to
    make it to Europe, and an unemployed local population that is
    rapidly running out of patience. And so AFRICOM seems to
    recognize this. An official was noting--and I quote that
    official saying the stability is absolutely fragile. There is a
    youth bulge we have here, the median age being less than 15 for
    more than half the population, literacy estimated to be at 15
    percent, and the humanitarian conditions very poor is going to
    affect how we conduct business.
        And so this is why I am concerned again about us expending
    over $100 million in our military base there. U.S. foreign
    assistance, however, towards health, agriculture, good
    governance, and other programs totaled less than $37 million in
    fiscal year 2016. And the fiscal year 2018 request from the
    administration was $1.6 million, given all that was going on.
        And so I am just curious for you entering again this
    extraordinary challenge and the extraordinary strategic
    importance of what is going on there--not only is it
    counterterrorism but preventing real humanitarian crises of the
    future. Are you concerned about the over-investment in the
    military or maybe it is not an over-investment in the military
    but not enough of an investment when it comes to things to
    stabilize the community, to empower locals to not only have the
    basic needs but also to help to stabilize democratic ideals? I
    am just wondering if you could give me any thoughts, as someone
    who has to make these policy decisions in cooperation with my
    colleagues about our investments or at least the mismatch that
    I seem to see about our investments in an important nation.
        Mr. Whitaker. Thank you, Senator. I take your question very
    seriously in particular because I have served in Niamey before
    and in neighboring Mali and Chad. And they all face the scourge
    of terrorism.
        We are trying to help Niger as a partner by training and
    equipping their military, helping to build an airfield near
    Agadez so they can conduct surveillance over their borders and
    protect from gun runners, movement of foreign fighters from
    country to country, and other smuggling. And this is important
    to their own security, but it is also important that the
    region, through a variety of initiatives, attack regional
    issues jointly. We are trying to help develop that capacity.
    This also includes our training of Nigerien military for the
    MINUSMA next door in Mali where they have a battalion and we
    train a battalion each year. So they are well prepared to carry
    out the responsibilities.
        I understand the importance of balance. That is why I am
    excited about the Millennium Challenge Corporation compact
    which will help with agricultural productivity because that is
    where people work is in the agricultural sector. Work in that
    area I think will help fight terrorism and any lure that
    violent extremism might have.
        The AID programs are going up. We are seeing an increase in
    funding, including in health and education, and I think these
    will support governance and give people hope for tomorrow.
        So I see we are doing a number of things. It may not be
    enough. I am certainly open to suggestions, which I will take
    in my consultations. I will be consulting with AFRICOM as well
    and getting a better handle on their programs and trying to
    ensure we have some greater balance in our relationship. So I
    look forward to working with my country team, if confirmed, to
    ensure that this takes place.
        I do share your concerns, sir.
        Senator Booker. All right.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker and Senator Coons, it is nice to have people
    so knowledgeable on the subject. We have worked on this issue
    for a while. I was with Senator Coons and traveled with him. I
    am glad that he spent some time here, as well as the interests
    that Senator Booker shows and the experience that he has.
        So with the thanks of the committee, I appreciate you
    testifying, and we will now call the second panel up and we
    will start in about 2 minutes, if that is okay. [Pause.]
        Senator Flake. That was fast. Thank you so much. We will
    now start with the second panel.
        The first nominee, Michael Dodman, who most recently was
    Executive Assistant to the Under Secretary for Economic Growth,
    Energy and the Environment. He served as counsel general in
    Karachi, as well as he was the economic officer to the European
    Union in Baghdad as well.
        Our second nominee, Nina Fite, most recently was Principal
    Officer in the U.S. consulate in Montreal. She also has served
    as Principal Officer in our consulate in Pakistan and served a
    previous tour in Angola, among other assignments.
        Our third nominee, Daniel Foote, most recently was Deputy
    Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of International Narcotics
    and Law Enforcement Affairs at State. He has been deputy chief
    of mission in both Santo Domingo and Port au Prince.
        Our fourth nominee, David Reimer, who most recently was
    Director for West African Affairs, also has been Director for
    East African Affairs and deputy chief of mission as well.
        So thank you so much. And with that, we will recognize Mr.
    Dodman.

    STATEMENT OF MICHAEL JAMES DODMAN, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
     BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
        STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF MAURITANIA

        Mr. Dodman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking
    Member. I am honored to come before you as President Trump's
    nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Islamic Republic
    of Mauritania. I am grateful to the President and Secretary
    Tillerson for their confidence.
        I am thrilled to be joined today by my wife Joan. Joan and
    I first met as freshman at Georgetown, and she has been an
    inspiration and support to me ever since then.
        One of our four children----
        Senator Booker. Family members have to raise their hand. We
    got to know who you are talking about here. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Dodman [continuing]. Thank you. And since Senator
    Booker has jumped in, I will also say she is a proud daughter
    of New Jersey.
        Senator Booker. You did not tell me. I recognize a Jersey
    girl. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Dodman. Thank you.
        Our daughter Claire, the youngest of our four kids, is also
    here. Our other three children and my parents are here in
    spirit. But I can just say for all of us, for the six of us,
    the 30 years that we have spent in the Foreign Service as a
    family has been the greatest thrill and honor for all of us to
    represent our country abroad.
        Mr. Chairman, Mauritania is a strong U.S. partner located
    at the crossroads of the Maghreb and the Sahel. The country's
    success and stability are important to the United States, and
    that is why we so emphatically support Mauritanians' efforts to
    strengthen their democratic institutions, to end slavery and
    its vestiges, and to build a secure, united, and prosperous
    society.
        Like its neighbors, Mauritania faces security threats from
    Al Qaeda and similar extremist groups. Thankfully, Mauritania
    has not experienced a terror attack on its soil since 2011. The
    country's leadership often cites U.S. training and assistance
    as a prime factor for this achievement.
        Today, Mauritania's contributions to regional security
    include their hosting in Nouakchott the secretariat of the G5
    Sahel organization. If confirmed, I look forward to
    strengthening our security cooperation with Mauritania and also
    with the G5 Sahel.
        Mauritania is preparing for presidential elections in 2019.
    Many Mauritanians hope to distance their nation from a history
    of autocratic governance. Impartial, transparent, and
    accountable governance is the best means to strengthen
    Mauritania's national unity and to promote a prosperous future.
        Mauritania has struggled to achieve a national identity
    that reflects its ethnic and racial diversity. If confirmed, I
    will support Mauritanians in this important effort, including
    pressing for the full implementation of laws and policies that
    guarantee freedom from slavery for all Mauritanians and that
    hold anyone accountable who infringes on the rights of others.
        Like many of my colleagues before you here today, the
    primary focus of my career has been economic diplomacy, and
    this is an area where I see significant opportunities in
    Mauritania. Bilateral commercial relations are growing,
    including with an American firm's discovery of significant
    offshore gas deposits. I am glad that we also have a new
    American business forum recently established in Nouakchott. So
    if confirmed, I look forward to being very active in this area.
        My recent tours have included some of our toughest Foreign
    Service posts, in particular my last assignment overseas
    running our consulate in Karachi. I can assure you, Mr.
    Chairman, that I take very seriously a chief of mission's
    responsibility to ensure the safety and security of all
    employees and of all resident Americans.
        Mr. Chairman, I am thrilled to be participating in this
    hearing today with friends and colleagues who represent the
    very best of the Foreign Service. I am especially grateful to
    Ambassador Larry Andre, whose seat I appear to have taken, for
    his support and guidance throughout this process. If confirmed,
    I look forward to building on the many achievements of
    Ambassador Andre and the strong team at Embassy Nouakchott to
    further advance an American-Mauritanian partnership based on
    shared values and shared interests.
        Thank you very much for your consideration. I look forward
    to any questions you may have.
        [Mr. Dodman's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Michael J. Dodman

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and distinguished members of
    the committee, I am honored to come before you as President Trump's
    nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the Islamic Republic
    of Mauritania. I am grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson
    for their confidence in me.
        I am joined here today by my wife Joan and our daughter Claire. For
    us, the Foreign Service has been very much of a family venture, and all
    of us are looking forward to the challenges and opportunities that this
    nomination presents.
        Mauritania is a strong U.S. partner in Africa, strategically
    located at the crossroads of the Maghreb and the Sahel. Mauritania's
    success and long-term stability are important to the United States.
    That is why we emphatically support the Mauritanian Government,
    political parties, and civil society in their efforts to strengthen the
    country's democratic institutions, end slavery and its vestiges, and
    build a secure, united, prosperous, and free society.
        Mauritania suffered vicious terrorist attacks from al-Qaida in the
    Islamic Maghreb starting in 2005. While the region continues to face
    serious threats from al-Qaida and similar groups, Mauritania has not
    experienced a terrorist attack on its soil since 2011. Mauritania's
    civilian and military leaders often cite our security partnership as a
    prime factor in this success, recognizing that U.S. training and
    assistance have boosted the capacity of Mauritanian security forces.
        Mauritania is contributing to efforts to confront regional security
    threats, including by hosting, in Nouakchott, the secretariat of the G5
    Sahel regional organization that brings together Mauritania, Mali,
    Burkina Faso, Niger, and Chad to address trans-border threats. If
    confirmed, I look forward to seeking ways to further strengthen our
    security cooperation with Mauritania, and through them with the broader
    region.
        Mauritania supports its neighbor, Mali, as that country also
    confronts violent extremism. Mauritania is supporting regional
    stability further by deploying peacekeepers to the U.N. Mission in the
    Central African Republic, to whom the United States provides training
    support. Mauritania hosts around 52,000 refugees from Mali. The United
    States has provided $48 million in humanitarian assistance to
    Mauritania over the last five years to address food and emergency needs
    of Malian refugees.
        Mauritania is preparing for its next presidential election in 2019.
    Many Mauritanians seek to distance their nation from a history of
    autocratic governance, and the surest path to this is a commitment to
    democracy, in the hands of a well-informed public who enjoy equal
    rights and equal recourse to the law. Impartial, transparent, and
    accountable governance is the best means to strengthen Mauritania's
    national unity to promote a prosperous future.
        Mauritania has struggled to achieve a national identity that fully
    reflects its cultural, ethnic, and racial diversity. If confirmed, I
    will work to support Mauritanians in this important effort, and that
    includes pressing for the implementation of laws and policies that
    guarantee freedom from slavery for all Mauritanians and that hold
    accountable any individuals who infringe on the rights of others.
        The focus of my three decades of work as an American diplomat has
    been economic diplomacy. I take great pride in the contributions I have
    made to build bilateral economic ties and strengthen economic
    development in post-communist Eastern Europe and in Turkey, Iraq, and
    Pakistan. This is an area where I see significant opportunities in
    Mauritania. Bilateral commercial relations have expanded dramatically
    in recent years, including with the discovery of sizeable offshore
    natural gas resources by an American firm. A new American business
    forum has just been established in Nouakchott. If confirmed, I look
    forward to expanding our commercial and economic partnership in a
    manner that will provide increased economic opportunities for all of
    Mauritania's citizens, while also supporting America's national
    interests.
        My recent assignments have included some of our toughest Foreign
    Service posts, notably my last overseas assignment leading our
    consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. I take very seriously the
    responsibility of a Chief of Mission to protect the security and safety
    of all resident Americans and of all U.S. Government employees.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it has been my great
    privilege and honor to represent the United States over the past thirty
    years, and to advance the interests of the American people in every
    country in which I have worked. If confirmed, I look forward to
    building on the achievements of Ambassador Larry Andre and his team and
    further advancing an American-Mauritanian partnership based on shared
    values and shared interests.
        I welcome any questions you may have. Thank you for your kind
    consideration of my nomination.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Ms. Fite?

    STATEMENT OF NINA MARIA FITE, OF PENNSYLVANIA, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
     BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
              STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF ANGOLA

        Ms. Fite. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, I am honored
    to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Angola. I
    am grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson for the
    confidence and trust they have placed in me with this
    nomination.
        If confirmed, I will devote myself to advancing U.S.
    interests and values, as I have throughout my 27-year career in
    the Foreign Service. I will work closely with this committee
    and other Members of Congress on our shared interests and
    strengthening the partnership between the United States and
    Angola.
        I would like to introduce my sister Tereza and her husband
    Peter who have traveled here from California via a week down
    the shore. Just putting in your New Jersey credit there. And I
    would also like to acknowledge my brother Richard and his wife
    Ruth, who were unable to be here with me today. For nearly 30
    years, my path of service has meant that I have not been able
    see them as much as I would have liked, but their support has
    sustained me every step of the way, as it does today. I would
    like also a moment to acknowledge my deceased parents, who
    instilled in me a dedication to public service and a love of
    international affairs.
        Angola is the United States' third largest trading partner
    in sub-Saharan Africa and the second largest oil producer in
    that region. Diplomatically, the United States has benefited
    from a strong and productive partnership with Angola. The
    Angolan Government has been an effective voice for peace in the
    region and has proven an excellent partner in our efforts in
    other African countries facing crisis, including those in the
    Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Central African
    Republic. We have a shared interest in seeing a peaceful,
    prosperous, and stable African continent.
        15 years ago, a resource-rich Angola emerged from its civil
    war as a major economic power in the region. Some U.S.
    businesses have thrived in Angola for decades, with many
    commercial relationships that predate our bilateral diplomatic
    relationship.
        While there are significant opportunities for U.S.
    companies, the commercial landscape remains challenging.
    Corruption remains widespread throughout society, and the
    country's economy requires diversification so that its security
    and prosperity are not dependent on oil prices. The U.S.
    supports Angola's goal of broadening its economy and creating a
    business climate that is more attractive and transparent for
    international partners. If confirmed, I will work closely with
    U.S. companies and the Government of Angola to advance U.S.
    commercial interests to create the best climate possible for
    American businesses. An improved business environment in Angola
    will also bring benefits and jobs to the United States and to
    our economy.
        When I served in Angola a decade ago, the United States was
    instrumental in helping the Angolan people prepare for national
    elections, in which many voted for the very first time in their
    lives. And 2 months ago, Angola marked a milestone in its
    democratic progression and elected its first new president in
    38 years. As President Lourenco articulates his vision for
    Angola, I believe it is an opportune time to deepen our
    relationship. We must build on our burgeoning defense
    cooperation and strong economic ties, while working to expand
    the space for democratic debate, to empower Angolan civil
    society and to reinforce Angola's foundations for democracy. If
    confirmed, I will focus my efforts on strengthening our
    dialogue on these important issues.
        Angola has the economic means to achieve substantial
    improvements in health outcomes for its people, including
    infant mortality, a measure by which Angola has fallen
    tragically short of its potential. The United States has
    supported Angola with targeted technical assistance in the
    health arena, fighting malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV. We also
    support Angola in its goal to make the country landmine-free by
    2025, an achievement that would help end one of the most
    painful reminders of its devastating civil war. If confirmed, I
    will focus on helping new models of assistance evolve as
    African nations like Angola mature economically and socially.
        Since I was last there, Angola has continued to move
    forward from the effects of its long civil war. But then, as
    now there is more work to be done. I will bring the experiences
    of my State Department career, including tours in Afghanistan
    and Pakistan, to advance U.S. interests in Angola, and a
    prerequisite to advancing any of our goals is ensuring the
    safety and wellbeing of all Americans, whether members of the
    embassy team or private citizens working, living, or doing
    business in Angola.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, thank you again for your
    enduring interest and support for engagement. I look forward to
    your questions.
        [Ms. Fite's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Nina Maria Fite

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee,
    I am honored to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Angola. I am
    grateful to the President and Secretary Tillerson for the confidence
    and trust they have placed in me with this nomination. If confirmed, I
    will devote myself to advancing U.S. interests and values, as I have
    throughout my 27-year career in the Foreign Service. I will work
    closely with this committee and other Members of Congress on our shared
    interests in strengthening the partnership between the United States
    and Angola.
        I would also like to introduce my sister, Tereza, and her husband,
    Peter who have traveled here from California; and acknowledge my
    brother Richard and his wife Ruth who were unable to be here today. For
    nearly 30 years, my path of service has meant I have not been able to
    see them as much as I would have liked, but their support has sustained
    me every step of the way, as it does today. I would also like to take a
    moment to acknowledge my deceased parents, who instilled in me a
    dedication to public service and a love of international affairs.
        Angola is the United States' third-largest trading partner in sub-
    Saharan Africa, and the second-largest oil producer in that region.
    Diplomatically, the United States has benefited from a strong and
    productive partnership with Angola. The Angolan government has been an
    effective voice for peace in the region and has proven an excellent
    partner in our efforts in other African countries facing crisis,
    including the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Central African
    Republic. We have a shared interest in seeing a peaceful, prosperous,
    and stable African continent.
        Fifteen years ago, a resource-rich Angola emerged from its civil
    war as a major economic power in the region. Some U.S. businesses have
    thrived in Angola for decades, with many commercial relationships that
    predate the bilateral diplomatic relationship. While there are
    significant opportunities for U.S. companies, the commercial landscape
    remains challenging. Corruption remains widespread throughout society,
    and the country's economy requires diversification so that its security
    and prosperity are not dependent on oil prices. The United States
    supports Angola's goal of broadening its economy and creating a
    business climate that is more attractive and transparent for
    international partners. If confirmed, I will work closely with U.S.
    companies and the Government of Angola to advance U.S. commercial
    interests to create the best climate possible for American businesses.
    An improved business environment in Angola will also bring benefits and
    jobs to the United States and our economy.
        When I served in Angola a decade ago, the United States was
    instrumental in helping the Angolan people prepare for national
    elections, in which many voted for the first time in their lives. Two
    months ago, Angola marked a milestone in its democratic progression and
    elected its first new president in 38 years. As President Lourenco
    articulates his vision for Angola, I believe it is an opportune time to
    deepen our relationship. We must build on our burgeoning defense
    cooperation and strong economic ties, while working to expand the space
    for democratic debate, to empower Angolan civil society, and to
    reinforce Angola's foundations for democracy. If confirmed, I will
    focus my efforts on strengthening our dialogue on these important
    issues.
        Angola has the economic means to achieve substantial improvements
    in health outcomes for its people, including infant mortality, a
    measure by which Angola has historically fallen tragically short of its
    potential. The United States has supported Angola with targeted
    technical assistance in the health arena, fighting malaria,
    tuberculosis, and HIV. We also support Angola in its goal to make the
    country landmine free by 2025, an achievement that would help end one
    of the most painful reminders of its devastating civil war. Some of
    this newly cleared land has returned to agricultural use, while other
    parcels have been used for new schools, allowing more Angolan children
    to receive a formal education. If confirmed, I will focus on helping
    new models of assistance evolve as African nations like Angola mature
    economically and socially.
        Since I was last there, Angola has continued to move forward from
    the effects of its long civil war. But now, as then, there is more work
    to be done.Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will bring the experiences of
    my State Department career, including tours in Afghanistan and
    Pakistan, to advance U.S. interests in Angola. A prerequisite to
    advancing any of our goals is ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all
    Americans, whether members of the Embassy team or private citizens
    working, living, or doing business in Angola.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee, I
    thank you again for your enduring interest and support for our
    engagement in sub-Saharan Africa and for this opportunity today. I look
    forward to your questions.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Foote?

     STATEMENT OF DANIEL L. FOOTE, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER OF
    THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
              STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA

        Mr. Foote. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, I think you
    have earned the concise version of my statement today.
        I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's
    nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the
    Republic of Zambia. If confirmed by the Senate, I will work
    with Congress to advance American interests in Zambia.
        Please allow me to thank my beloved family for their
    inspiration, support, and sacrifice. First and foremost is my
    wonderful wife Claudia, without whom none of this would be
    possible. I am blessed to share this special day with my
    daughter Cecilia and remotely and later, because I expect my
    son at boarding school should be on the football field right
    now at practice. I would also like to thank my parents, Curt
    and Caroline, and my outstanding friends.
        My heart goes out to the victims and families of the tragic
    events in Las Vegas yesterday, and while not related this time
    to foreign policy, I am struck by the importance of diplomacy
    in protecting the American people.
        Zambia is a strong partner, and if confirmed, I will
    energetically promote our citizens' shared values of diplomatic
    principles, greater prosperity, regional stability, and
    improved health and education.
        While we have long appreciated Zambia's democratic history,
    it must remain focused on its democratic environment.
    Developments such as problematic media restrictions and
    treatment of opposition members tarnish its reputation. If
    confirmed, I plan to promote constructive dialogue aimed at
    reconciliation and the restoration of Zambia's strong
    democratic traditions. I will staunchly advocate for human
    rights and freedoms and the inclusion of all in democratic
    processes.
        Improved economic growth is vital to create employment, to
    improve the lives of people, to create market opportunities for
    U.S. entities. And if confirmed, I will strive to boost
    prosperity and increase U.S. trade and investment in Zambia.
        Zambia, as a dependable peacekeeping contributor and a
    welcoming sanctuary for refugees fleeing conflict, has the
    potential to be a great regional leader. If confirmed, I will
    cultivate Zambia's ongoing efforts to advance regional
    stability.
        Healthy and engaged populations are critical to
    advancement. Our development in health programs in Zambia have
    saved millions of lives and educated a generation of people. I
    commit to officially implement our assistance programs in
    Zambia as a faithful steward of U.S. taxpayer funds.
        Having served across the globe, including twice in Iraq,
    once in Afghanistan, and once in Haiti, I have developed a
    sense of what I think it takes to run a happy and safe embassy.
    If confirmed, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, I pledge to you
    to lead a productive, high-morale embassy working for the
    American people and fortifying the U.S. relationship with
    Zambia.
        I thank you for the privilege of appearing today and I
    welcome your questions.
        [Mr. Foote's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Daniel Foote

        Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the
    committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's
    nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Republic of
    Zambia. I am grateful for the confidence President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson have placed in me. If confirmed, I will work with Congress to
    advance American interests in Zambia.
        I want to express deep appreciation to everyone who helped me
    through this incredible journey. Please allow me to recognize and thank
    my beloved family, as my key source of inspiration through their
    indispensable support and incalculable sacrifice. Foremost is my wife
    Claudia, to whom I owe everything. I'm blessed to share this special
    moment with my children, Cecilia--here today with Claudia--and, if only
    via C-SPAN, with Danny, who is away at school. I hope you three are a
    fraction as proud of me as I am of you. And to my parents, Curt and
    Caroline, my siblings, and many mentors. I believe my diplomatic
    service, in diverse and increasingly challenging jobs in ten countries
    and the United States, provides me with a strong foundation to serve
    successfully as Ambassador, if confirmed. I expect my broad experience
    advancing human rights, democracy, security, development, education,
    and health will enable me to further American interests effectively.
        I have great respect for the importance of diplomacy in protecting
    our nation and the American people by strengthening ties and
    partnerships. Zambia is a strong partner with which we share democratic
    values and goals of development, economic growth, and regional
    stability. If confirmed, Senators, I pledge to protect U.S. citizens
    and interests by energetically promoting democratic principles, broad-
    based economic growth and development, regional security, and improved
    health and education outcomes. Additionally, I commit to secure,
    develop, and lead the dedicated professionals, and their families, at
    Embassy Lusaka, and to protect all Americans in Zambia.
        While Zambia carries a record of stable democratic transitions, it
    needs to maintain and advance its democratic achievements. I am
    concerned that, in recent years, we have seen problematic media
    restrictions and treatment of opposition members. Such developments
    tarnish Zambia's democratic reputation. If confirmed, I will be a
    staunch advocate for human rights; the promotion of open and
    constructive dialogue among political parties, media, and civil
    society; and the equal inclusion of all citizens in democratic
    processes. I will also encourage Zambia to realize its potential as a
    regional democratic leader.
        Zambia's eventual success in diversifying its economy from copper
    into sectors such as agriculture, energy, and tourism would create
    employment, reduce debt, enhance stability, and provide market
    opportunities for U.S. companies and investors. If confirmed, I will
    use all the tools of the U.S. government to enhance transparency and
    improve the operating environment for U.S. firms working in or with
    Zambia. I will work to increase U.S. trade and investment with Zambia,
    as the U.S. representative to the region's economic group, the Common
    Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), and through the
    African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA),
        Reinforcing our existing partnership can help Zambia expand its
    role as a good neighbor in the region and as a positive, global actor.
    Supported by U.S. military training and assistance, Zambia has become a
    dependable peacekeeping contributor in the Central African Republic.
    Zambia has welcomed those fleeing conflict for decades, and it hosts an
    estimated 55,000 current and former refugees. If confirmed, I will
    cultivate Zambia's continuing efforts to advance regional and global
    stability.
        Productivity and strong partnerships begin with healthy and engaged
    populations, and the United States' and Zambia's combined efforts have
    delivered impressive results. Our PEPFAR (the President's Emergency
    Plan for AIDS Relief) partnership investment in Zambia has saved
    millions of lives, and, since 2004, increased the number of Zambians
    with access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) from 3,500 to more than
    800,000. As a result, Zambia is on track to achieve epidemic control of
    HIV/AIDS by 2020.
        Additionally, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact
    with Zambia is providing $355 million to improve the lives of over 1.2
    million people, and support the government's efforts to improve water
    and sanitation services. If confirmed, I will continue to implement our
    assistance programs constructively and with accountability and ensure
    American taxpayers' funds are spent effectively. I will encourage
    increased efforts by the Zambian government to provide for its
    citizens.
        To conclude, Mr. Chairman: if confirmed, my duty would be, first
    and foremost, to the American people. I promise to strive to lead an
    effective Embassy, protect and develop our people, and fortify U.S.-
    Zambia relations.
        I thank you for the privilege of appearing before you today, and I
    welcome your questions.

        Senator Flake. Mr. Reimer?

    STATEMENT OF DAVID DALE REIMER, OF OHIO, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
     SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
    AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY
    AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY
      AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
                         REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES

        Mr. Reimer. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, I am
    honored to appear before this committee today as the
    President's nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to
    the Republic of Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles. I am
    grateful for the confidence and trust that the President and
    Secretary Tillerson have placed in me.
        I would like to introduce my wife Simonetta Romanola.
    Simonetta and I have been married for a grand total of 2 and a
    half months. Simonetta is Italian. However, she has worked for
    the U.S. Department of State longer than I have, over 30 years
    at the U.S. consulate in Milan, Italy.
        I would also like to acknowledge my parents, Richard and
    Lois Reimer, who could not be here today, as well as my brother
    Paul and my sister Sue.
        Democracy and trade continue to be important elements of
    our bilateral relationship with the Republic of Mauritius.
    Mauritius is politically stable, committed to democracy,
    ethnically diverse, and economically strong. Since its
    independence from the United Kingdom nearly 50 years ago, the
    country has gone through a remarkable economic transformation
    from an economy based on sugar production to a diversified
    economy of export-oriented manufacturing, tourism, and
    financial and business services. In many ways, Mauritius is a
    model, politically and economically, for Africa and the rest of
    the developing world.
        A challenge in our bilateral relationship with Mauritius is
    its claim of sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean
    territory, which Mauritians call the Chagos Islands. Together
    with the United Kingdom, we have operated Naval Support
    Facility Diego Garcia in these islands for the last 50 years.
    Mauritius has taken its sovereignty claim to the International
    Court of Justice for an advisory opinion. However, we continue
    to strongly support the UK's longstanding territorial claim.
        As a career diplomat and economic officer, I bring years of
    experience to the task of promoting democracy and economic
    prosperity for the benefit of the United States and our
    partners around the world. I have visited Mauritius several
    times, and my service in Africa, the Caribbean, Europe, and the
    Middle East has prepared me for the challenges and
    opportunities of this post. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Mauritian Government and people and encourage them to embrace
    leadership roles to promote democracy and build economic
    prosperity in the region, which will also benefit the American
    people. I look forward to the opportunity to promote U.S.
    exports and investment in both Mauritius and Seychelles.
        The United States Government enjoys a positive bilateral
    relationship with Seychelles. In the recent past, the
    Government of Seychelles has been a steadfast partner in
    fighting maritime piracy off the Horn of Africa. The near
    elimination of that scourge owes much to the efforts of the
    Seychelles. We continue to partner with the Seychelles people
    and government in the fight against piracy, terrorism, drug
    trafficking, and illegal fishing.
        On the economic side, Seychelles has the highest per capita
    income in Africa. However, income is not evenly distributed and
    poverty remains. Over the last 8 years, though, Seychelles has
    implemented needed economic reforms and the economy remains on
    a positive track. In the last year, Seychelles has adapted well
    to a political environment in which, for the first time in the
    country's history, the presidency and the legislature are
    controlled by opposing parties. If confirmed, I will encourage
    Seychelles to continue with its economic reforms, to continue
    to improve its human rights standing, and to continue its
    growth as a strong, fully functioning democracy. Although our
    embassy is located in Mauritius, if confirmed, I intend to
    travel frequently to the Seychelles.
        My highest priority, if confirmed, will be the protection
    of Americans living and traveling in Mauritius and Seychelles.
    I commit to you to serve as an energetic advocate for U.S.
    business and to promote U.S. investment opportunities. I will
    be a careful steward of U.S. resources in Mauritius and
    Seychelles.
        Mr. Chairman, I am deeply honored to be nominated for the
    post of Ambassador to Mauritius and Seychelles. If confirmed by
    the Senate, I look forward to working closely with you and
    other members of the committee. I welcome your questions.
        [Mr. Reimer's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of David Dale Reimer

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee,
    I am honored to appear before this committee today as the President's
    nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of
    Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles. I am grateful for the
    confidence and trust that the President and Secretary Tillerson have
    placed in me.
        Democracy and trade continue to be important elements of our
    bilateral relations with the Republic of Mauritius. Mauritius is
    politically stable, committed to democracy, tolerant of ethnic
    diversity, and economically strong for nearly fifty years, since its
    independence from the United Kingdom. The country has gone through a
    remarkable economic transformation from an economy based on sugar
    production to a diversified economy based on export-oriented
    manufacturing, tourism, and the financial and business services
    sectors. In many ways, Mauritius is a model, politically and
    economically, for Africa and the rest of the developing world.
        A challenge in our bilateral relationship with Mauritius is its
    claim of sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory, which
    Mauritians call the Chagos Islands. Together with the United Kingdom,
    we have operated Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia in these islands
    for the last fifty years. Diego Garcia is a strategic military base for
    our armed forces in the region. Mauritius has taken its sovereignty
    claim to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion,
    and we continue to strongly support the UK's long-standing territorial
    claim.
        As a career diplomat and economic officer, I bring years of
    experience to the task of promoting democracy and economic prosperity
    for the benefit of the United States and its partners around the world.
    I have visited Mauritius several times, and my service in Africa, the
    Caribbean, Europe and the Middle East has prepared me for the
    challenges and opportunities of this post. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Mauritian government and people to encourage them to embrace
    more strongly leadership roles that will promote democracy and build
    economic prosperity in the region, which will also benefit the American
    people. As a former Economic and Commercial Officer overseas, I look
    forward to the opportunity to promote U.S. exports and investment in
    both Mauritius and the Seychelles.
        The United States Government enjoys a positive bilateral
    relationship with the Government of Seychelles. In the recent past, the
    Government of Seychelles has been a steadfast partner in fighting
    maritime piracy in the Horn of Africa. The near-elimination of that
    scourge owes much to Seychelles' efforts. We continue to partner with
    the Seychelles' people and government in the fight against piracy,
    terrorism, drug trafficking, and illegal fishing.
        On the economic side, Seychelles has the highest per capita income
    in Africa, although it is not evenly distributed, and poverty still is
    problematic across the country. Over the last eight years, Seychelles
    has achieved needed economic reforms, and the economy remains on a
    positive track. In the last year, Seychelles has adapted well to a
    political environment in which the Presidency and Legislature are
    controlled by opposing parties. This is the first time this has
    happened in the history of the country. If confirmed, I will encourage
    Seychelles to continue with its economic reforms, to continue to
    improve its human rights standing, and to continue its growth as a
    strong, fully-functioning democracy. Although the United States Embassy
    is located in Mauritius, if confirmed, I intend to travel frequently to
    the Seychelles.
        If confirmed, my highest priority will be the protection of
    Americans living and traveling in Mauritius and Seychelles. I commit to
    you to serve as an energetic advocate for the promotion of U.S.
    business and investment opportunities and will be a careful steward of
    U.S. resources in Mauritius and Seychelles.
        I am deeply honored to be nominated for the post of Ambassador to
    Mauritius and Seychelles. If confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to
    working closely with you and other members of the committee. I welcome
    your questions.

        Senator Flake. Well, thank you. And might I say that is not
    a bad place to honeymoon too. [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. I have spent time in southern Africa and a
    lot of people would go to Mauritius and the Seychelles, and I
    have not yet been there. So I look forward to being there.
        Mr. Dodman, with regard to Mauritania, they have taken a
    step backward a bit with regard to governance. There is an
    upcoming 2019 presidential election that will certainly send a
    signal as to where they are going. How important is that? How
    important is our presence there in ensuring that they have
    proper governance? It is obviously important to our security
    arrangements with them.
        Mr. Dodman. Thank you, Senator.
        Yes, you are right. The presidential election is coming up
    in 2019. It is critical. Mauritania has a history of autocratic
    governance. There has not been a transition from one
    democratically elected government to another in Mauritania. So
    this upcoming election in 2019 is important. President Aziz has
    stated repeatedly that he intends to step down at the end of
    his two terms, as is required by the constitution, and
    certainly, if confirmed, part of my dialogue with the president
    and with all the figures in Nouakchott will be to continue the
    dialogue that Ambassador Andre has had about the importance of
    that transition specifically and of democracy more broadly.
        Democracy is the foundation for a stable society.
    Mauritania, of course, is a strong partner on counterterrorism
    issues, but my message will be, if confirmed, that in order to
    maintain the stability that is important to Mauritania and
    important to the United States, it is critical that human
    rights be respected, all human rights. I am certainly including
    working on slavery and actively removing slavery and all of its
    vestiges in Mauritania, but also that democratic transition.
        Both Ms. Fite and I were in Pakistan when Pakistan also had
    its first democratic transition from one democratically elected
    government that completed its full term and went on to be
    replaced by another democratically elected government. So I
    have seen firsthand the importance that one single election can
    make to a country's trajectory, and that is certainly a message
    I will be carrying to Nouakchott, if confirmed.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        With regard to Angola, we met in my office before President
    Lourenco gave his inaugural address. How do you expect things
    to change? I am assuming the effort will be to make sure that
    oil wealth is spread more broadly than in the past. I think all
    any of us can remember after 38 years is dos Santos in that
    position. What is going to change there?
        Ms. Fite. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In his inaugural
    address, President Lourenco talked about diversifying the
    economy and developing the economy and getting it away from oil
    wealth because I think he is recognizing that it is a difficult
    time to be dependent on oil when the prices are so low. At the
    same time, he addressed the need to combat corruption. He also
    addressed a need to have multiple voices and perhaps voices
    that do not agree with you speaking and being heard. So he made
    a number of comments. He talked about education, addressing
    technical training for Angolans, young Angolans. He talked
    about his youth bulge and how to create jobs and an economy for
    those people.
        I think the truth will be 6 months from now, a year from
    now, how does he deliver on those. But as a U.S. Ambassador, I
    would certainly encourage him to do everything he can to
    deliver on those promises in his inaugural speech and also in
    his campaign speeches.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Foote, low copper prices have really hobbled a lot of
    the governments around, and Zambia is pretty reliant on that.
    How are they going to diversify? What can they do and how can
    we help them?
        Mr. Foote. Well, you are exactly right, Senator, and thank
    you for that question.
        While prices have rebounded 35 percent so far this year and
    perhaps alleviated some of the urgency for structural reform, I
    think that is important for Zambia to undertake.
    Diversification into sectors such as construction,
    infrastructure, agriculture, energy, and tourism will be
    important. A focus on fiscal management, better transparent
    regulatory trade and other frameworks, and creating a
    predictable and level playing field to reduce uncertainty and
    attract businesses and private sector investors is going to be
    critical for them.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Reimer, when we spoke in my office, we talked about
    there is not an issue right now in Mauritius or the Seychelles
    with any terrorist cells or security issues like that, but
    strategically they are important places with regard to piracy.
    Seychelles is in a tough neighborhood, I guess, in that regard.
    What are we doing or what are they doing to combat piracy? How
    much of an issue is that?
        Mr. Reimer. Thank you for that question, Senator.
        In the recent past, Seychelles has been an outstanding
    partner in that area. We have provided training to government
    officials, and in turn, the Government of Seychelles has tried,
    convicted, and imprisoned more pirates than any other country
    in the world. Thankfully, the scourge of piracy is greatly
    diminished, and so we do not have that problem as we had
    before. But we continue with an excellent security relationship
    with the Seychelles. It is a very popular port of call for the
    U.S. Navy, and we have done a little bit of security assistance
    for the country as well. So we have a good record and an
    excellent ongoing relationship.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Dodman, can I just start with you real quick because I
    know Mauritania, along with Mali, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso
    is part of the G5 Sahel, which has proposed a multinational
    counterterrorism and border security force. Correct? And I
    guess that is why I found it sort of surprising to me that
    President Trump added Chad to the administration's travel ban
    list, prompting the Chadian Government and France, which has
    worked closely with Chad and with us, frankly, to counter
    terrorism in the Sahel. And I have been one of those people
    sort of questioning this as France and the Chadian Government
    have been asking the administration to reverse this
    determination.
        So I guess a few questions. I will throw them out there and
    let you respond. But what, if any, impact do you think that the
    travel ban designation regarding Chad will have on the G5's
    operational capacity and the U.S.'s ability to provide
    assistance to its component of the forces? To what extent do
    you think the designation will make other Sahel countries more
    reticent to work with the United States? What factors do you
    think enabled Mauritania to escape the similar designation?
    What differentiates them from Chad? And do you believe that the
    criteria that the administration used to add Chad to the travel
    ban that maybe Mauritania is at risk of being added to a travel
    ban in the future? And if so, what effect will that have in our
    security efforts?
        Mr. Dodman. Thank you, Senator.
        I will be honest up front and say I will not be able to
    give a full answer to it. I have not been working this issue. I
    have been working economic issues. I still am working economic
    issues. So I was not directly involved in any of the
    preparation of the review of all of the countries and their
    information sharing agreements.
        What I can tell you is that Chad is a critical
    counterterrorism partner to the United States. That is
    absolutely true. They are critical to the success of the G5 as
    an organization that promotes not just security and
    counterterrorism cooperation among the five but promotes
    development and growth and trade and all the sorts of things
    that we would like to see these five Sahelian countries work
    more closely to promote their own growth and stability.
        What it means for the G5 and our potential assistance to
    the organization in terms of building up these joint forces--I
    do not believe that there is any direct correlation, but I
    would have to get back to you with a more formal answer after I
    have looked into that and checked into it.
        As I understand the process that was announced a few weeks
    ago, there is a clear set of steps for each of the countries
    that was designated to move forward in terms of working in
    cooperation with the State Department and with the Department
    of Homeland Security on sharing of information. It is all about
    sharing of information.
        Certainly discussions are underway. I assume discussions
    are underway between Chad and the U.S. Government now about how
    to meet those requirements.
        And certainly when I get to Mauritania, should I get to
    Mauritania, I will be working with the Mauritanian Government
    to make sure that that form of cooperation on border security
    issues continues because the last thing any of us would want to
    see is to have our strong partnership on counterterrorism
    issues be at all harmed by any failure to provide the
    information requested.
        Senator Booker. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Foote, in Zambia, 43 percent of the women aged 15 to 49
    have experienced physical violence. When women live in fear of
    violence, when girls are married too young, taken out of
    school, a society faces tremendous long-term development
    challenges, not to mention the sheer evilness to have that
    level of percentage of your population having experienced
    violence. It is abhorrent and unacceptable.
        And I just wondered in your role, how are you planning on
    raising this as a serious concern? And how do you think you can
    help improve Zambia in meeting these challenges?
        Mr. Foote. Thank you, Senator.
        I agree wholeheartedly that gender-based violence and
    violence against vulnerable populations is a terrible drag on
    societies.
        I will encourage and engage with the government and with
    civil society to empower civil society to hold its government
    accountable.
        Additionally, I bring some experience from Afghanistan
    where we worked in establishing and broadening women's shelters
    and associated family guidance centers where we were able to
    sort of in the areas where we were working change the culture
    and make women and those who were vulnerable to or victims of
    gender-based violence comfortable to come in and seek help and
    assistance and get shelter and assistance. So that is an issue
    that I will take seriously, and I welcome any further guidance.
        Senator Booker. Well, I welcome you communicating with us
    about evidence-based programs that address this as something
    that we as a Congress might want to invest in.
        Mr. Foote. You have my commitment.
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Fite, a lot of talk about how much the Chinese are
    investing in sub-Saharan Africa, their presence there. We just
    talked about the base in Djibouti. It is tremendous. And I am
    wondering when it comes to investment and trade, how do you
    assess China's role in the Angolan economy and giving us a fair
    shot as we continue our economic relationship?
        Ms. Fite. Thank you, Senator.
        I believe that China's investment and presence in Angola is
    not a threat to the United States. I think that their
    relationship with Angola has gone on for a number of years. It
    is very much oil-based. And China has become, I think, Angola's
    largest importer of oil at this point.
        At the same time, I think we have some shared interests in
    Africa in general--the United States and China. And certainly
    China has helped in some humanitarian issues that we have been
    very concerned about. They provided I think more than $1
    million to Ebola eradication and treatments in West Africa in
    2014. They have also been involved in some of the other health
    issues.
        I think one thing that can happen, though, is with the U.S.
    there, we can, first off, help Angola develop a better business
    environment because I believe fundamentally that U.S. companies
    will compete very well and can win contracts against Chinese
    competitors because U.S. companies are known for high quality
    training and maintenance and training of technicians. And so I
    think these are things that, again, I do not see China as a
    competitor, but another--or sorry--not as a threat but just
    another competitor for products and for exports in Angola.
        Senator Booker. Thank you.
        Mr. Reimer, given the time, I am not going to ask you a
    question, but I will make two points. The first point is that
    Chairman Flake is--I know how hard of a worker he is in the
    United States Senate. I know he visits lots of hotspots. I
    doubt we will be doing a CODEL during your time there, but if
    he should choose to and believe that it is important, I will
    give full consideration to joining him. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Reimer. You both are very welcome, Senator.
        Senator Booker. And then my last comment is very simply
    congratulations. You will have to tell me about this marriage
    thing, if it is something I should explore myself. And I do
    want to say that your wife--you did not have any connections to
    New Jersey, sir, but your wife is Italian and we have the
    highest per capita Italian population in the entire United
    States of America in New Jersey. So she is welcomed to visit
    anytime.
        Mr. Reimer. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker.
        Thank you all, the witnesses in both panels today. We
    really benefit from your testimony. And as mentioned by Senator
    Booker, we hope that you will stay in touch with us and
    certainly interact with our offices when there are things that
    are needed. And hopefully we will get to visit some of you at
    least during the time. So we appreciate that.
        The record will remain open until the close of business
    today, including for members to submit questions for the
    record. We ask you to respond as quickly as you can, and your
    responses will be made part of the record.
        With the thanks of the committee, the hearing is now
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Larry E. Andre by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Mauritania since
    2014, I led my team to contribute toward eradicating slavery and its
    vestiges by working with both Mauritanian and American civil society
    organizations and coordinating the advocacy and programming activities
    of U.S. government agencies. Mauritanians closely identify the U.S.
    Embassy with the anti-slavery struggle. Our advocacy helped free
    imprisoned activists. Our programming increased funding to local
    organizations providing legal assistance to slaves resulting in
    liberation of slaves and successful prosecutions and other legal
    actions against slave owners.
        As Director of the Office of the Special Envoy for Sudan and South
    Sudan, serving multiple and lengthy stints as Charge d'Affaires in
    Juba, South Sudan, I strenuously advocated the release of imprisoned
    ruling party dissidents threatened with death for alleged treason,
    including attendance at their trials and visits to their places of
    detention. Once released, the dissidents were conducted directly to the
    Embassy, where they met with concerned members of the diplomatic
    community. Among only five Americans remaining at the Embassy following
    evacuation during factional fighting in Juba, I protested to the
    government the killing of civilians and threats to the United Nations-
    managed camp in Juba for internally displaced persons. While the
    government continued to complain about the camp, there were no
    incursions while I was present (January-April 2014).
        I have advocated for human rights and democracy throughout my
    career, and, if confirmed, will continue to do so in Djibouti.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Djibouti? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Djibouti? What do
    you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most pressing human rights issues in Djibouti are the
    suppression of opposition political voices; the refusal to allow some
    groups to form legally recognized political parties; the harassment,
    abuse, and detention of some government critics; the government's
    denial of access to independent sources of information; and
    restrictions on freedoms of speech and assembly. I will advocate, both
    with the public and privately with Djibouti's leadership, for the
    strengthening of democratic institutions and the adoption of democratic
    practices as the best guarantors of long-term peace, prosperity and
    stability. Specifically, I will seek to influence the authorities to
    improve significantly the fairness and credibility of the legislative
    elections scheduled for 2018.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Djibouti in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Many Djiboutians see their neighbors to the south (Somalia)
    and to the east (Yemen) as examples of state failure, leading to
    collapse into violent anarchy. Djiboutian government authorities tend
    to fear that loosening political restrictions will increase the risk of
    severe instability within their country, with potentially disastrous
    consequences. It is our task to strongly and consistently advocate for
    human rights and responsive, democratic institutions as the best
    guarantors of peace, stability, and prosperity over the long term.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Djibouti? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Yes, I am committed to working with both U.S. and local
    civil society organizations to promote our human rights objectives.
    This has been my practice throughout my career. If confirmed, I will
    direct all personnel under chief of mission authority to proactively
    implement the Leahy Law and similar provisions. I understand that our
    current security cooperation includes human rights components. I commit
    to review those components to ensure they are clear.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Djibouti to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Djibouti?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will lead our team to engage in this
    area, just as I did in Mauritania and in South Sudan. Djibouti's long-
    term peace, stability, and prosperity requires rule of law and
    protections for individual citizens' political rights.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Djibouti on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. A formal objective of the U.S. Mission is that
    Djibouti achieve progress on human rights and good governance. If
    confirmed, I will advance that objective.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Djibouti?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. My experience leading U.S. Missions overseas confirms the
    research referenced in your question. If confirmed, and as I have done
    at other posts, I plan to mentor and maintain a diverse, inclusive
    Embassy team, including consideration of aspects of diversity relevant
    to our Djiboutian workforce and the composition of Djiboutian society.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will speak publicly and regularly, including in Town Hall
    and Country Team meetings, about my own commitment to diversity and
    inclusion and my expectations that all members of the Embassy team will
    experience and sustain an inclusive and supportive workplace. I will
    require all supervisors to promote an inclusive, supportive, and
    ethical workplace. I will encourage all supervisors to include in
    performance evaluations a comment on the supervisor's success in
    valuing diversity and promoting inclusion, and will recognize and
    commend efforts among supervisors to value diversity and foster
    inclusion. I will ensure that supervisors are cognizant of EEO
    principles and rules, and held accountable for respecting them. I will
    ensure prompt engagement, and corrective action when warranted, on any
    expressions of concern that the Embassy workplace does not value
    diversity or promote inclusion.

        Question 12. In the wake of President Guelleh's meeting with
    President Obama in 2014, the United States launched the U.S.--Djibouti
    Binational Forum.

       What issues were discussed as part of the Binational Forum? Will
            the Forum continue? What issues should be covered as part of
            the forum?

        Answer. The Binational Forum (BNF) covers issues in political,
    economic development, health, and military cooperation. In the
    political sphere, we were successful in our efforts to encourage
    Djibouti to join the Counter ISIS coalition, improve conditions for
    refugees in Djibouti, including educational opportunities for refugee
    children. Djibouti also agreed to host the Intergovernmental Authority
    on Development (IGAD) Center of Excellence for countering violent
    extremism (CVE). Further, we made progress in helping Djibouti improve
    efforts to combat trafficking in persons. In the economic development
    sphere, the BNF advanced USAID projects in workforce development and
    energy, and improved the positive economic impact of our military
    presence through the Djibouti First, and now Africa First, programs
    which aim to improve the local economy. In the military cooperation
    sphere, the BNF helps to deepen our military-to-military cooperation,
    ensure operational coordination, review security assistance, and
    respond to requests from the Government of Djibouti. The BNF has
    served, and continues to serve, as an important forum for U.S.
    engagement with Djibouti, which will be hosting the next BNF meeting in
    the spring of 2018.

        Question 13. If confirmed, what would be your approach to
    maintaining security cooperation while advocating for accountability
    and transparency in government?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Embassy team continues
    to emphasize the need for accountability and transparency in all of our
    engagements with the Government of Djibouti, not just in security
    cooperation. As I have done throughout my career, if confirmed, I will
    speak both publicly and privately in favor of Djiboutians developing
    transparent and accountable democratic institutions and instituting
    democratic norms as the best long-term guarantor of their nation's
    stability and prosperity. I will share our own nation's history of
    developing democratic institutions and practices.

        Question 14. How much has the United States provided to Djibouti in
    security assistance in each of the past four fiscal years?

        Answer. During Fiscal Years 2014-2017, the Department of State
    provided approximately $18.9 million in funding for security assistance
    to Djibouti. This amount includes funding from Foreign Military
    Financing (FMF), International Military Education and Training (IMET),
    and multiple Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)-funded programs, including
    the Africa Military Education Program (AMEP), African Maritime Security
    (AMS), Partnership for Regional East Africa Counterterrorism (PREACT),
    Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI--including Africa Contingency
    Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA) training), and Non-
    Proliferation, Anti-terrorism, demining, and Related Programs (NADR).
        In FY 2017, we provided approximately $4.236 million; in FY 2016
    $4.795 million; in FY 2015 $5.559 million; and in FY 2014, $4.316
    million in security assistance to Djibouti.

        Question 15. What are the major programs and funding sources for
    our security assistance programs?

        Answer. The major programs and funding sources for Department of
    State security assistance programs include:

       International Military Education and Training (IMET)--sending
            Djiboutian officers to school in America side by side with our
            officers and NCOs;
       Foreign Military Finance (FMF)--providing financing for the
            purchase of U.S.- manufactured military equipment and training;
       Various Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)-funded programs, including:

            The Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI)--including
                the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance
                program--supporting Djiboutian peacekeepers;
            Counterterrorism programming under PREACT;
            Africa Military Education Program (AMEP)--which is working
                on curriculum development at the Djiboutian military
                academies;
            African Maritime Security (AMS)--working with the
                Djiboutian Navy and Coast Guard
            Non-Proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related
                Programs (NADR) funding for the Antiterrorism Training and
                Assistance (ATA) program.

        Question 16. How much development and humanitarian aid have we
    provided to Djibouti in each of the past four fiscal years, and what
    are the major areas of focus?

        Answer. Over the last four fiscal years, the United States provided
    development assistance to Djibouti in the following amounts: FY 2014
    $11,735,000; FY 2015 $19,904,000; FY 2016 $19,008,000; and FY 2017
    (allocation) $16,900,000. Humanitarian assistance to Djibouti over the
    same period is as follows: FY 2014 $6,022,137; FY 2015 $5,166,137; FY
    2016 $6,566,137; and FY 2017 (allocation) $5,100,000. The major focus
    areas of assistance are Health-HIV/AIDS, Humanitarian Assistance,
    Workforce Development, Basic Education, and Civil Society.

        Question 17. The United States pays a reported $68 million a year
    to lease Camp Lemonnier. What steps did we take to ensure that the
    proceeds would be used to support spending on social services that
    benefit the poor and underserved population in Djibouti?

        Answer. The U.S. encourages the Government of Djibouti to use its
    resources to expand economic opportunity for the poor and underserved,
    and to provide support for refugees, migrants, and groups vulnerable to
    trafficking. This advocacy has produced a notable success: This year,
    the government welcomed refugee youth into the national education
    system. The Government of Djibouti recently agreed to pay for 18 health
    personnel to work at the International Organization's Migration (IOM)
    Response Center in Obock. With trafficking, we have increasingly
    encouraged the Government of Djibouti to provide more social services
    to trafficking victims, and the Minister of Health (MOH) has requested
    IOM to provide training in counter trafficking in persons for MOH
    personnel.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Peter Henry Barlerin by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have been a consistent advocate for human rights
    throughout my Foreign Service career. In my first tour at the Consulate
    General in Lubumbashi, Zaire nearly 30 years ago, I conveyed our
    government's concern by visiting the family of a human rights lawyer
    who had been arrested by the Zairian government. I also met with a
    professor at the University of Lubumbashi who had had run-ins with
    government authorities. The day after Presidential Guard forces were
    alleged to have attacked and killed a number of University of
    Lubumbashi students, I went directly to my neighbor, the local
    commander, to protest and demand an explanation. The commander was
    replaced in the wake of ongoing scrutiny of the incident.
        As Deputy Director in the Office of Regional and Security Affairs
    from 2007-2009, I oversaw Leahy vetting and Africa Bureau input into
    the State Department's Human Rights Reports. I also represented the
    United States in international contact group meetings in Conakry,
    Guinea, to try to convince Guinean coup leader Dadis Camara to step
    down, and later attended a contact group meeting in Paris, France to
    try to induce Mauritanian coup leader Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz to
    release the detained Prime Minister and organize elections. Dadis
    Camara was eventually replaced by democratically elected President
    Alpha Conde and Abdel Aziz ultimately stepped down as head of state in
    order to run for President in accordance with the Mauritanian
    constitution. He was elected President in an election that was deemed
    largely free, fair, and credible.
        As Deputy Chief of Mission in Bamako, Mali, with the assistance of
    a very talented entry level officer, I succeeded in getting Mali to
    take the necessary concrete actions against trafficking in persons to
    be upgraded to Tier 2 after being on Tier 2 Watch List status for two
    years in a row and facing an automatic downgrade to Tier 3. Tier 3
    would have entailed withholding of all non-humanitarian foreign
    assistance. I made multiple, high-level demarches including to the
    President and the Prime Minister to impress upon them the possibility
    of losing badly needed U.S. foreign assistance if they did not show
    more progress in fighting trafficking in persons. In the end, we
    prevailed.
        After a coup overthrew the democratically elected president of Mali
    in March 2012, I was the first American to call coup leader Amadou
    Sanogo to demand that he step down and to insist that the military
    return to their barracks. I met regularly with civil rights groups and
    opposition politicians including Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, who went on to
    be elected president of Mali. After my departure, Sanogo was detained
    and remains in prison.
        As Deputy Assistant Secretary of State with oversight
    responsibility for West Africa and then as acting Principal Deputy
    Assistant Secretary of State and finally, as Senior Official in the
    Africa Bureau, I consistently sought to advance human rights and
    democracy in sub-Saharan Africa. In particular, we supported an effort
    by the Economic Community of West African States to convince Yahya
    Jammeh, a dictator who had ruled The Gambia for 23 years, that he
    should respect the results of the election that had ousted him. I
    worked with our Embassies and the team back in Washington to support
    free, fair, and credible elections in Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, and
    Ghana, among other countries. I met with opposition leaders from the
    several countries and pressed government leaders in many countries to
    show respect for human rights and constitutional term limits.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in the
    Republic of Cameroon? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in the
    Republic of Cameroon? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. Over the last year, the most significant challenges to
    human rights and democracy in Cameroon include the ongoing situation in
    the South West and North West Anglophone regions that has resulted in
    loss of life, restrictions on the freedoms of expression and peaceful
    assembly, and the detention of numerous peaceful demonstrators and
    journalists covering the events, many of whom are still awaiting trial.
    Reports of forced repatriation of thousands of Nigerian refugees
    fleeing Boko Haram, back to unsafe areas is likewise an issue of great
    concern. Also deeply troubling are allegations that Cameroonian
    security forces tortured individuals thought to be linked to Boko
    Haram.
        If confirmed, I would continue to urge all parties to commit to
    dialogue in order to resolve the root causes of the conflict, and to
    find a mutually acceptable, peaceful resolution that will ensure
    Cameroon's long-term stability. I will continue to call for the release
    from detention peaceful protesters and political prisoners, and to
    press the government to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms,
    including freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
        I will directly engage senior Cameroonian government officials on
    upholding refugee protection within the country in accordance with
    international norms and ensuring that any refugee returns are voluntary
    and conducted safely, and with dignity. I will make the case that
    defeating terrorism in the long-term is possible only when security
    forces respect human rights and gain the trust of civilians. Torture is
    not acceptable under any circumstances, and I will insist that
    Cameroonian authorities fully investigate credible allegations that its
    security forces or law enforcement personnel have engaged in torture.
        If confirmed, I am also committed to working with the Cameroonian
    people and government to increase political space and democratic
    participation, including among women and young people, to advance civil
    and political rights. With presidential elections scheduled for 2018,
    promoting democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and peaceful
    assembly, and the rule of law will be among my highest priorities.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Cameroon in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. In spite of challenges, Cameroon has achieved considerable
    progress since its independence. If confirmed, I will seek to help
    build on that progress. Looking forward, the Government of Cameroon
    stands a much greater chance of success when it respects human rights,
    and when it has the trust of the people. Good governance is the single
    most important factor in the success or failure of any nation, and the
    ends do not justify all means. I will work with the government, the
    people of Cameroon, and our international partners to ensure that
    elections in 2018 are free, fair, and credible, as well as peaceful.
        I will, if confirmed, encourage the government to release peaceful
    protesters and journalists detained in connection with the protests in
    the Anglophone regions, and urge all parties to commit to dialogue. In
    addition, I will continue to engage the Government of Cameroon to
    uphold its commitments in implementing the Tripartite Agreement with
    Nigeria and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees on the treatment of
    Nigerian refugees.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Republic of Cameroon? If confirmed, what
    steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar
    efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and
    security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed as Ambassador, I will meet with U.S.-
    based human rights, civil society and other non-governmental
    organizations, and with local and international human rights NGOs in
    Cameroon. I will encourage the Cameroonian government to engage with
    these groups in order to open political space and to encourage the
    participation of civil society, particularly in the run-up to the 2018
    Presidential elections. It is important to make the case that engaging
    with and hearing the views of individuals from these organizations will
    go a long way toward demonstrating that the Government of Cameroon is
    serious about human rights.
        The United States values Cameroon as a key partner in combating
    Boko Haram and its offshoot, ISIS-West Africa, in the Lake Chad Region.
    If confirmed, I will work closely with AFRICOM, and senior Cameroonian
    military officials to ensure that, in accordance with the Leahy Law,
    the United States does not furnish foreign assistance to any
    Cameroonian security force unit if the Secretary of State has credible
    evidence that such a unit has committed a gross violation of human
    rights. I will also continue to fully support the participation of
    appropriately vetted candidates in AFRICOM's International Military
    Education and Training (IMET) Expanded IMET (E-IMET) courses, which
    provide instruction in military law and justice, human rights, and the
    Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) as a means to interconnect military
    education and the importance of respect for human rights.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Republic of Cameroon to address cases of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Republic of Cameroon?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, my team and I will continue the
    Embassy's long-standing policy of advocating for key political
    prisoners and individuals unjustly targeted. I am particularly
    concerned about cases in which targeted individuals or organizations
    that expressed views at odds with government policy are arbitrarily
    detained, as highlighted in the U.S. Department of State's annual
    Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.
        If confirmed, I will advocate for respect for human rights and
    fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression and peaceful
    assembly, in accordance with Cameroon's constitution and its
    commitments and obligations under international law.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the Republic of Cameroon on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will make the promotion of human rights,
    civil rights, and democracy, a key priority, and will ensure these
    issues are raised directly with senior officials of the government of
    Cameroon.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Cameroon?

        Answer. No. I have not had any material changes to my financial
    assets, income, or any other information requested by the Office of
    Government Ethics financial disclosure form since the date I signed it.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As Deputy Chief of Mission in Bamako, Mali from 2009-2012
    and in leadership positions in the Africa Bureau from 2013 to the
    present, I have made consistent and sustained efforts to increase
    diversity and nurture people from different backgrounds. Over the
    years, I have mentored and remain in close contact with entry level
    officers from diverse backgrounds through the State Department's formal
    mentoring program and have informally mentored other Foreign Service
    and civil service officers from diverse backgrounds and gender over the
    years.
        First as Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, and then as
    Senior Official in the Bureau of African Affairs, I was responsible for
    making recommendations for Chief of Mission and Deputy Chief of Mission
    assignments, and ensured that diversity and gender were reflected on
    the short lists of candidates whenever possible.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will make diversity and inclusivity elements of the work
    requirements of all supervisors at the Embassy, including locally
    employed staff, and hold them accountable, just as I do with other
    standards of performance. I will speak regularly to the value of
    diversity and gender inclusivity and lead by example through my own
    behavior.
    Security Assistance
        Question 12. How much money has the United States provided to
    Cameroon in each of the past four fiscal years from both bilateral and
    regional accounts?

        Answer. From FY 2014-FY 2017, the United States Congress obligated
    $85.349M in security assistance funding for Foreign Military Financing
    (FMF), International Military Education and Training (IMET), and
    Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) to support military professionalization,
    counterterrorism, peacekeeping, maritime security, and counter-poaching
    efforts.

       Breakdown per Year

            FY 2014--$13.014M was obligated for Cameroon in IMET and
                PKO to support military professionalization, peacekeeping,
                and counter-poaching efforts.
            FY 2015--$31.305M was obligated in FMF, IMET and PKO to
                support military professionalization, counterterrorism
                efforts, maritime security, and peacekeeping.
            FY 2016--$7.503M was obligated in FMF, IMET and PKO to
                support military professionalization, counterterrorism
                efforts, maritime security, and peacekeeping.
            FY 2017--$33.527M was obligated in FMF, IMET and PKO to
                support military professionalization, counterterrorism
                efforts, maritime security, and peacekeeping.

        While Cameroon does not receive bilateral International Narcotics
    Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) funds for civilian security
    assistance, Cameroon has benefited from the centrally managed INCLE
    funds for the period of FY 2014--FY 2017.

       Breakdown per Year:

            FY 2014--$915,000
            FY 15--$1,034,000
            FY 2016--$1,362,000
            FY 2017--$1,490,000 (estimated)

        Question 13. What is the status of AFRICOM's inquiry into whether
    or not American soldiers were aware of torture and abuses being carried
    out by Cameroonian soldiers?

        Answer. A preliminary inquiry, directed by the Commander, Special
    Operations Command Africa (Forward), found no evidence that U.S. forces
    observed or received reports of the law of armed conflict (LOAC)
    violations allegedly committed by partner forces in Cameroon.
        Nevertheless, after reviewing the findings of the preliminary
    inquiry, the Commander of U.S. Africa Command (US AFRICOM) appointed a
    general officer, assisted by various subject matter experts, to further
    investigate the extent to which U.S. forces had engaged with
    Cameroonian forces who were alleged to have committed LOAC violations.
    The investigation is examining the human rights and LOAC training
    received by U.S. forces prior to deploying, as well as any training
    provided by U.S. forces to Cameroonian forces. The investigation will
    make recommendations on the actions that the Department of Defense
    should take moving forward.

        Question 14. Will the results of this inquiry be provided to
    Congress?

        Answer. The provision of the results of the inquiry will be
    determined by AFRICOM.

        Question 15. How will you, if confirmed as Ambassador, effectively
    message that the United States does not tolerate human rights abuses by
    the Cameroonian military?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will reiterate to the Cameroonian
    Government that the United States takes gross human rights abuse
    allegations seriously and, in accordance with the Leahy Law, does not
    furnish assistance to any security force unit if the Secretary of State
    has credible information that such a unit has committed a gross
    violation of human rights.
        I will urge Cameroon to uphold its commitments and obligations
    under international law. All allegations and reports of torture and
    abuses must be fully investigated in a transparent manner. If
    warranted, the perpetrators must be prosecuted and punished in order to
    meet those commitments.
        We value Cameroon's partnership in combating terrorism. And as a
    valued partner in this fight, it is necessary to underscore that the
    strong partnership between the United States and Cameroon is not
    sustainable if Cameroonian security forces show a pattern of human
    rights abuses in the fight against terrorism.

        Question 16. The State Department has ranked Cameroon "Tier 2
    Watchlist" on trafficking in persons. If confirmed, what types of U.S.
    diplomatic efforts and aid, if any, would you pursue to help Cameroon
    better tackle this problem?

        Answer. The Government of Cameroon does not fully meet the minimum
    standards for the elimination of trafficking in persons; however, it is
    making significant efforts to do so. There are several lines of
    diplomatic effort I will pursue, if confirmed, to encourage the
    Government of Cameroon to improve on its current Tier 2 Watchlist
    ranking.
        I will urge the Government of Cameroon to increase efforts to
    investigate, prosecute, and convict traffickers for all forms of
    trafficking-including complicit officials and cases referred by NGOs-
    under the trafficking section of the penal code. I will also encourage
    Cameroon to provide repatriation assistance, including travel
    documents, to Cameroonian trafficking victims identified abroad, expand
    trafficking-specific services for all victims, and increase
    collaboration with NGOs on identifying and protecting victims and
    raising awareness of trafficking.
        Additionally, I will work with the Government of Cameroon to
    encourage efforts to protect Cameroonian women who are recruited to
    work abroad, especially in exploitative situations in the Middle East,
    by encouraging the active regulation and investigation of labor
    recruiters and the provision of pre-departure information to citizens
    on their rights as foreign workers.

        Question 17. In what ways might such efforts be incorporated into
    existing U.S. programs that aim to help strengthen Cameroon's security
    sector and the rule of law?

        Answer. If confirmed, I believe that there is an opportunity
    through AFRICOM to amplify an anti-trafficking message in their work
    with the Cameroon Armed Forces, specifically the Gendarmerie. As
    precedence, in 2016, U.S. Marines and Sailors worked with Cameroonian
    counterparts to increase their capabilities to combat illicit activity
    and improve maritime security. In accordance with the Leahy Law, the
    Department of State has the ability to train and increase the capacity
    of Cameroonian security forces so that they are more representative of
    and accountable to the communities they serve. In addition, the Defense
    Institute for International Legal Studies (DIILS) provides our foreign
    partners with professional development in the investigation and
    prosecution of criminal activity within the military. AFRICOM works
    closely with DIILS to sponsor numerous training events and workshops
    each year.
        If confirmed, I would work closely with the Department of Justice
    Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance, and Training
    (OPDAT), which works specifically with partner governments to increase
    the effectiveness of their rule of law institutions. Such programs
    would help strengthen the country's judicial capacity to investigate
    and prosecute these crimes in a transparent and credible manner.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
               to Eric P. Whitaker by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my Foreign Service career I have supported
    democracy and human rights, including promoting civil liberties, civil
    society, anti-trafficking in persons, and freedom of religious belief
    and practice. This has included serving as an election observer in
    Ethiopia, co-hosting civil society conflict prevention roundtables in
    Niger, promoting civic and voter education in Mali, and working with
    district advisory councils to improve local human services in Iraq.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in the
    Republic of Niger? What are the most important steps you expect to
    take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in the
    Republic of Niger? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. The most serious human rights problems include attacks by
    armed groups that resulted in death, disappearances, and abuse; harsh
    and life-threatening prison and detention center conditions;
    trafficking in persons, including forced labor and caste-based slavery;
    and restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly.
        The United States government is concerned by a troubling trend in
    the past few years of Nigerien authorities arresting and threatening
    critics of the government in a series of what regime opponents and
    human rights organizations deem as politically driven actions.
    Political activists and journalists use language on social media
    perceived by the government as provocative or overly critical,
    including sometimes calling for regime change. Rather than acknowledge
    the right of freedom of speech, the Nigerien authorities frequently
    react using diverse and in many cases concerning tactics, ranging from
    temporarily detaining individuals for questioning, months-long
    detentions with threat of imprisonment, and in a few cases, convictions
    with suspended sentences.
        If confirmed, I will continue to implement and champion programs
    and funding to combat violations of human rights and civil liberties,
    and expand respect for fundamental freedoms in Niger. I will engage
    proactively with human rights, civil society, and other non-
    governmental organizations. I will speak out in the media. I will
    encourage the Nigerien Government to seek input from a broad range of
    viewpoints, including civil society. I will be vigilant to ensure that
    our security cooperation is never misused to restrict the rights of the
    Nigerien people, and that, in accordance with the Leahy law, units
    which have committed human rights violations do not receive U.S.
    training. I will also forcefully advocate for the protection and
    defense of human rights. I will press the Nigerien government to adhere
    to its own cconstitution and laws, and to hold accountable violators of
    those laws.
        Through these actions, if confirmed, I will seek to reinforce with
    both the Government of Niger and the Nigerien public the strong stance
    of the U.S. government with respect to democratic progress and respect
    for human rights, including media freedoms, space for civil society
    actions, and political space for all political parties. This support
    will extend to judicial practices so as to minimize pre-trial
    detention, improve penal conditions, and improve the treatment of those
    in custody by law enforcement officials. Furthermore, I will seek to
    advocate against any abuses by security forces against civilians,
    infringements of labor rights, and exploitation of any element of the
    Nigerien public, to include slavery or servitude.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in the Republic of
    Niger in advancing human rights, civil society, and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. There are many obstacles to improving the human rights
    situation in Niger. Niger's armed forces are not numerous enough and
    lack sufficient resources to protect all of Niger's citizens from being
    victimized by violent extremists. Nigerien prisons are critically
    underfunded, and as a result, conditions are dire. Nigerien law
    enforcement officials lack sufficient training on the importance of
    respecting fundamental freedoms, and accountability mechanisms to deter
    violations are not in place; as a result, these freedoms are
    occasionally violated.
        In Niger's prisons, nutrition, sanitation, potable water, and
    medical care are poor. National Guard troops have acted as untrained
    prison guards, but a new training institute has been established, and
    prison officials at all levels are enrolled. Recordkeeping on prisoners
    is inadequate. There are no official penal or judicial alternatives to
    incarceration for nonviolent offenders. Some Nigerien law enforcement
    officials have violated Nigeriens' freedom of expression and freedom
    from arbitrary detention in order to counter what the government
    perceives as threats to public safety.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in the Republic of Niger? If confirmed, what
    steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar
    efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and
    security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed as Ambassador, I will proactively engage
    with human rights, civil society, and other non-governmental
    organizations. I will encourage the Nigerien government to seek input
    from a broad range of viewpoints, including civil society. I will also
    vigorously advocate for the protection and defense of human rights.
        If confirmed, I will make certain the Embassy continues to
    rigorously implement Leahy requirements to ensure that recipients of
    U.S. security assistance are subject to human rights vetting and that
    security cooperation activities, including pre-deployment training for
    Nigerien peacekeepers in Mali under the Africa Contingency Operations
    Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program, include human rights training
    to reduce the risk of human rights abuses in peacekeeping operations in
    which Niger participates. I will do the same for rule of law programs
    with the police. I will be vigilant to ensure that our security
    cooperation is never misused to restrict the rights of the Nigerien
    people, and that units which have committed human rights violations do
    not receive U.S. training.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with the
    Republic of Niger to address cases of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Niger?

        Answer. If confirmed, my team and I will work hard to ensure that
    the rule of law is respected in Niger, including the Nigerien
    Constitution, which guarantees basic human rights.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to advocate for the
    respect of fundamental freedoms to include the freedom of speech and
    peaceful assembly, and advocate for persons unjustly detained by the
    government.

        Question 6. Will you engage with the Republic of Niger on matters
    of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider human rights and democracy
    advocacy to be a fundamental part of my job and will regularly engage
    with the Nigerien government on these issues. I will make support for
    human rights, civil rights, and good governance key elements of my
    engagement with the Nigerien government across the full range of
    issues. Niger stands to benefit greatly in all areas when its people
    are empowered, free to express their views and engage their government
    without fear of retribution, and have trust in the rule of law.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Republic of Niger?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As a Foreign Service officer who has served with diverse
    teams throughout my career, I strongly believe in the value of
    workplace diversity. If confirmed, I will ensure that the U.S. Embassy
    in Niamey has active and accessible Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
    and Federal Women's Program (FWP) operations, programs, and outreach,
    and will ensure that EEO and FWP counselors are trained and afforded
    time at the workplace to perform their duties. I will ensure the
    embassy has a structured mentorship program and that each member of the
    embassy team has opportunities for personal growth and professional
    success. I will include staff from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in activities, committees and boards, working
    groups, visitor hosting, field travel, and other developmental
    assignments. I will also hold sessions to listen to their feedback
    regarding the mission and its undertakings.
        Furthermore, in my own behavior, I will model a strong commitment
    to diversity and inclusion. I will ensure that the employee evaluation
    process is rigorously followed, including formal and documented
    counseling sessions throughout each performance period, so that
    employees receive timely and constructive feedback on their performance
    and have structured opportunities to raise with their supervisors any
    workplace concerns or impediments to success.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will speak publicly, including in Town Hall
    and Country Team meetings, on a regular basis regarding my commitment
    to diversity and inclusion, and underscore my expectations that all
    embassy team members will experience and sustain an inclusive and
    supportive workplace. I will require all supervisors to promote an
    inclusive, supportive, and ethical workplace, and will emphasize the
    importance of diversity and inclusion in my oversight of section and
    agency heads as well as in orientation and training sessions. I will
    encourage that the performance evaluations of all supervisors comment
    on the supervisor's success in valuing diversity and promoting
    inclusion, and will recognize and commend efforts among supervisors to
    value diversity and foster inclusion. I will ensure that supervisors
    are cognizant of EEO principles and rules, and held accountable for
    respecting them. I will ensure prompt engagement, and corrective action
    when warranted, on any expressions of concern that the embassy
    workplace does not value diversity or promote inclusion.

        Question 12. According to a report in the New York Times last
    month, the administration is considering new rules for drone strikes
    and raids that may well affect operations in Niger.

       What rules currently govern who is targeted drone strikes, and is
            that rule in fact going to be relaxed? Should we expect to see
            more strikes in Niger? Will such strikes be vetted and approved
            at the same levels within our government that they were in the
            Obama administration? Will rules governing ``commando raids
            outside conventional battlefield.'' as the article suggest be
            changed?

        Answer. The United States bases and operates MQ9 unmanned aerial
    vehicles from Niamey, Niger. In close coordination with the government
    of Niger, U.S. Air Force Africa (AFAFRICA) supports a range of security
    missions. This effort promotes regional stability in support of U.S.
    diplomacy and national security, and strengthens relationships with
    regional leaders committed to security and prosperity. The United
    States has not armed any of these drones, so there are no strikes. I
    must defer to the Department of Defense for more specifics regarding
    this program.

        Question 13. How much money have we provided to Niger in each of
    the past four fiscal years in security assistance from all sources?
    What are the primary accounts and programs through which we have
    provided such assistance?

        Answer. During Fiscal Years 2013-2016, the United States provided
    nearly $90 million in funding for security assistance to Niger. This
    amount includes funding from Foreign Military Financing (FMF),
    International Military Education and Training (IMET), Nonproliferation,
    Antiterrorism, Demining and related programs (NADR), counter-terrorism
    (TSCTP) the Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF), and Peacekeeping
    Operation Funds.
        In FY 2016, we provided $34.5 million; in FY 2015 $28.2 million; in
    FY 2014 $9.7 million; and in FY 2013, $18 million in security
    assistance to Niger.

        Question 14. What are the current proposals for funding the ``G-5
    Sahe.'' (a grouping of Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso)
    under discussion in the Security Council?

        Answer. Some G-5 member states and France have attempted to
    persuade the U.N. Security Council to authorize the deployment of the
    G-5 Joint Force, under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter.

        Question 15. What is the United States position on how the G-5
    should be funded and what international partners should contribute?

        Answer. The United States applauds the increased leadership that
    regional organizations have demonstrated and strongly supports the
    efforts of the G-5 Sahel countries to bolster regional security. The G-
    5 Sahel Joint Force represents a concrete opportunity to leverage
    resources to solve problems. The United States will continue to support
    the G-5 through flexible bilateral and regional support, which have
    proven the most pragmatic in the Sahel. Since 2012, the Department of
    State has provided over $600 million in security assistance to G-5
    countries. Since February 2013, the United States has also provided $95
    million in logistics support for French stabilization and operations to
    counter violent extremism in the Sahel.
        Many donor nations have pledged support intended for the G-5 Sahel
    Joint Force. The European Union has pledged 50 million euros, to be
    disbursed through a French parastatal. Each of the five G-5 countries--
    Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and Chad, has pledged 10 million
    euros, as well as a minimum of one battalion of the troops and law
    enforcement personnel who will constitute the force. France has pledged
    to pay eight million euros by the end of 2017, and will donate
    helicopters to Niger by 2019. France is currently providing military
    staff support to Mauritania. Germany has pledged to provide ambulances,
    water tank trucks, construction, training, and mobility support.

        Question 16. Freedom House's 2017 report stated that, ``Niger's
    political rights rating declined from 3 to 4 due to the repressive
    conditions surrounding the 2016 presidential and legislative elections,
    including harassment of the opposition, as well as alleged
    irregularities in the balloting itself.'' The report goes on to say
    that the ``struggle to meet the security challenges that surround Niger
    has served as an alibi for the government to restrict freedoms and
    civil liberties.''

       What assistance have we provided to Niger over the past four fiscal
            years to support democracy and human rights?

        Answer. From FY 2014--FY 2017, the United States provided
    approximately $9 million in bilateral foreign assistance to support
    democracy, governance, and human rights activities in Niger. In
    addition to the bilateral funding, Niger has also received
    approximately $40.5 million in resilience programming between FY 2014
    and FY 2017 from USAID's West Africa Regional Mission, which supports
    programming in Niger for health and family planning, environment,
    agriculture, trade, and peace and governance, including countering
    violent extremism.

        Question 17. How will you, if confirmed as Ambassador, ensure that
    the government in Niger understands that security challenges should not
    serve as an excuse to restrict freedoms and civil liberties?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure that my messaging, both public
    and private, to the government and people of Niger would underscore the
    importance that the U.S. government attaches to the promotion of
    democracy, respect for human rights, support for effective and
    accountable government, and the maintenance of open political space
    with freedom to express peacefully views critical of the government.
    These elements all work to support long-term stability and deepen
    Niger's democratic consolidation. Furthermore, the embassy's public
    diplomacy, high-level visits, field trips, and programming would
    continuously accentuate the importance of democratic freedoms and civil
    liberties to a vibrant democracy that serves as a foundation for
    Niger's development.
        Our Embassy has set up a press freedom working group to highlight
    concerns that protection of democratic institutions and civil liberties
    is critical to our partnership. We aim to advocate for, and effect
    actions that result in, easing of journalist harassment and safe
    platforms for those with opposing views. If confirmed, I look forward
    to continuing the activities of this working group in order to promote
    greater freedom of expression for all Nigeriens.
        If confirmed, I will make certain the embassy continues to
    rigorously implement Leahy requirements to ensure that recipients of
    U.S. security assistance are subject to human rights vetting.
    Furthermore, I will require that security cooperation activities,
    including pre-deployment training to Nigerien peacekeepers in Mali
    under the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA)
    program, include specific human rights training to reduce the risk of
    human rights abuses in peacekeeping operations in which Niger
    participates. I will do the same for rule of law programs with the
    police. I will be vigilant to ensure that our security cooperation is
    never misused to restrict the rights of the Nigerien people, and that
    units which have committed human rights violations do not receive U.S.
    training.
        The U.S. Mission in Niger is working on two levels to improve good
    governance. At the local level, we support multi-stakeholder dialogues,
    planning, budgeting, and joint action to identify and address citizen
    needs. At the national level, we support priority policy reform,
    including improvements to the Electoral Law, Young Girl Education and
    Protection Law, and Future Generations Law. We also continue to
    strengthen the capacity of the legislative branch, media, civil
    society, and other actors to fulfill their critical roles in society,
    increase public dialogue, and serve as a check and balance on the
    executive. If confirmed, I will continue to implement and champion
    similarly effective programs and funding to combat violations of human
    rights and civil liberties, and expand respect for fundamental freedoms
    in Niger.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
               to Michael J. Dodman by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting respect for human rights and democracy has been a
    priority in each of my Foreign Service assignments. The following
    examples are among my most significant actions, drawn from two very
    different posts.
        As Consul General in Karachi, one of my top priorities was
    fostering dialogue among religious groups, both to build respect and
    tolerance for religious freedom, and to promote conditions conducive to
    a more democratic, stable, and prosperous society. I met regularly with
    religious leaders of all faiths, including direct outreach to students
    in madrasas, and established the Consul General's residence as a space
    for regular interfaith discussions. I directed that the beneficiaries
    of any assistance programs in our consular district include
    representatives from Pakistan's many religious and ethnic minorities.
    Likewise, I ensured that women and girls benefited from our assistance
    programs, and were represented in all of our public diplomacy programs.
    The Consulate team and I developed a close partnership with the
    country's leading philanthropist, and together we hosted a series of
    educational sessions and social events for residents of the city's
    largest orphanage for girls. Finally, I made sure that the U.S.
    Consulate was widely recognized as a model employer in the region,
    where qualified employees were hired and promoted regardless of gender,
    religion, ethnicity, or social status. For instance, during my time in
    Karachi, we expanded the number of women hired as security guards. As
    the public face of our compound, this sent a visible signal to the city
    about U.S. values and equal employment opportunity.
        As Political Counselor in Prague, my team and I exposed details
    regarding the plight of around 100 North Koreans working at a factory
    in the Czech Republic in conditions of forced labor. We assessed the
    scale of the workforce and their working conditions, providing the
    State Department with details and recommendations. We made a clear and
    compelling case to the Czech Government to intervene on behalf of the
    workers. The Government promptly responded, forcing the firm to end its
    contract with the North Korean government. The Czechs also put in place
    procedures that prevented future contracts with the North Korean
    regime.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Mauritania? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Mauritania? What do
    you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most serious human rights concern in Mauritania is
    slavery. The elimination of slavery everywhere is long past due, but
    doing so in Mauritania has been particularly difficult. While
    Mauritanian law prohibits slavery, the Government has rarely prosecuted
    alleged slaveholders. and efforts to enforce anti-slavery legislation
    have been insufficient. If confirmed, I will seek to engage the
    Government of Mauritania in a partnership to fight slavery, and other
    forms of human trafficking, and identify and provide protective
    assistance, social services, and skills training to former slaves. If
    confirmed, I will seek to increase the capacity of civil society to
    support the reintegration of marginalized groups, including former
    slaves, and improve their access to justice. I will work to provide
    U.S. training to police, prosecutors, and judges to address the
    challenges of investigating and trying human trafficking cases.
        Other human rights problems include incarceration of children with
    adult prisoners, government influence over the judiciary, arbitrary
    limits on freedom of assembly, public corruption, and restrictions on
    religious freedom. The constitution dictates that only Muslims may be
    citizens. Other reported human rights abuses included gender-based
    violence against women and girls; discrimination against women; female
    genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C); early and forced marriage;
    political marginalization of sub-Saharan (non-Arab) ethnic groups and
    of the Arab Haratine caste of slave descendants; racial and ethnic
    discrimination; discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual,
    transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) persons and persons with HIV/AIDS;
    child labor; and inadequate and selective arbitrary enforcement of
    laws, including labor laws.
        If confirmed, I will also continue to underscore that Mauritania's
    eligibility for trade benefits under the Africa Growth and Opportunity
    Act (AGOA) will require continued progress on AGOA eligibility
    criteria, including those related to human rights and labor rights. As
    Mauritania strives to expand our trade and investment relationship, we
    should leverage AGOA eligibility criteria to encourage greater progress
    in combatting slavery, holding slaveholders accountable, protecting
    worker rights, and ensuring civil society organizations, including
    anti-slavery NGOs, are able to do their work without threats or
    intimidation from the government.
        Through steady engagement with the Mauritanian Government and civil
    society, I hope to affect real progress towards the goal of a more
    just, inclusive, and free Mauritanian society.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Mauritania in
    advancing human rights, civil society, and democracy in general?

        Answer. The three courts set up to hear slavery and human
    trafficking cases are understaffed, underfunded and generally lack
    political support from the central government. Tadamoun, the Government
    agency mandated to address poverty and the ``vestiges of slavery,''
    does not fulfill its role to submit criminal cases on behalf of victims
    and represent victims in cases against their alleged traffickers or
    slaveholders. Government agencies charged with combating trafficking
    and slavery continue to lack the resources, personnel, and political
    will to prosecute politically connected offenders, and there remains a
    fundamental lack of commitment to make serious and sustained efforts to
    combat hereditary slavery. Many senior government officials, like many
    Mauritanian citizens, downplay or deny the continued existence of
    slavery. However, we know that significant work remains to be done if
    slavery is to be fully abolished from the country.
        The Government of Mauritania has taken many necessary steps to
    create laws and a judicial framework to address and correct human
    rights abuses, but a major obstacle is a failure to follow through and
    empower these new institutions to enforce the new laws. For example, in
    April 2016 the Government created the National Mechanism for Prevention
    of Torture (MNP) as an independent governmental body charged with
    investigating credible allegations of torture. Yet to date, the MNP has
    not launched a single investigation. A major challenge is in getting
    the Mauritanian Government to recognize that while it has made very
    modest progress in combating slavery, the international community
    strongly feels the Government is doing enough in this realm.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Mauritania? If confirmed, what steps will
    you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will meet regularly with human rights,
    civil society, and other non-governmental organizations. The U.S.
    Embassy in Nouakchott has a strong record in this area, and I intend to
    maintain this focus.
        If confirmed, I will make certain the Embassy continues to
    rigorously implement Leahy requirements to ensure that recipients of
    U.S. security assistance are subject to human rights vetting and that
    security cooperation activities, including pre-deployment training for
    Mauritanian peacekeepers in the Central African Republic under the
    Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program,
    include specific human rights training to reduce the risk of human
    rights abuses in peacekeeping operations in which Mauritania
    participates. I will do the same for rule of law programs with the
    police. I will be vigilant to ensure that our security cooperation is
    never misused to restrict the rights of the Mauritanian people, and
    that units which have committed human rights violations do not receive
    U.S. training.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Mauritania to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Mauritania?

        Answer. If confirmed, my team and I will make it a priority to
    press for the rule of law to be respected in Mauritania. I am concerned
    by reports of cases where these rights are infringed by violations of
    due process and political interference, including with regard to
    members of the political opposition and civil society. If confirmed, I
    will advocate for the respect of fundamental freedoms, including
    freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, and advocate for the release
    of persons detained unjustly.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Mauritania on matters of human
    rights, civil rights, and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider human rights and democracy
    advocacy to be a fundamental part of my job and the embassy's mission.
    I will make support for human rights, civil rights, and good governance
    key elements of my engagements with the Mauritanian government.
    Mauritania stands to benefit greatly when its people are empowered,
    free to express their views and engage their government without fear of
    retribution, and have trust in and the protection of the rule of law.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Mauritania?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am a strong supporter of career development and
    mentorship for all State Department and Foreign Service employees, and
    agree fully that diversity is essential to a well-function public
    service. Likewise, as the face of the United States abroad, it is
    essential that the Foreign Service represent America in all of its
    diversity.
        As Director of the State Department office managing the initial
    assignments of all Foreign Service personnel, I took special effort to
    make sure that participants in the Pickering and Rangel programs--the
    two programs that most directly recruit underrepresented groups in the
    Foreign Service--received assignments that would provide a firm basis
    for success in their Foreign Service careers. I have mentored and
    supported the applications to the Pickering and Rangel programs of
    several students from diverse backgrounds whom I have met through
    lectures and seminars I have led at local universities. In making
    hiring decisions for my own staff, and through my participation on the
    State Department committee that selects Principal Officers and
    candidates for Deputy Chief of Mission positions, I have always
    emphasized the importance of diversity.
        Mentoring, career development, and respect for diversity are all
    personal core values, and I am confident that they will be front and
    center of my management of the U.S. Embassy in Nouakchott, if
    confirmed. In particular, given the challenges that Mauritania
    confronts in addressing ethnic and racial barriers, I intend to follow
    the practice I used successfully as Principal Officer in Karachi,
    Pakistan, of ensuring that the composition of our local staff fully
    reflects the diversity of the host nation.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. Most important is leading by example and setting the tone
    from the top that makes clear that our workplace will be one that
    embraces respect for everyone. If confirmed, I will highlight this in
    my first meeting with the country team, and in my first town hall with
    the full staff; it will be repeated in these settings at least
    annually, to make sure that newcomers understand my expectations. I
    will make diversity, tolerance, and respect for equal opportunity an
    element of each of my performance management discussions with my direct
    reports, and will take swift action to discipline staff who do not
    abide by these principles. Finally, I will ensure that all staff
    receive training on diversity and EEO rules and procedures.

        Question 12. What are the current proposals for funding the ``G-5
    Sahel" (a grouping of Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso)
    under discussion in the Security Council?

        Answer. Some G-5 member states and France have attempted to
    persuade the U.N. Security Council to authorize the deployment of the
    G-5 Joint Force, under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter.

        Question 13. What is the United States position on how the G-5
    should be funded and what international partners should contribute?

        Answer. The United States applauds the increased leadership that
    regional organizations have demonstrated and strongly supports the
    efforts of the G-5 Sahel countries to bolster regional security. The G-
    5 Sahel joint force represents a concrete opportunity to leverage
    resources to solve problems. The United States supports the G-5 Sahel
    countries through flexible bilateral and regional support. Since 2012,
    the United States has provided over $600 million in security assistance
    to G-5 countries. Since February 2013, the United States has also
    provided $95 million in logistics support for French stabilization and
    operations to counter violent extremism in the Sahel.
        Many donor nations have pledged support intended for the G-5 Sahel
    Joint Force. The European Union has pledged 50 million euros, to be
    disbursed through a French parastatal. Each of the five G-5 countries--
    Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and Chad, has pledged 10 million
    euros, as well as a minimum of one battalion of the troops and law
    enforcement who will constitute the force. France has pledged to pay
    eight million euros by the end of 2017, and will donate helicopters to
    Niger by 2019. France is currently providing military staff support to
    Mauritania. Germany has pledged to provide ambulances, water tank
    trucks, construction, training, and mobility support.

        Question 14. What will be your role in in terms of U.S. cooperation
    with the G-5 if confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Mauritania given the
    ``permanent secretariat'' is based in Nouakchott?

        Answer. I anticipate that the State Department will formally
    request that the G-5 Sahel Secretariat in Nouakchott recognize our U.S.
    Ambassador in Mauritania as the official U.S. diplomatic representative
    to the G-5 Sahel. Having our Ambassador to Mauritania designated as our
    diplomatic representative to the G-5 Sahel will give us deeper and more
    immediate information about and help shape our policy toward this
    regional organization that is emerging as a potentially influential
    force in West Africa.

        Question .15 Recent droughts, such as the 2011 Sahel-wide drought,
    have impacted the resilience and coping mechanisms of Mauritanian
    households. The presence of Malian refugees in host communities in
    Mauritania, like the 50,000 Malians in Mauritania's Mbera refugee camp,
    have also strained the country. What should the USG's approach be to
    improve the level of cooperation with international relief
    organizations providing food aid and refugee support?

        Answer. Though improving conditions in some parts of northern Mali
    have led some Malian refugees to return home, most refugees have been
    cautious, and only a small number have spontaneously returned to Mali
    from Mauritania. The Mauritanian Government is committed to hosting
    refugees despite its own challenges with food insecurity, and it has
    maintained open borders for refugees amidst security concerns. The
    Government works closely with the Office of the United Nations High
    Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to protect and assist Malian
    refugees.
        The U.S. Government is a major multilateral donor that supports
    U.N. agencies such as the UNHCR, the World Food Program (WFP), and the
    United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF). We
    also support international and national non-governmental organizations
    (INGOs) to ensure that refugees have access to life-saving support. Our
    assistance also trains refugees and builds their skills in preparation
    for return to Mali. The good work that we accomplish through these
    organizations notwithstanding, we note a donor fatigue with regard to
    global assistance to the Malian refugees in the Mbera Camp. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Government of Mauritania to encourage
    it and other partners to take a greater role in assisting the refugees
    and in designing a sustainable exit strategy.

        Question 16. Mauritania is identified as a ``Tier 3" country in the
    2016 Trafficking in Persons Report, meaning it does not fully meet the
    minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making
    significant efforts to do so. In your estimation, does the Government
    have the political will to address human trafficking? If confirmed,
    what types of U.S. diplomatic efforts and assistance, if any, would you
    pursue to help Mauritania better tackle this problem?

        Answer. The Mauritanian Government has taken steps that shows it
    has some political will to address human trafficking, but the U.S.
    Government would like to see it take many more, and stronger, steps,
    and fully implement the commitments it has already announced.
        While Mauritanian law prohibits all forms of trafficking, including
    hereditary slavery, the Government has rarely prosecuted alleged
    traffickers or slaveholders, and efforts to enforce anti-slavery and
    anti-trafficking legislation have been otherwise insufficient. The
    Government has taken steps to increase public awareness of the
    prohibition of slavery and in 2013 established a national agency,
    Tadamoun, to address poverty and the ``vestiges of slavery;" however,
    this agency has primarily focused on general poverty-reduction efforts
    rather than specifically addressing slavery. In 2015, an anti-slavery
    law was passed following consultations with the United Nations, which
    strengthened the country's ability to prosecute all forms of human
    trafficking. The Supreme Judicial Council set up three courts in 2015
    and 2016, with an exclusive mandate to hear slavery and human
    trafficking cases. One of the courts has convicted two slaveholders,
    with the convictions upheld by the Court of Appeals. Despite some
    positive steps, the Government has not taken adequate steps to enforce
    its 2003 anti-trafficking nor its 2015 Anti-Slavery laws.
        The staff of the new anti-slavery courts have not received
    sufficient training or resources to produce the intended results in
    terms of convictions (only two to date, but several cases are in
    progress and others have been handled by civil compromise between the
    parties). In addition, judges and prosecutors must be trained further
    to support the referrals of trafficking and slavery cases to the anti-
    trafficking courts, thereby facilitating victims' access to justice.
        One part of our encourage is to incentivize the Mauritanian
    Government to meet agreed-upon benchmarks in its efforts to combat
    slavery in order to maintain economic benefits under the African Growth
    and Opportunity Act (AGOA). Our Embassy in Nouakchott has taken
    measures to increase knowledge of AGOA benefits and eligibility
    criteria among Mauritanians, bringing an AGOA expert to Mauritania to
    meet with business leaders in Nouakchott and Nouadhibou. The Embassy
    worked with business leaders to establish the U.S.-Mauritania Business
    Forum to, among other purposes, persuade the Government to take actions
    to preserve access to AGOA benefits.
        If confirmed, I will engage the Government of Mauritania in a
    partnership to fight slavery and other forms of human trafficking, hold
    slaveholders to account, and identify and provide protective
    assistance, social services, and skills training to former slaves. I
    will also work along with the embassy staff to provide training for
    police, prosecutors, and judges to address the challenges of
    investigating and trying human trafficking cases.

        Question 17. Though laws have been passed criminalizing slavery in
    recent years, practice has been slow to change. What specific further
    actions will you take to support organizations attempting to address
    the issue of slavery in Mauritania, if confirmed?

        Answer. The State Department is funding a $1.6 million, three-year
    program focused on the eradication of slavery and full integration of
    people emerging from slavery into mainstream society. The objectives of
    the program are to provide skills, opportunities, and support for 310
    people emerging from slavery to achieve socio-economic independence and
    rights, including citizenship, and to strengthen the legal system and
    framework to identify and prosecute perpetrators of slavery. The
    project uses three mutually reinforcing strategies--supporting the
    socioeconomic empowerment of people emerging from slavery; ensuring
    that the authorities more rigorously identify and pursue the
    prosecution of slavery cases and compensate victims; and changing
    societal norms and attitudes towards slavery and its victims. This
    program includes sub-grants to two key partners: a leading anti-slavery
    non-government organization (NGO) in Mauritania and a legal
    organization which supports the NGO. DRL is funding a second program in
    Mauritania for $1.9 million over four-and-a-half years that supports
    the reintegration of marginalized groups, with a particular focus on
    improving their access to justice and promoting access to legal
    identity documents.
        Mauritania is also part of the $1 million Department of Labor-
    funded global BRIDGE project, which will contribute to the Mauritanian
    government's efforts to eliminate all forms of slavery and to provide
    protection and remedies to victims.
        The Department of State is increasing the capacity of civil society
    to support the reintegration of marginalized groups, including former
    slaves, and improve their access to justice. If confirmed, I will
    remain in close communication and share information with local and
    international NGOs whose mission is to publicize and combat slavery and
    human trafficking. Whenever possible, and when a visit by such a group
    would not interfere in any way with U.S. foreign policy, the embassy
    staff and I will welcome international NGOs to Mauritania and seek to
    facilitate meetings for them with both government and private
    officials, so that they may more effectively promote our shared goals
    of ending slavery and human trafficking.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Nina Fite by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career in the Foreign Service, I have sought
    to promote human rights and democracy. During my three years as
    Principal Officer in Lahore, Pakistan, I focused on increasing business
    and entrepreneurial training and opportunities for women through the
    U.S.-Pakistan Women's Business Council, enlisting Pakistani companies
    and business executives to commit to providing internships. In my tour
    in Afghanistan, I also worked extensively with programs to support
    business education and training for women.
        In Pakistan, I emphasized religious tolerance through public visits
    to places of worship of all religions represented in my consular
    district. I championed tolerance with government officials,
    particularly with regard to several high-profile cases. I used a
    television appearance, which reached more than 30 million viewers, to
    talk about religious tolerance in the United States. In Pakistan, as
    during my previous tour in Angola, I met regularly with human rights
    groups, provided them access to high-level visitors, and ensured they
    were represented in our International Visitor Leadership Program. I
    lobbied the respective governments on human rights cases and the
    importance of following international standards in their treatment of
    human rights activists.
        During the run-up to Angola's 2008 elections, I led our Political
    and Economic section in close cooperation with USAID-funded democracy
    programming to train election officials and citizens on democratic
    elections and voting. In Pakistan, during the 2013 elections, I
    directed the Consulate team in our election monitoring efforts,
    incorporating visiting U.S. election monitors. Our observations and
    reporting contributed directly to the U.S. government's and
    international community's evaluation of the election process.
        As Principal Officer in Montreal, Canada, I highlighted Native
    American culture and achievements by arranging for the first Native
    American federal judge to speak directly to Canadian First Nation
    members in our consular district. For our 2017 national day
    celebration, we highlighted Native American culture, including a
    performance by a Hopi dance troupe, which we sponsored in Montreal.
    Throughout my tenure in Montreal, our Consulate promoted LGBTQ rights
    by operating a booth during the Pride Community Days and marching in
    the annual parade, the only Consulate in Montreal to do so. We used
    public diplomacy programming to support the Montreal Black Film
    Festival, and I hosted a lunch at my residence for Martin Luther King
    III with NGO representatives and city dignitaries.
        Throughout my career, I have used my convening power to bring
    together representatives of religious and ethnic minorities, political
    parties, NGOs, and women to promote U.S. policy and tolerance.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Angola? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Angola? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The 2016 Human Rights Report notes instances of cruel,
    excessive, and degrading punishment, including reported cases of
    torture and beatings; limits on freedoms of assembly, association,
    speech, and press; and official corruption and impunity. Issues like
    these show how important it is for us to sustain high-level dialogue
    with governments on these issues, seek opportunities to promote civil
    society, and use public engagement opportunities to expand democratic
    space. If confirmed, I would make full use of such engagement to seek
    both resolution in individual cases and to address systemic issues.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Angola in advancing
    human rights, civil society, and democracy in general?

        Answer. The 2016 Human Rights Report notes several potential
    obstacles to progress on human rights issues, including the
    government's obstruction of opposition parties' exercise of their right
    to meet. It also notes restrictions on the operation of civil society,
    such as 2015 regulations on NGOs, which civil society criticizes as
    potentially restrictive and intrusive.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Angola? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil society,
    and other non-governmental organizations. If confirmed, I will
    strengthen U.S. efforts to work with the Government of Angola, as well
    as non-governmental organizations, to improve human rights conditions
    in Angola. I will also ensure that my staff fully implements and
    complies with the Leahy Law and similar efforts.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Angola to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by Angola?

        Answer. Members of Congress and the State Department have spoken
    publically in support of human rights defenders in Angola. If
    confirmed, I would continue to press these issues and include them
    prominently in our engagement.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Angola on matters of human rights,
    civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. In 2010, the United States created a Strategic Partnership
    with Angola, agreeing to hold high-level diplomatic meetings on a
    regular basis, as well as separate meetings on specific issues,
    including human rights. If confirmed, I will continue to strengthen our
    work on these issues and ensure we include human rights issues
    prominently in our engagement with Angola.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Angola?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor, and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As a leader and manager in several diplomatic posts, I know
    that diversity enriches our work, as it does the United States as a
    whole. If confirmed, I will use the diversity of my staff to benefit
    all at the Mission, while promoting a range of backgrounds and
    perspectives in the individuals whom I review for future positions.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that everyone on my team is
    treated professionally, that their rights are respected, that they are
    safe, and that they have the resources they need to perform their jobs.
    We are all one team working for the good of the U.S-Angola relationship
    and the interests of the United States and the American people.

        Question 12. U.S.--Angola Relations: During the Obama
    administration, issues of democracy, human rights, and development were
    discussed with Angola through a Human Rights Dialogue held as part of
    the U.S.-Angola Strategic Partnership Dialogue.

       What is the status of the U.S.-Angola Strategic Partnership
            Dialogue?
       If confirmed, will you commit to ensure that human rights and
            democracy are put on the agenda of the U.S.-Angola Strategic
            Partnership Dialogue?

        Answer. The U.S.-Angola Strategic Partnership Dialogue remains
    active, and has given us a platform to raise a variety of issues to the
    highest levels of government. Most recently, in May 2017, the Defense
    Minister, now the President of Angola, came to Washington to sign a
    Memorandum of Understanding on security cooperation with Secretary of
    Defense Mattis. This was regarded as a milestone in our partnership,
    and shows another facet of our continuing dialogue that our Embassy in
    Luanda pursues every day.
        If confirmed, I will commit to ensuring that human rights and
    democracy issues are discussed within the framework of the U.S.-Angola
    Strategic Partnership dialogue. I believe it is important to keep open
    and frank communication with countries like Angola, and maintaining
    dialogue on the state of civil society and human rights is vital to
    U.S. interests. I am confident our strategic partnership will continue
    to grow in the coming years and deepen and strengthen our countries'
    ties.

        Question 13. Angola's Regional Role: Angola currently holds the
    presidency of the International Conference for the Great Lakes Region
    (ICGLR). Given the administration's [decision] not to name a Special
    Envoy for the Great Lakes, much of the responsibility for engaging
    Angola on regional issues will fall to you for the duration of Angola's
    term as President.

       What do you see as the most significant issues related to peace and
            security in the Great Lakes, and what actions will you advocate
            Angola take as President of the ICGLR related to issues such as
            the political crisis in Burundi, the political, security and
            the humanitarian crisis in DRC?
       What diplomatic support will you provide to Angola as they attempt
            to have the ICGLR address these issues?

        Answer. Angola provides stabilizing leadership in the region and
    exercises considerable regional influence. Under its ICGLR Presidency,
    Angola has chaired summits on issues in the DRC, for example. We expect
    Angola to continue to play an influential role in the ICGLR, and we
    will continue to engage through both Luanda and Brazzaville as the
    Republic of Congo assumes the Presidency imminently. In addition,
    Angola has participated in diplomatic plenaries, including the June
    International Contact Group meeting the State Department hosted here in
    Washington, to find a common way forward on key issues impacting the
    Great Lakes Region, including the crisis in Burundi. Most recently,
    Angola, along with the United States, participated in a high-level
    event on the margins of the UN General Assembly hosted by France and
    the United Kingdom to discuss the DRC's ongoing political impasse.
        Resolving the political impasse in the DRC, which we believe can be
    achieved only by the holding of credible elections and a peaceful,
    democratic transfer of power, is critical given its implications for
    stability in the DRC and the broader region. Regional leaders, and in
    particular Angola, can have considerable influence on and access to
    President Kabila; messages from the region are often better received
    than those of the United States or western partners. We have therefore
    worked closely to coordinate our messaging with Angola, which we
    believe increases the impact of our efforts.
        If confirmed, I would work with the Angolan government to
    strengthen its role as a steadying anchor in a turbulent region, in
    order to further mutual political and economic interests.

        Question 14. Corruption: Angola is a country regarded as one of the
    world's most corrupt--ranked 164th of 176 by Transparency
    International.

       In what sectors is most official corruption found in Angola?
       To what degree are former President Jose Eduardo dos Santos and his
            family implicated in ongoing corruption?
       If confirmed, what tools do you have at your disposal to help
            address corruption and what actions will you take as Ambassador
            to advocate for improvement in transparency and good governance
            with relevant Angolan stakeholders?

        Answer. Corruption impacts all facets of Angola's economy and
    society, and limits Angola's ability to grow and produce wealth for its
    people. It also contributes to a difficult business environment for
    U.S. companies. A culture of corruption with impunity was allowed to
    flourish during President Jose Eduardo dos Santos' 38 years in power.
    Transparency International also cited former President dos Santos for
    nepotism in appointing his daughter to head the state oil company
    Sonangol and his son to head the country's Sovereign Wealth Fund.
        Angola is a member of the Eastern and Southern Africa Anti-Money
    Laundering Group (ESAAMLG), a technical working body tasked with
    promoting and enforcing the Financial Action Task Force's anti-money
    laundering/counter terrorism financing (AML/CFT) standards in the
    Southern Africa region. These standards include mandates for
    transparency and beneficial ownership, regulation of sectors prone to
    money laundering and counter terrorism financing, and politically
    exposed persons. If confirmed, I will advocate for Angola's adherence
    to its ESAAMLG commitments, as well as advocate for changes in the
    current regulatory environment that allows proceeds from corruption and
    other illicit acts to move freely. I would also leverage Angola's
    upcoming mutual evaluation review of its AML/CFT regime and national
    AML/CFT risk assessment as an opportunity to advocate for lasting
    improvements in Angola's financial and other regulated sectors, prone
    to abuse by corrupt officials.
        If confirmed, I will strengthen U.S. efforts to work with the
    Government of Angola, as well as non-governmental organizations, to
    increase transparency and promote good governance to combat corruption
    and impunity better. This will take a coordinated, whole-of-government
    approach, and commitment from Angola's new government.

        Question 14. Trafficking in Persons: The State Department has
    ranked Angola ``Tier 2 Watchlist'' on trafficking in persons.

       If confirmed, what types of U.S. diplomatic efforts and assistance,
            if any, would you pursue to help Angola better tackle this
            problem?
       In what ways might such efforts be incorporated into existing U.S.
            programs that aim to help strengthen Angola's security sector
            and the rule of law?

        Answer. Angola moved up from the Tier 2 Watchlist designation in
    the 2015 Trafficking in Persons Report, and has remained off the
    Watchlist in the most recent 2017 report. The Government of Angola does
    not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination of
    trafficking, but it is making significant efforts to do so.
        If confirmed, I will emphasize the critical importance of
    strengthening law enforcement efforts to detect and interdict suspected
    traffickers, particularly those involved in sex trafficking and forced
    labor. I will press the Angolan government to prosecute these
    individuals to demonstrate to perpetrators that strict penalties exist
    for these crimes and are enforced under Angolan. I will also work
    closely with the Department of State's Office to Monitor and Combat
    Trafficking in Persons to implement U.S. foreign assistance devoted to
    combatting trafficking in persons and protecting victims, and
    incorporate anti-trafficking initiatives into other aspects of the
    Embassy's work.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Daniel Foote by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promotion of human rights and democracy has been an
    important part of my career. In Colombia, I oversaw a comprehensive,
    joint review of the curricula used by the Colombian National Police
    (CNP) by all officers. A critical impact of the review's
    recommendations was the successful inclusion of human rights modules at
    every level of CNP professional development training, and a marked
    decrease in reported human rights irregularities. In Afghanistan, I led
    the expansion of U.S. support to shelters, and associated family
    guidance centers, for women and children who suffer from, or are
    vulnerable to, gender-based violence or trafficking-in-persons. The
    impact was a significant increase in the number of at-risk Afghans
    receiving protection and support.
        While serving in the Dominican Republic, I initiated programs to
    monitor and improve the human rights conditions of Haitian immigrants
    whom sugar barons mistreated. Working together with the Department of
    Labor and the Dominican Government, we enhanced Dominican capacity to
    address broad human rights issues and particularly the worst forms of
    child labor, leading to improved working conditions. In Haiti, I
    recruited the regional Department of Homeland Security Investigations
    office to investigate a large human-smuggling ring with ties to Major
    League Baseball.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Zambia? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Zambia? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. In the lead-up to the 2016 Zambian election, we
    unfortunately saw increasing levels of intolerance and even some acts
    of violence that members of both parties committed, along with the
    incumbent party leveraging the resources of the state to its advantage.
    Despite these problems, the U.S. Government believed the 2016 election
    reflected the will of the Zambian people. However, since President
    Lungu's re-election, we have seen continued conflict between the
    political parties, culminating in opposition leader Hakainde
    Hichilema's arrest in April 2017 on charges of treason. Although
    Hichilema was released in August, we continue to see government
    attempts to limit political space for the opposition, civil society,
    and the media, including an ongoing "threatened" state of emergency,
    which we hope will lapse in the coming days.
        The continued restrictions on freedoms of assembly and speech we
    have witnessed in Zambia remain a concern. If confirmed, I would
    continue to engage the Government of Zambia and advocate for respect
    for the rule of law and the need to enhance further Zambia's reputation
    for political pluralism. I strongly believe that Zambia's continued
    democratic success, which includes respect for human rights and the
    rule of law, and the long-term peace and stability that it provides, is
    in Zambia's own interests as well as the interests of its people and
    the U.S. Government.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Zambia in advancing
    human rights, civil society, and democracy in general?

        Answer. The political tensions in Zambia continue to serve as
    potential obstacles to addressing human rights in Zambia, particularly
    in regard to respecting fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of
    assembly and press. However, recent developments, particularly the
    release of opposition leader Hakainde Hichilema in August and the offer
    by the Commonwealth's Secretary General (SG) to facilitate dialogue
    between the two sides on the issues dividing the country, are
    promising. The Commonwealth's SG has appointed an envoy to promote
    constructive dialogue and reconciliation involving Zambia's political
    parties and civil society, designed to develop reforms that will help
    lead the country forward. If confirmed, as Ambassador, I will continue
    to encourage both sides to embrace the dialogue process and work with
    Zambian civil society and the Commonwealth's envoy.
        Furthermore, taking a broader view on the issue of advancing human
    rights, civil society, and democracy, I will advocate for human rights
    and the role of civil society in working with government to promote
    democracy. If confirmed, I will continue to strengthen our work on
    these issues and ensure we include human rights issues prominently in
    our engagement with Zambia, ensuring that all Zambians have a voice in
    their society.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society, and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Zambia? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed as Ambassador, I will meet with human
    rights, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations because
    I recognize that it is important that I meet with Zambians from all
    walks of life, especially representatives from civil society and NGOs.
    I will absolutely meet with human rights defenders as well as with
    U.S., local, and international NGOs. If confirmed, as Ambassador, I
    will direct my staff to ensure all security assistance and security
    cooperation activities receive Leahy and other vetting to reinforce
    human rights.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Zambia to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by Zambia?

        Answer. If confirmed, my team and I will work hard to ensure that
    the rule of law is respected in Zambia. I will continue to urge the
    Government of Zambia to exercise restraint in addressing differences,
    to respect the rule of law, and to follow the due process that we would
    expect from a country like Zambia that historically has had a
    reputation for political pluralism and peaceful conflict resolution. I
    will ensure my team actively engages with the Government of Zambia on
    political prisoners and others unjustly targeted. I will continue to
    advocate for the respect of fundamental human rights, to include the
    freedoms of speech and peaceful assembly, and advocate for all persons
    to receive timely, fair, equitable access to justice.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Zambia on matters of human rights,
    civil rights, and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. I consider human rights and democracy advocacy to be a
    fundamental part of my job and if confirmed, I will engage with the
    Zambian Government on these issues. I will make support for human
    rights, civil rights, and good governance a key element of my
    engagement with the Government of Zambia.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Zambia?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. Per the Secretary's statement on diversity and equal
    employment opportunity, the Department of State is committed to having
    a workforce that reflects the diversity of the people whom we
    represent.
        As a career Foreign Service Officer specializing in management,
    former Assignments Officer for the Bureau of European and Eurasian
    Affairs, and two-time Deputy Chief of Mission, I have spent much of my
    career recruiting and supporting staff with diverse backgrounds and
    talents to maximize productivity and reflect the richness of American
    society. From staffing 88 posts between Rekjavik and Vladivostok, to
    working in tents on a Forward Operating Base in the hinterlands of
    Iraq, to supporting multi-billion-dollar assistance programs in
    Washington, I have developed an intense appreciation for the
    exceptional value of a diverse team. I took great pride in establishing
    effective, career-development mentorship programs at Embassies Port-au-
    Prince and Santo Domingo. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will require
    diversity as a key element in recruitment, model ample and productive
    mentorship, and support relevant organizations that assist and advocate
    for employees diversity.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. An Embassy environment reflects the attitudes of its
    leadership. As Ambassador, I will actively set an example of
    inclusiveness and fairness for my subordinates, direct them to maintain
    inclusive environments in their sections and agencies, and will counsel
    accordingly if these standards are not adhered to rigidly.

    Democracy Promotion
        Question 12.  In your confirmation hearing you made a commitment to
    promote a dialogue aimed at reconciliation and to advocate for respect
    for human rights.

        How will a reconciliation dialogue help support democracy? Will
            such a dialogue address such issues as what was deemed the
            politically motivated arrest and detention of opposition leader
            Hakainde Hichilema, or the removal of civil servants alleged to
            support the United Party for National Development opposition
            party? Will it address the closing media space?

        Answer. Democracy flourishes when citizens can voice diverse
    opinions about their government, including critical views, without fear
    of harassment or persecution. The environment for speaking freely in
    Zambia has been constricted, and a reconciliation dialogue will provide
    a formalized structure for all parties to air issues and seek redress
    or improvements to current processes and institutions. The Commonwealth
    Secretary General's offer to facilitate constructive dialogue and
    reconciliation provides all parties the opportunity to move Zambia
    forward.
        If confirmed, as Ambassador, I would continue to encourage both
    sides to embrace the dialogue process. I believe, in order such a
    dialogue to be successful, there needs to be a frank discussion of the
    political environment leading to last year's August general election
    and the related events that have since occurred. I anticipate these
    issues will naturally include concerns around restrictions on freedoms
    of the press, assembly, and expression and respect for rule of law and
    human rights. I would robustly engage with, and encourage, civil
    society and journalists to take appropriate steps to hold political
    leaders accountable for constitutional and democratic principles.

        Question 13. How much has the United States invested in Human
    Rights and Democracy programs in Zambia over each of the past four
    fiscal years? What types of programs would be beneficial in Zambia?

        Answer. The U.S. Government has been a stalwart supporter of human
    rights and democracy in Zambia for years. We have advocated for civil
    society strengthening, political pluralism, and human rights. In
    support of our policy approaches, we have supported complementary
    projects at various points from Fiscal Year 2014 through Fiscal Year
    2017 with a total value of approximately $9,200,000. Our investment in
    democracy and governance has increased over the past four years from no
    Development Assistance (DA) Funds provided for this area in 2014, $1
    million in 2015, $2 million in 2016, and $4 million in 2017. In
    addition, $1.8 million from the Elections and Political Process Fund
    and $400,000 in Economic Support Funds were designated for Zambia in
    2015. These investments supported national and international civil
    society organizations to advance productive citizen participation in
    civic events, as well as technical assistance for the Government of
    Zambia to reduce corruption, increase efficiency and accountability,
    and promote the protection of human rights.
        Looking forward, Zambia is a country where our investments in human
    rights and democracy programming can have continued impact. Despite
    current challenges, the Government is willing and open to engagement,
    and civil society is poised to play an increasingly important role as
    watchdog and citizen advocate. If confirmed, I will support national
    champions of responsive democratic governance within the Zambian
    Government, in addition to activities to: promote productive engagement
    by women and youth, buttress the Human Rights Commission, increase
    respect for fundamental freedoms, and support advocates of reform
    within relevant parliamentary committees.

    Corruption
        Question 14. Zambia has made considerable progress in the fight
    against corruption in the last decade, as reflected by major
    improvements recorded in main governance indicators. However,
    corruption remains a serious issue in Zambia, affecting the lives of
    ordinary citizens and their access to public services.

       How effective is the Anti-Corruption Commission? Does it prosecute
            high-level government officials? Has the United States provided
            funding to the Commission? Why or why not?

        Answer. The Anti-Corruption Commission has had a reputation for
    being an independent institution that pursued allegations and developed
    cases based on their merits, unbiased with respect to the prominence of
    the person or transaction under review. In recent years, however, that
    reputation has weakened, with the Commission succumbing to increasing
    political pressure, i.e., pressure to investigate political opponents
    or government critics selectively or to prematurely halt investigations
    of politically connected individuals.
        By law, the Commission has no prosecutorial power. Based on the
    results of its findings, if the Commission believes a case has merit,
    it must turn the file over to the Zambia Police Service to act on the
    information and refer the matter to the Director of Public
    Prosecutions. The Commission has referred cases of high-level
    government officials with decreasing regularity over the last half
    dozen years.
        The U.S. Government last provided funding to the Commission over a
    decade ago, judging, at the time, that the Commission was among the
    stronger institutions in Zambia and was worth receiving limited U.S.
    resources. Currently, given the political pressures on the Commission,
    U.S. Government resources likely would be more effective in reducing
    corruption within specific government structures that interface with
    citizens, such as the sectoral line ministries and the Office of the
    Auditor General.

        Question 15. If confirmed, what specific actions will you take in
    your first year as Ambassador to highlight the need to effectively
    fight corruption, and how will you support anti-corruption advocates?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will leverage my experience leading anti-
    corruption efforts in the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
    Enforcement. I intend to meet with anti-corruption advocates, such as
    Transparency International--Zambia and the African Parliamentarians
    Network Against Corruption, to understand the nature of corruption
    allegations better and learn about Zambians' efforts to address
    concerns about malfeasance by their own government. If confirmed, I
    anticipate working in collaboration with civil society partners to
    bring additional attention to these issues and raise concerns directly
    with government leaders. I will also work to buttress the role of anti-
    corruption champions within the Government of Zambia, such as the
    Office of Auditor General and relevant parliamentary oversight
    committees. I also plan to undertake efforts to encourage Zambian
    citizens to hold their own government accountable, such as continuing a
    series of dialogues between youth leaders and government officials the
    Embassy has recently initiated.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Daniel Foote by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Promoting human rights and democracy has been an important
    part of my work in the State Department. As Director of the Office of
    West African Affairs, I met regularly with Cabinet-level African
    officials and Washington-based Ambassadors to press them to ensure
    their countries respect human rights. On several occasions I brought
    specific cases to their attention where we believed human rights had
    been violated. I was part of the Department of State team that led the
    response to the attempt by The Gambian President Jammeh to remain in
    power after he lost the election in December 2016. We worked with the
    international community, especially neighboring African countries, to
    force President Jammeh to respect the results of the election and give
    up power peacefully.
        As Deputy Chief of Mission and Charge d'Affaires in Mauritania, I
    met regularly with anti-slavery activists and spoke out publicly,
    including at an anti-slavery event, in order to raise awareness of the
    issue and demonstrate U.S. support for the activists.
        As Refugee Coordinator in Baghdad, Iraq, I advocated with the Iraqi
    Government on behalf of the displaced and persecuted religious
    minorities. In Geneva, Switzerland, I advocated bilaterally and in the
    multilateral arena for other countries to increase their efforts and to
    match what the United States was doing to assist the displaced.
        I believe that my efforts, working in partnership with others,
    contributed to changes in policies and assistance and support levels.
    Although the nature of human rights work often does not lead to
    immediately apparent results, I still believe it is important as a
    representative of the United States to speak up in support of human
    rights and democracy and will, if confirmed continue to do so, as I
    have throughout my career.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Mauritius and Seychelles? What are the most important steps you expect
    to take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in
    Mauritius and Seychelles? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. Both Mauritius and Seychelles have generally good records
    on democracy and human rights, though challenges remain. In Mauritius,
    freedom of speech is a challenge, as the Government owns the sole
    television station, and has engaged in censorship. Also, violence
    against women is a societal problem. If confirmed, I expect to engage
    with the national leadership to expand opportunities for private
    ownership of media communications and also to call for justice for the
    victims of domestic violence.
        Likewise, in Seychelles, the Government owns the sole television
    station and one of the country's only two radio stations. Viewpoints at
    odds with the Government are rarely broadcast, and opportunities to
    engage in free speech are therefore limited. Domestic violence against
    women is underreported, and police rarely respond to domestic disputes.
    If confirmed, I plan to encourage the licensing of additional broadcast
    stations, and seek effective prosecutions of domestic violence cases.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Mauritius and
    Seychelles in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. Both Mauritius and Seychelles have expressed interest in
    continuing to improve their respective human rights records, and I do
    not see lack of willingness as an obstacle. I would expect that either
    country or both, may ask for additional training or resources to do so.
    Civil society and democratic institutions are healthy, as demonstrated
    by the two countries' high standing in various international indices,
    including the Ibrahim Index of African Governance.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Mauritius and Seychelles? If confirmed, what
    steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar
    efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and
    security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Yes, in the course of my career, I have met with a variety
    of human rights and civil society groups in the United States and
    abroad and, if confirmed, will continue to do so in my new assignment.
    In previous postings, I have insisted upon strict adherence with Leahy
    vetting rules, prohibiting human rights violators from participating in
    U.S. security programs, and explaining, our legal requirements. If
    confirmed, I will continue to do so in Mauritius and Seychelles.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Mauritius and Seychelles to address cases of key political prisoners or
    persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Mauritius and Seychelles?
        Answer. At the moment, we are unaware of any political prisoners or
    persons unjustly targeted by either government. But yes, if it becomes
    necessary, this will be one of the country team's key responsibilities,
    and if confirmed, I will vigorously engage with the host government.

        Answer.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Mauritius and Seychelles on
    matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes, this is imperative, and central to the Mission's goals
    and objectives.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Mauritius or Seychelles?

        Answer. No, neither I, nor members of my immediate family, have any
    such interests.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As I have done throughout my Foreign Service career, I will
    continue to mentor, promote, and support all members of the Mission
    staff through one-on-one consultations, group training, and counseling,
    where appropriate. I will pay particular attention to those staff
    members who come from diverse backgrounds or are from underrepresented
    groups in the Foreign Service.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will make sure that this goal is reflected in the stated
    mission of the Embassy, and that we periodically review as a country
    team and as individuals how we are meeting these standards. To the
    extent that I find we are insufficient in fostering such an
    environment, we will take targeted steps to remedy it.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Rubio [presiding], Risch, Gardner, Kaine,
    Cardin, and Shaheen.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Rubio. This is the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee nominations hearing for Governor Sam Brownback to be
    the Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom,
    and Ms. Michele Sison to be the U.S. Ambassador to Haiti.
        Thank you both for being here with us today and for your
    willingness to serve.
        As I told the nominees earlier, I am going to abbreviate my
    opening statement, because we do have votes scheduled in the
    Senate at 11. These are important nominations, and I want to
    make sure everybody has time to answer questions.
        I would also encourage the nominees, as your opening
    statements will be in the record, make sure you say what you
    need to say, but I know our members are looking forward to
    engaging with you, and we want to make sure that they have the
    full opportunity to do that.
        On international religious freedom, I just think any sort
    of cursory glance around the globe will reveal daily assaults
    on religious freedom. In Burma, we have nearly half a million
    Rohingya Muslims that have been forced to flee their homes due
    to horrific violence. In Iraq and Syria, ancient Christian
    communities, Yazidi, and other religious minorities are on the
    verge of extinction. In Iran, the Baha'i minority is ruthlessly
    persecuted. In Pakistan, draconian blasphemy laws sentence
    innocent people to death. In China, the Government shuts down
    underground churches, bulldozes Tibetan Buddhist centers. In
    Cuba, the Castro regime regularly arrests the Ladies in White
    on their way to mass every Sunday, including this past Sunday.
    In Saudi Arabia, the official textbooks teach hate and
    intolerance toward religious minorities.
        So sadly, there is no corner of the map that is untouched.
    That is why a robust American engagement on behalf of the
    beleaguered faith communities is an urgent need and, I think,
    international security interest. So the hearing could not be
    timelier.
        As I said, Governor Brownback has been a long-time champion
    of the issue of religious freedom globally and sought to ensure
    that America's first freedom is infused into our U.S. foreign
    policy.
        Among other things, he was the driving force in passing the
    original International Religious Freedom Act in 1998, which
    created the position he is now nominated to fill.
        In Haiti yesterday, Ms. Sison and I spoke about the
    challenges and opportunities in Haiti. Florida, my home State,
    has the largest Haitian-American diaspora, and I remain engaged
    in the community and in many challenges facing their nation of
    birth.
        One of the major areas of concern is the United Nations
    Stabilization Mission in Haiti, known as MINUSTAH, is scheduled
    to withdraw on October 15, just a few days from now. The new
    security mission is smaller than the original mission. So it is
    vital that the United States support international efforts to
    enhance and maintain security in Haiti.
        Ongoing natural disasters, global health challenges like
    HIV/AIDS, malaria, and cholera have also undermined Haiti's
    ability to meet its full potential.
        I personally have seen firsthand the potential of the
    Haitian community when they have been given the opportunity, as
    they have in Florida. And I am committed to supporting U.S.
    initiatives that promote good governance and security, and,
    hopefully, our foreign policy will remain committed in that
    direction.
        I will now introduce Senator Kaine. And then, obviously,
    also our ranking member, Senator Cardin, joins us, and he may
    have some comments that he would like to make at the opening.
    And then, hopefully, we can proceed to brief introductory
    statements and get right into the questions.
        Again, we apologize. But as Governor Brownback knows, the
    Senate does things this way. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. So, anyway, Senator Kaine?

                     STATEMENT OF HON. TIM KAINE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA

        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have enjoyed working
    with you on religious liberty issues.
        The day I got back from a wild 105-day ride in November
    2016, you and I introduced a bill about combating anti-Semitism
    around the globe through the State Department, and I have
    appreciated your partnership.
        I also am really thrilled to have both of these nominees
    who have strong public service track records, but also my
    friend and a great champion of religious liberty, Frank Wolf,
    here.
        I am not going to give an opening comment, except to say
    that it is important that we have Governor Brownback's hearing
    on the same day we are going to follow up with a substantive
    hearing about the situation of minorities, including religious
    minorities, in Iraq. So I am glad that we are doing both of
    these together.
        And that will be all opening comments that I will make.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you. And the ranking member, Senator
    Cardin, is here. He and I have worked together now on countless
    human rights issues, so much so that people are starting to say
    that we look alike. I do not know. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. That would be good for me.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. That is a great compliment. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman. I appreciate it.
        Senator Rubio has been a great champion on human rights. I
    think he would agree with me that we are all students of Frank
    Wolf.
        Frank, we thank you for your long commitment to human
    rights. It was a real honor to serve with you in the House of
    Representatives. It is always good to see you. You are a great
    friend, a great role model for all of us. So thank you for
    being here.
        It is Senator Brownback, not Governor. We take the higher
    title. [Laughter.]
        Senator Cardin. The Senator was a great leader on the
    Helsinki Commission. We worked together on many human rights
    issues. A great record, he has an excellent record of working
    across party lines to get things done in the United States
    Senate. We very much admire your continued interest to serve
    the public.
        And we thank you and your family for being willing to serve
    our country. It is a tremendous sacrifice.
        And to Ms. Sison, I understand that you are a Marylander,
    and you have served a career in diplomatic service. We thank
    you for your willingness to continue to serve our country.
        Again, we thank you and your family.
        You had the best sense to live in the State of Maryland, so
    we appreciate that very much.
        Senator Rubio. All right, Ms. Sison, we will begin with
    you, for your opening.

    STATEMENT OF MICHELE JEANNE SISON, OF MARYLAND, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF CAREER MINISTER, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
               STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI

        Ambassador Sison. Mr. Chairman, and members of the
    committee, I am honored to appear before you as President
    Trump's nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of
    Haiti. I am grateful for the confidence the President and
    Secretary Tillerson have placed in me.
        For the past 3 decades, I have been honored to represent
    our country as a career Foreign Service Officer.
        I want to give a shout-out today to my daughters, Allie and
    Jessica, U.S. Foreign Service kids who traveled the world with
    me.
        I have been privileged to lead our embassies in the United
    Arab Emirates, Lebanon, and Sri Lanka as U.S. Ambassador, and
    currently serve as the U.S. Deputy Permanent Representative to
    the United Nations.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to work
    closely with the Congress to advance America's interests in
    Haiti.
        The U.S. and Haiti share a long history. We are close
    neighbors and are linked through a sizable Haitian-American
    diaspora.
        Over the years, Haiti has suffered periods of violence and
    political instability that slowed its economic growth. I first
    served in Haiti in the early 1980s, my first tour with the
    State Department. Then, as now, it was clear that Haiti needed
    to strengthen governmental institutions, good governance, and
    transparency, if it was to prosper and lift its citizens from
    deep poverty.
        Today, after 2 years of political impasse, Haiti has a
    democratically elected government in place. The United States
    and the international community now have a long-term partner
    with whom we can engage. The United States has worked in
    partnership with the Haitian-led process to help the country
    build a more promising future.
        Thanks to broad bipartisan support in Congress, U.S.
    assistance has helped advance economic opportunities for
    Haitians, develop a comprehensive food security strategy,
    provide access to basic health care and water and sanitation
    services, and improve educational opportunities for youth. This
    strong U.S. engagement helps encourage Haitians to live and
    work in Haiti rather than embark on often dangerous and illegal
    migration, including to the United States, which in turn
    supports U.S. efforts to secure our borders.
        Since 2010, U.S. assistance has seen notable successes. For
    example, $8 million in investment capital from the private
    sector and other sources has been mobilized through a USAID
    project to assist small- and medium-sized enterprises creating
    jobs for over 13,000 Haitians, about a third of whom are women.
    In addition, almost 13,000 jobs have been created in northern
    Haiti's industrial park with U.S. support. And some 70,000
    farmers have increased incomes while the U.S. Government has
    also introduced new technologies, including improved seeds,
    fertilizer, irrigation, to another 118,000 farming households.
        The Haitian national police is now a stronger, better
    trained force with U.S. support.
        And many health indicators continue to improve through the
    U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the USAID
    programming. We have provided more than $100 million to prevent
    and respond to cholera as well.
        But Haiti's long-term development will require the
    Government of Haiti to continue to institutionalize rule of law
    and anticorruption efforts, uphold more transparent and
    accountable institutions to improve the future of Haitian
    citizens, and address the factors contributing to migration and
    trafficking in persons.
        Our rule of law assistance, as I mentioned, supports the
    Haitian national police in supporting its capacity. We are also
    working to support judicial independence, reduce pretrial
    detention levels, and support legislative reforms.
        As you mentioned, Senator, recently, the U.N. Security
    Council voted unanimously to withdraw the military component of
    the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Haiti, a mission that had been
    deployed since 2004. This U.N. vote reflected recognition of
    the progress Haiti had made toward stabilization and return to
    democratic quarter.
        A smaller police-only U.N. successor mission will launch on
    October 16 and will focus on police development, strengthening
    the rule of law, and protecting human rights. If confirmed, I
    will work to ensure strong coordination between the Haitian
    Government and U.N. rule-of-law efforts, and our own U.S.
    programming in this critical sector.
        Finally, while continuing to take into account the
    challenges in Haiti, we must not lose sight of the factors
    working in Haiti's favor, including its vibrant civil society
    and media, and, of course, our strong and engaged Haitian-
    American population here at home.
        Of course, the most important of these factors is the
    continued support of congressional committees and staff. What
    happens in Haiti is important to the United States. Haiti is a
    neighbor whose stability and success bolsters our own security
    and that of the region.
        A Haiti that takes full responsibility for its own
    prosperous and democratic future is certainly in our interests.
    And if confirmed, I will do my best to promote the U.S.-Haitian
    partnership and lead our talented U.S. interagency team at
    Embassy Port-au-Prince.
        I appreciate your consideration of my nomination, and I
    would be happy to answer any questions you may have for me.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        [Ambassador Sison's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Michele J. Sison

        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear
    before you as President Trump's nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to
    the Republic of Haiti. I am grateful for the confidence the President
    and Secretary Tillerson have placed in me.
        For the past three decades, I've been honored to represent our
    country as a career Foreign Service officer. I've been privileged to
    lead our Embassies in the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, and Sri Lanka
    as U.S. Ambassador, and currently serve as U.S. Deputy Permanent
    Representative to the United Nations.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to work closely
    with the Congress to advance America's interests in Haiti.
        The U.S. and Haiti share a long history. We are close neighbors and
    are linked through a sizable Haitian-American diaspora. Over the years,
    Haiti has suffered periods of violence and political instability that
    slowed its economic growth.
        I first served in Haiti in the early 1980's--my first tour with the
    State Department. Then, as now, it was clear that Haiti needed to
    strengthen governmental institutions, good governance, and transparency
    if it was to prosper and lift its citizens from deep poverty. Today,
    after two years of political impasse, Haiti has a democratically-
    elected government in place; the United States and the international
    community now have a long-term partner with whom we can engage.
        The United States has worked in partnership with a Haitian-led
    process to help the country build a more promising future. Thanks to
    broad bipartisan support in Congress, U.S. assistance has helped
    advance economic opportunities for Haitians; develop a comprehensive
    food security strategy; provide access to basic health care and water
    and sanitation services; and improve educational opportunities for
    youth.
        This strong engagement helps encourage Haitians to live and work in
    Haiti, rather than embark on dangerous and illegal migration to the
    United States, and supports U.S. efforts to secure our borders.
        Since 2010, U.S. assistance of $8 million in investment capital
    from the Haitian private sector and other sources has been mobilized to
    assist small-and medium-sized enterprises--creating jobs for over
    13,000 Haitians, about one-third of whom are women. In addition, almost
    13,000 jobs have been created in northern Haiti's industrial park. Some
    70,000 farmers have increased incomes and the U.S. Government has also
    introduced improved seeds, fertilizer, irrigation, and other new
    technologies to over 118,000 farmers. And the Haitian National Police
    is now a stronger, better-trained force. Many health indicators
    continue to improve, and through the U.S. Centers for Disease Control
    and Prevention and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the
    United States has provided more than $100 million to prevent and
    respond to cholera.
        But Haiti's long-term development will require the Government of
    Haiti to continue to institutionalize rule of law and uphold more
    transparent, accountable institutions to improve the future of Haitian
    citizens and address the factors contributing to migration and
    trafficking in persons. U.S. rule of law assistance in Haiti supports
    the Haitian National Police in improving its capacity and growing its
    ranks to better serve and protect the Haitian people. The Haitian
    National Police has made significant progress with U.S. support,
    including increasing its community policing, counter-narcotics and
    anti-kidnapping capabilities. Our assistance is also aimed at
    strengthening judicial independence, reducing pre-trial detention
    levels, and supporting legislative reforms.
        Recently, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to withdraw
    the military component of the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Haiti, a
    mission that had been deployed since 2004. The U.N. vote reflected
    recognition of the progress Haiti had made towards stabilization and
    return to democratic order. A smaller, police-only U.N. successor
    mission will launch on October 16, 2017, and will focus on police
    development, strengthening the rule of law, and protecting human
    rights. If confirmed, I will work to ensure strong coordination between
    Haitian Government and U.N. rule of law efforts and our U.S.
    programming in this crucial sector.
        Finally, while continuing to take into account the challenges in
    Haiti, we must not lose sight of the factors working in Haiti's favor,
    including its vibrant civil society and media. Of course, one of the
    most important of these factors is the continued support of
    Congressional committees and staff. What happens in Haiti is important
    to the United States; Haiti is a neighbor whose stability and success
    bolsters our own security and that of the region. A Haiti that takes
    full responsibility for its own prosperous and democratic future is
    certainly in our interest. If confirmed, I will do my best to promote
    the U.S.-Haitian partnership and lead our talented U.S. interagency
    team at Embassy Port-au-Prince.
        I appreciate your consideration of my nomination, and I would be
    happy to answer any questions you may have for me.
        Thank you.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you very much.
        The Honorable Frank Wolf is here. We welcome him to the
    committee. He is here to introduce the President's nominee to
    be Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom.

     STATEMENT OF FRANK R. WOLF, DISTINGUISHED SENIOR FELLOW, 21ST
         CENTURY WILBERFORCE INITIATIVE, FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA

        Mr. Wolf. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senators. I will be
    very brief.
        It is an honor to be here with Governor and Senator
    Brownback today.
        I have watched the Governor involved in international
    religious freedom, advocacy for the bill, trafficking in
    victims and persons, Sudan Peace Act, North Korea Human Rights
    Act.
        Senator Brownback was the first Senator to go to Sudan,
    Darfur, during the genocide. I was with him on that trip. I
    watched him in action. We were in a village when the Janjaweed
    were doing things to women. And I watched Sam, and I just have
    to tell you, he will be an outstanding Ambassador for us.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Governor or Senator?
        Governor Brownback. Governor, please.
        Senator Rubio. All right, Governor.

       STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL DALE BROWNBACK, OF KANSAS, TO BE
        AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE FOR INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

        Governor Brownback. I am currently occupied but interested
    and hopeful to be confirmed for this position to be able to
    move into the role of Ambassador.
        I have to say, Frank Wolf, he is a mentor of mine. I think
    he is probably the mentor of several of us. He just has taught
    me so much on how you do these issues and the passion that you
    need to do them with. Because to me, you have to have a passion
    about these things to be able to stick with it the length of
    time it takes to get them done. And he has done that, and I am
    honored that he would be here to introduce me.
        I also would like to recognize Ambassador Rabbi David
    Saperstein, who is the most recent occupant of this position,
    who I have consulted with a couple times already on the phone.
    I worked with him previously. When I was in the Senate, he was
    on the commission, not the Ambassador himself. And I found him
    great to work with.
        And I would like to say to my former colleagues here, this
    is a position that this body created. We did it in 1998, and
    then you renewed it last year under the Frank Wolf Act. It is
    one of those topics that this place has worked very hard to
    keep bipartisan. And because of that, it has had a strength
    that I think some other issues tend not to have.
        I pledge to you to continue that bipartisan effort on it. I
    have worked in this town over a number of years in different
    capacities and in different ways. The way you get things done
    is often to really try to build that coalition. And often,
    there are people who do not agree on different pieces of the
    topic. But if you can build the coalition and you can sustain
    it, you can have something that has longevity, and you can have
    something that will have impact. And I believe that is what
    that position can and will be able to do.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with a number of
    you on specific international religious freedom issues. And
    Lord knows, there are enough of them around the world, whether
    it is Rohingya that is taking place now, whether it is the
    Nineveh plains. You could probably go around the world and list
    a bunch.
        I have read through these reports recently, because I have
    been serving as Governor recently. But going back through it,
    the situation just keeps getting worse. Until, I think, we
    really engage this topic of international religious freedom and
    say that, look, this is a fundamental right that you have, to
    do with your own soul what you choose. This is your right. You
    need to be able to do it without interference by government or
    groups. This is a right that we will stand up and defend
    wherever you are, whoever you are, whatever you believe, or no
    belief at all. We will stand for you. And we are going to stand
    committed for you to be able to practice what you see fit.
        I think this is one of these fundamental human rights that,
    if we start to get it right, and it starts to penetrate further
    around the world, you are going to see more peace breakout in
    places. And you are going to see the rest of a number of human
    rights continue to, hopefully, grow and flourish.
        If we do not get it right, if we do not have religious
    freedom around the world, you are going to see a continuation
    of many more conflicts like we have today, and probably growing
    and accelerating taking place.
        I think this issue is just so critical. It is foundational
    to our Constitution. It is foundational to the U.N. Declaration
    of Human Rights. It was started by this body. It is continued
    by this body. This position was created here in the Congress.
        And I really look forward, if confirmed, to working with a
    number of you, because if we do not, we are going to miss an
    opportunity. And if we miss this opportunity, there is going to
    be far more difficulty in the world. That is what it is going
    to be like.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit my full statement
    for the record.
        Senator Rubio. Absolutely. There will be no objection to
    that.
        [Governor Brownback's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Governor Sam Brownback

        Good Morning Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Kaine, and members of
    the committee, It is an honor to appear before the committee as the
    President's nominee for the position of Ambassador-at-Large for
    International Religious Freedom. I thank the President, Vice President,
    and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence in me in making this
    nomination.
        Religious freedom is a fundamental right of every human no matter
    where they live, who they are, or what they believe. It is the right to
    do with your own Soul what you choose, without the interference of any
    government or group.
        So declares Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human
    Rights. So states our Constitution. So say our hearts in our universal
    yearning to be free.
        Freedom begins on the inside. It is the nature of our hearts to
    chaff against bondage. Yet millions in the world live in countries
    where they are not free to worship and indeed risk their lives to
    pursue their faith. This administration will not tolerate the continued
    assault on of religious freedom.
        Promotion of international religious freedom is in our national
    interest, and it directly supports national security priorities
    including the defeat of ISIS and other violent extremist groups. When
    Secretary Tillerson released the 2016 International Religious Freedom
    Report recently, he noted that, ``Where religious freedom is not
    protected, instability, human rights abuses and violent extremism have
    a greater opportunity to take root,'' and, ``no one should have to live
    in fear, worship in fear or face discrimination for his or her
    beliefs.''
        Further, the Secretary emphasized that protection of the rights of
    religious minorities and other victims of violent extremism is a human
    rights priority for the Trump administration, and that the
    administration will ``continue working with our regional partners to
    protect religious minority communities from terrorist attacks and to
    preserve their cultural heritage.''
        The Congress is to be commended for focusing the federal government
    on this alarming deterioration of freedom with the groundbreaking
    International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, an Act I was honored to
    sponsor. During my fourteen years serving in the United States Senate,
    I was involved in a diverse range of issues related to religious
    freedom. I spoke out against atrocities committed against Christians in
    the Sudan, and pushed passage of the Darfur Peace and Accountability
    Act in 2005, to expand peacekeeping and logistical support for the
    region. In 2009, I co-sponsored a resolution condemning the state
    sponsored persecution of the Baha'i minority in Iran. In 2000, I was
    instrumental in enacting the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. Human
    trafficking of individuals is often associated with religious
    persecution.
        As a Senator serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for
    eight years, I presided over hearings, Senate oversight hearings of the
    United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. I fully
    understand the important role of the Commission in informing United
    States decision makers and other world leaders about religious freedom.
    Last year, you passed, and President Obama signed into law, the Frank
    R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act to further address and
    focus the U.S. Government on the dire plight of religious minorities
    around the world.
        This position of Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious
    Freedom is integral to our priority foreign policy goals, and if
    confirmed I pledge to use my energies and the range of diplomatic tools
    to strengthen international religious freedom issues and concerns in
    U.S. foreign policy. As called for in the International Religious
    Freedom Act, I pledge to: ``[Stand] for liberty and [stand] with the
    persecuted, to use and implement appropriate tools in the United States
    foreign policy apparatus, including diplomatic, political, commercial,
    charitable, educational, and cultural channels, to promote respect for
    religious freedom by all governments and peoples.''
        You have spoken with clarity and conviction of the commitment of
    our people to this most basic right. It is now incumbent on the
    Executive Branch to fully implement the law. If confirmed, I will do my
    utmost to implement the law to its fullest by working with Department
    bureaus, posts and missions to elevate and fully integrate
    international religious freedom into security strategies and strategic
    planning, and will work with other government agencies to develop a
    comprehensive whole-of-government approach.
        Further, if confirmed, I will press the leaders of other countries
    for the release of religious prisoners and for needed reforms, and be
    on alert for bilateral and multilateral opportunities to protect
    religious freedom victims and advance international religious freedom.
    I will also review diplomatic training to ensure that there is a strong
    curriculum that sensitizes all Ambassadors, Chiefs of Mission, officers
    departing for overseas posts, and all entry-level officers, and ensures
    that international religious freedom is fully integrated into policy,
    programs, casework and other initiatives.
        Finally, if I am confirmed I will reach out to USCIRF in order to
    optimize our cooperation, and will meet with religious leaders, people
    of faith, and civil society groups to pursue our religious freedom
    goals. And I pledge to look to Congress for wisdom and help, as I know
    first-hand of the long-standing dedication you have to this cause, and
    I value your advice.
        Time is short. Every passing day finds more people persecuted,
    imprisoned, tortured and even killed for simply practicing their
    innermost convictions.
        We cannot let this dire situation continue without an aggressive
    response. We as Americans must stand strong for this first freedom or
    we will see the world spin into increasing conflicts and violence. We
    must act to protect and preserve this most basic right for all people.
        Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your questions.

        Senator Rubio. I am going to defer my opening questions. I
    know members have votes, and I am going to be here a while.
        So Senator Gardner, by order of attendance.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thanks to both of you for your willingness to serve our
    country. I appreciate your willingness to serve.
        And, certainly, thanks to your families as well for this
    commitment.
        Governor Brownback, we had a great conversation and
    opportunity to visit in the office. One of the things that we
    did not get into too much--well, a little bit--was water. So
    the Colorado-Kansas water issues we will defer to another day,
    although it may take a religious perspective at some point
    between our two States. [Laughter.]
        Governor Brownback. Yes, you have to quit doing what you
    guys are doing. [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Unfortunately, you had better lawyers than
    we have had. [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Governor Brownback, during our
    conversation in the office, we talked a little bit about some
    of the unfortunate situation that has occurred, the incidents
    in India with a Christian organization called Compassion
    International. It is based out of Colorado Springs. Many people
    are familiar with it.
        Compassion International has been in India since 1968. But
    in March last year, it was forced to shut down because of the
    Government's spurious objections over its activities.
        Compassion provided health, nutrition, medical services,
    tutoring to over 145,000 children. Now, these children are left
    to their own devices. This organization situation raises
    overall concerns about religious freedom issues in India.
        According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious
    Freedom, in 2015, religious tolerance deteriorated and
    religious freedom violations increased in India. Minority
    communities experience numerous incidents of intimidation,
    harassment, violence.
        Furthermore, there seems to be a real crackdown on
    religious NGOs by the Indian Government in the last year.
    According to the same report, in April 2015, the Ministry of
    Home Affairs revoked the licenses of nearly 9,000 charitable
    organizations.
        Now I think India is an incredibly great nation, and I have
    the utmost respect for that nation. But I want to make sure
    that it is not taking a direction for the worse and make sure
    that we are aware of what is happening there. So could you talk
    about maybe some of the root causes of this religious
    intolerance and what we can help do to change that situation?
        Governor Brownback. Thank you very much, Senator, for the
    question. I am familiar with the issue that has arisen. I have
    not gotten internal briefs on what all has taken place, because
    I am not confirmed for the position, so I do not know any more
    than what I have been reading that is available publicly on it.
        I have worked with the Indian Government previously. When I
    started on this committee at a chair over here at the end, I
    was the subcommittee chairman that dealt with India, and I
    worked with the Government a great deal, the former BJP
    Government, not the current one. I am familiar with India.
        I think this is something we have to press them on, and we
    have to press hard. India has, in the past, had a very good
    track record, overall, of dealing with a lot of religious
    tolerance. It is a very religiously diverse Nation.
        I do not know what is causing this, but I pledge to you my
    work to press the Government of India to be a government that
    honors religious freedom for everybody. And we will look into
    the issue of what has taken place with Compassion
    International.
        I hope to be able to work with your office on it, too.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you very much, Governor. Obviously,
    my work on the East Asia Subcommittee has brought greater
    attention to the plight of persecution in Myanmar and the
    plight of the Rohingya there, and what we need to be doing to
    make sure that we provide guidance, leadership, and objection
    to the activities and the treatment that is taking place there,
    but also concern in China as well toward the Christian minority
    in China and what we can be doing around the globe.
        So thank you for your willingness to serve, both of you,
    again. And I will go back my time.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Again, to the witnesses, I congratulate you for your
    nominations.
        Governor Brownback, you are supported by a number of people
    I really care about and respect, and you are suited for this
    position in many ways. I do have a couple concerns, so let me
    just jump right to them.
        In 2015, you issued an executive order retracting an 8-year
    executive order in Kansas that provided protection in the State
    work force against adverse employment action on the grounds of
    sexual orientation. Describe why you did that.
        Governor Brownback. That was an order that created a right
    by the executive branch that was not available to other people,
    and it was not passed by the legislative branch. I believe
    those sorts of issues should be passed by a legislative branch.
        Senator Kaine. Do you commonly issue executive orders?
        Governor Brownback. What is that?
        Senator Kaine. Do you commonly issue, as Governor,
    executive orders?
        Governor Brownback. Some, but not a huge number.
        Senator Kaine. Isn't that kind of the point of an executive
    order? You issue an executive order on something that the
    legislature has not passed. If it was clearly in statute, you
    would not need to issue an executive order.
        Governor Brownback. Yes, but this is a foundational issue
    that you are creating a right for State employees that was not
    available to the rest of the people in the State.
        Senator Kaine. Was it bad to give State employees that
    right?
        Governor Brownback. I believe these sorts of things ought
    to be passed by the body. I am one who feels like you ought to
    create and have the law passed itself. So that answers why we
    did that, why I did that.
        Senator Kaine. As the Governor, do you appoint cabinet
    secretaries?
        Governor Brownback. I do.
        Senator Kaine. Do you appoint agency heads?
        Governor Brownback. Most, not all, but I do.
        Senator Kaine. And do you take those appointments
    seriously, interview people to make sure they are competent,
    honest, that they can do the job well?
        Governor Brownback. To the best of my ability.
        Senator Kaine. Do you feel like you have high standards in
    the people that you appoint?
        Governor Brownback. Yes.
        Senator Kaine. Wouldn't it be appropriate, in terms of
    setting a standard for your work force, for your cabinet
    secretaries and agency heads, for you to say to them, ``I do
    not think you should discriminate against people on the grounds
    of their sexual orientation?'' If you are hiring for honesty,
    if you are hiring for competence, wouldn't that be an
    appropriate thing that the Governor, as the chief of a State
    personnel operation, would want to know about leaders in State
    Government?
        Governor Brownback. I think that would be a rational thing.
    I just do not think it is a right that the executive branch
    should create without the legislative branch.
        Senator Kaine. When I was Governor, the first day, I did an
    executive order that protected people in a variety of ways,
    including on the grounds of sexual orientation. The first order
    I signed, about 10 minutes after I was inaugurated in
    Williamsburg.
        And I had an attorney general who made the same point to
    me. He said, well, the legislature didn't do this. And I said,
    but I am hiring agency heads and cabinet secretaries who are
    administering State Government. And I think, as the chief
    executive, one of the things I want to know about them is that
    they will not discriminate against employees.
        Can't you see that the retraction of an executive order
    like this that had been in place for 8 years sends a message
    that that is not a value, nondiscrimination against folks on
    the grounds of sexual orientation, that is not a value that you
    share?
        Governor Brownback. I do not think it sends that message.
    And furthermore, as being the Ambassador on Religious Freedom,
    I look forward to working with people, working with you,
    working with everybody, regardless of their ideas or views, on
    how we can advance the agenda of religious freedom.
        There may be differences on other topics. There are
    differences that Ambassador Saperstein and I have on other
    topics.
        Senator Kaine. Let me connect it to religious freedom.
        Governor Brownback. But the beauty of this topic has been
    that people, we tend to focus on what bipartisan things there
    are that we agree upon. And I pledge to you to do that in this
    role as Ambassador for Religious Freedom----
        Senator Kaine. Let me connect----
        Governor Brownback [continuing]. And continue the work that
    Ambassador Saperstein has done on this as well.
        Senator Kaine. Let me connect this to religious freedom.
        Are you aware that there are countries around the world
    where you can be imprisoned, and even executed, if you are
    LGBT?
        Governor Brownback. I believe that is correct.
        Senator Kaine. And are you also aware that, in some of
    those countries, the asserted justification for criminal
    treatment of people based on LGBT status is a religious
    justification? That is what is cited as the justification for
    the criminal punishment for people who are LGBT.
        Governor Brownback. I had a lengthy conversation yesterday
    with Randy Berry, who worked with Ambassador Saperstein in the
    prior administration, who has Kansas roots, as you do some as
    well.
        We had a good conversation about how these two offices work
    together. And I do not see doing anything any different than
    what they worked together on, as far as the topics.
        Senator Kaine. That was not really my question.
        Governor Brownback. But that really is the point of the
    job.
        Senator Kaine. Is there any circumstance under which
    religious freedom can justify criminalizing, imprisoning, or
    executing people based on their LGBT status?
        Governor Brownback. Well, I agree with what Randy Berry did
    around the world on that topic. I am not fully briefed on the
    various and the specifics. But what he basically did and
    described to me yesterday, the work they did back and forth
    with Ambassador Saperstein, I wouldn't see changing.
        Senator Kaine. Okay, but I am going to close just with this
    question. I would like an answer to this question.
        Is there any circumstance under which criminalizing,
    imprisoning, or executing somebody based on their LGBT status
    could be deemed acceptable because somebody asserts that they
    are religiously motivated in doing so?
        Governor Brownback. I do not know what that would be, in
    what circumstance, but I would continue the policies that have
    been done in the prior administration in working on these
    international issues.
        Senator Kaine. I really would expect an unequivocal answer
    on that.
        But my time is up.
        Senator Rubio. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations, Governor Brownback, Ambassador Sison.
    Thank you both for your willingness to serve.
        Ambassador Sison, I am especially appreciative that you are
    taking on the role in Haiti. I know that you have had other
    challenging roles in Lebanon and other places as Ambassador. So
    thank you for your willingness to do that.
        Governor Brownback, I want to ask you about your thoughts
    about what message it sends to the rest of the world with
    respect to religious persecution, because I agree, one of our
    first lessons as children in school is learning that the United
    States was founded because people were fleeing religious
    persecution. We have a group of Indonesians in New Hampshire
    who have been here fleeing persecution from Indonesia,
    religious persecution. They are Christians. And they are now
    under threat of deportation, even though they are not
    criminals.
        They are being sent back to Indonesia, where the record of
    religious persecution of Christians has gotten worse in the
    last several years.
        So what kind of message do you think that sends to the rest
    of the world, as we are holding the United States up as a model
    for trying to make sure that people of all faiths can be
    treated fairly here, to send back to a country where they are
    certainly going to be persecuted again because of their
    religion?
        Governor Brownback. I do not know the specific
    circumstances of what you are talking about, Senator. I will be
    happy to look into it, because it does not sound appropriate.
        Senator Shaheen. My question was really, what kind of a
    message does that send to the rest of the world when we are not
    willing to accept people fleeing religious persecution in the
    United States?
        Governor Brownback. Well, I think we should accept people
    that are fleeing religious persecution.
        I used to do a lot of this work, on helping people that
    were persecuted for their faith in various countries to get to
    the United States and help them when they would resettle in my
    State. And then there are often a lot of different
    circumstances engaged, other than just the one. The one is
    important, and it should not be one that causes them not to
    come. But often, there is just a series of what I found issues.
    And I am very sympathetic to people fleeing a plight because of
    the religious persecution.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I appreciate the work you did
    in the Senate to address religious persecution. My concern is
    that sometimes that support has come at the expense of other
    groups, women, in particular. I think women's health is
    sometimes put at risk because of suggestions of ensuring
    individual's religious freedom.
        So how do you address that, for women who have been denied
    access to health care, even women who are victims of rape and
    incest who are not able to access abortion services? Why is
    that okay in the name of religious freedom for certain
    individuals?
        Governor Brownback. I am going to answer a broader question
    and then drill into your point here.
        The beauty of what this job has been I think under the
    prior administration and this one is that there are contentious
    issues that people do not agree upon, and this position has
    tried to stay in its lane on religious freedom. And we could
    veer off into a lot of other debate points and lose the support
    of the Congress, and lose support around the world.
        But I think the key piece is to stay in the lane of
    religious freedom. And those things that start to pull you out
    of it, you should not go there, whether it is the issue you are
    talking about or others, just because this one is so critical
    and difficult enough as it is without trying to venture into
    the difficult abortion debate or other debates domestically.
    And the focus is on international and the places we agree upon.
        That is how I did the original bills working on this, on
    human trafficking with Paul Wellstone. There were differences
    of opinion on what all should be included in that. But the ones
    that he was pursuing from his side of the aisle that I could
    not agree on, he dropped. The ones that I was pursuing on my
    side of the aisle that he wouldn't agree on, I dropped. And we
    ended up with a pretty decent bill.
        That is why I think this is an important position not to
    get into a number of these more difficult debate points that we
    are in, in the United States. And I pledge to you to stay there
    in this lane on a bipartisan basis.
        Senator Shaheen. So will you commit to this committee that
    you will work with civil society organizations who are
    defending human rights, not just for religious minorities but
    for women and for people in the LGBTQ communities?
        Governor Brownback. I will work with anybody that I can on
    the topic of religious freedom and not veer out of that lane,
    because I think if you start to veer out of that lane, you get
    pulled to other topics that other people are charged with
    doing. You are going to lose the bipartisan support for the
    position, which is critical to have.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        So Senator Kaine went to vote. When he gets here, he will
    assume the gavel until I get a chance to get over there and get
    back.
        So in the interim, I will just use that time to try to get
    my questions in.
        Just to bring further clarity, because a number of
    questions have pulled you in that direction, Governor
    Brownback, I want to kind of refocus a little bit on the job
    that you will have.
        The job of the Ambassador-at-Large is to advocate for
    religious liberty, which is oftentimes challenged or invariably
    challenged in places where either the population of that
    particular religious view is a minority in numbers, or even if
    they are a majority, the Government is of a different
    persuasion and targets those individuals for persecution.
        So the job that you have been nominated to do is basically
    to advocate for the religious liberty of all religious entities
    and denominations and views around the world, irrespective of
    the size, their theology, their views on one particular issue
    versus another. If there is persecution on the basis of
    religion, or oppression on the basis of religion, or the denial
    of liberty on the basis of religion, your job would be to
    advocate for that freedom for them to practice in peace.
        That is the scope of the job that you have been nominated
    to, is that correct, not to litigate theological points or
    policy differences beyond the scope of that liberty?
        Governor Brownback. That is. And I also think that is the
    strength of the position, is to stay in that lane that is
    bipartisan agreed to, that has seen these bills pass by large
    majorities or by unanimous consent on international religious
    freedom.
        If you start to veer into these more difficult issues and
    discussions, you will lose support for the job. You will lose
    support for the position. And the position will be less
    effective, if effective at all.
        Senator Rubio. Now in terms of the position itself, last
    year, the Congress passed the Frank Wolf International
    Religious Freedom Act, which, among other things, elevated the
    position you have been nominated to internally within the State
    Department, so that it now is, by statute, required to report
    directly to the Secretary, which was designed to combat years
    of the position and the issue being relegated to a sort of
    secondary concern rather than being fully integrated into U.S.
    foreign policy.
        Secretary Tillerson has informed the Senate of his intent
    to have this role report to the Under Secretary for Civilian
    Security, Democracy, and Human Rights. And I want to state
    clearly here and on the record, that runs contrary to the
    legislative intent of the law the Congress passed, and it is
    something that we object to.
        I am not asking you to opine on it, but I do want to use
    this opportunity to make clear that that is not the intent of
    that law, and we would view that as in direct violation and
    contradiction of the law that was passed.
        That said, I want to hear more about how you intend,
    obviously recognizing the limitations we have before us here
    today, what would you do, that you could share with us, to
    elevate the international religious freedom issues within the
    U.S. foreign policy at large and within the ranks of the U.S.
    State Department? Because that was the intent of this law, not
    just to require direct report but to elevate the importance of
    this as a critical component of our broader foreign policy.
        Governor Brownback. As one of the original sponsors of the
    1998 act, I thought the Frank Wolf act really improved on what
    took place in the 1998 act. The 1998 act was groundbreaking,
    but I think it had some limitations to it that a number of
    people saw.
        One of the big things I think needs to take place is what
    you put in the act of having a cross-agency, cross-section
    group that meets to advise and work on international religious
    freedom issues, so it is not just within the State Department.
    It is also a security apparatus and the aid organizations.
        And I look forward to working with that and bringing that
    multiagency approach to this task of religious freedom. I think
    that is the effectiveness that Congress is looking for that I
    certainly want to implement in this particular bill and this
    particular area.
        As I said at the outset, I am just firmly convinced, we
    have to get more focus on this by a broader cross-section, or
    we will not be effective in this. And if we are not effective
    on religious freedom, you are going to see violence continue to
    grow in many places around the world.
        So I look forward to implementing the Frank Wolf act.
        Senator Rubio. Just as an aside, and perhaps an editorial
    moment here for me, and you can agree if you would like, in
    fact, I would prefer if you did--[Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. With that what I am about to say, but I
    think you will because we spoke about this yesterday.
        You see the plight of the Rohingya Muslims that are facing
    persecution in Burma, and I would argue that has a direct
    national security implication for the United States. To their
    credit, the leaders of that community have been very resistant
    to, and they have rejected, efforts by radical elements to
    reach out and sort of take advantage of the situation.
        That said, when a population of people anywhere in the
    world is being persecuted, mistreated and, in this case, even
    killed, they become vulnerable to outside actors showing up and
    trying to take advantage of those circumstances. It is yet
    another example beyond the humanitarian concerns of why it is
    in the national security interest of the United States to
    ensure that people around the world have an opportunity to live
    in peace and prosperity.
        It is the right thing to do morally. It is also the
    pragmatic thing to do, because that instability, that
    suffering, that violence, those humanitarian catastrophes all
    create the conditions within which radical elements and bad
    actors around the world--that is their playground. That is what
    they took advantage of in Syria, with regard to the sectarian
    abuses occurring on behalf of the Assad regime. So, again, this
    is another example of why that is so important.
        I want to now turn to Haiti for a moment, obviously a very
    important part of this nomination. I always tell nominees, if
    you are not getting a lot of questions in a hearing, that is a
    good thing.
        But I do want to ask, because it is so important to
    Florida. Haiti has such a difficult history. We know the
    struggles they have had. On the issue of Haiti, one of the
    decisions the White House and the administration will have to
    make soon is about whether or not to continue to extend
    temporary protective status.
        I am not asking you to opine on what they should do. I am
    asking you to give us insight as to what the implications would
    be if, in fact, TPS is not extended and Haiti is asked to
    assume a significant number of people over a short period of
    time.
        In your view, what would the implications of that be for
    the Haitian Government, in terms of absorbing this reentry?
    What would the implications be for them, if TPS was not
    extended and people were forced to return? What would it mean
    to the Haitian Government, to their capacity and to their
    ability to handle that?
        Ambassador Sison. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        As we know, TPS was extended for an additional 6 months and
    is set to expire January 22, 2018. So the process is, of
    course, that under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the
    Department of Homeland Security Secretary has the authority to
    designate a foreign state for temporary protective status. But
    before a decision is made for what will happen in January 2018,
    of course, DHS will consult all relevant government agencies,
    including the Department of State, in determining whether
    conditions for TPS continue to be met in Haiti.
        Senator Rubio. I apologize. I understand the process for
    making the decision. My question is, what, in your view, would
    it mean? I am not asking you to tell me whether they should or
    should not extend it. I am just curious about your views on
    what it would mean for Haiti if, in fact, TPS is not extended.
        Ambassador Sison. Exactly, Senator. The Embassy in Port-au-
    Prince is part of this process. They are contributing to a
    country conditions assessment that looks at infrastructure,
    health, sanitation services, continued ability to respond to
    disasters. So, if confirmed, I am going to want to keep the
    lines of communication open with you, Senators, and the staff.
        In terms of the implications for the U.S. partnership on
    the ground and what we are doing with Haiti, I believe that a
    number of the programs that we actually have in place now in
    terms of assisting with economic livelihoods, assisting with
    agricultural and food security, these economic growth programs,
    these educational programs, these health programs all help
    build a resilience with our Haitian partners in order to
    respond not only to the natural disasters--of course, the TPS
    was put into place after the earthquake in 2010--but also
    building the resilience for the eventual return, if this is
    determined, of approximately----
        Senator Rubio. I apologize. I have to go vote. My time has
    expired, and I know Senator Kaine has questions about Haiti as
    well. I would just say I understand, as a nominee, why you do
    not want to delve into, ``This is what it would mean to
    Haiti.''
        So I just want to say this. I think it would be difficult
    for them to absorb it, if that is the decision the
    administration makes, which I hope they do not. But if they
    did, my view is that the Embassy will have a lot of work on its
    hands, and the Government of Haiti will require a lot of
    assistance.
        So it is my advice that, if and when confirmed, as I
    anticipate you will be, that you make that argument, that, in
    essence, you guys make the decision you need to make, but if
    you decide to terminate TPS, we better step up our presence and
    our operations here, because the Haitian Government is already
    struggling with the people who are there now. Any large influx
    of returnees will strain that, and we will need to have greater
    capacity to help them meet that demand.
        Again, unsolicited advice, but I think it is good advice,
    but it is my advice, so----
        Ambassador Sison. I look forward to continuing to work with
    you, Senator. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. I second that emotion. I think that is very
    good advice.
        Ambassador Sison, April 2017, the U.N. Security Council
    decided that the U.N. stabilization mission in Haiti, which was
    established in 2004, would come to an end later this year. I
    think on October 15, we are coming up on the date. That would
    include a full withdrawal of the mission's military component,
    which is about 2,000 personnel.
        Talk about this transition and what it might mean in Haiti.
    And is the Haitian Government sort of prepared to take on these
    responsibilities? And things that you might be able to do in
    your capacity, should you be confirmed, to help in this next
    chapter?
        Ambassador Sison. Thank you, Senator.
        Yes, MINUSTAH, U.N. stabilization force, winds down October
    15. And the very next day, October 16, MINUJUSTH, the justice
    sector support force, police only, stands up.
        And I am up at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations now
    tracking this very issue. And in conversations with the
    Department of Peacekeeping up at the U.N., I am well aware that
    the U.N. is on track, both for the timing of this transition,
    for the budgeting of this new police-only justice sector
    support mission that will focus on police development, and rule
    of law, and human rights. The locations are spread throughout
    the country appropriately, standing up civilian staff
    corrections officers, 38, to cover countrywide some of these
    pretrial detention issues that I mentioned in my opening
    statement. Individual police officers and formed police units,
    seven formed police units, the total number of police there
    between the IPOs and the foreign police units, 1,275. The
    support, the medical, aviation, legal, all of this package is
    on track.
        Combined with that, we continue our own U.S. bilateral rule
    of law and police development support. And that is also an
    important factor here.
        That U.N. vote that you mentioned, of course, was
    unanimous. And it was recognition of the success that Haiti has
    had in returning in their democratic transition after the
    elections, the recent elections, and also to the fact that the
    Haitian national police is much stronger today. And again, a
    lot of that is thanks to U.S. bilateral support that we have
    provided to stand up the force that will be up to 15,000 by the
    end of this year. We have provided, through U.S. support,
    training, equipping, and we have really partnered with the
    other donors, including the U.N., to enhance law and order on
    the ground, but also Haiti's ability to combat the scourge of
    narcotics, for example, which has become a transnational
    threat.
        So short answer to your question is that our U.S.
    partnership, but also the role that we play at the U.N., is I
    think setting this up to be a successful transition later on
    this month.
        Senator Kaine. [Presiding.] Thank you for that thorough
    answer. I appreciate that.
        Governor Brownback, quickly, you have taken some steps, or
    Kansas has during your tenure as Governor, that have been
    perceived as anti-Muslim, pulling out of the Federal refugee
    resettlement program, voicing support for the Muslim ban first
    announced by President Trump in January, signing an anti-Sharia
    law bill.
        I would like to give you the opportunity to talk about,
    because you clearly have a track record of battling for
    religious minorities in this body and elsewhere, I would like
    to have you talk about your commitment, actions in the past,
    your commitment to battle for Muslims when they are in minority
    status around the world.
        The chair's opening comments talked about the deplorable
    situation with Rohingya Muslims in Burma. The situation of Shia
    in some nations like Bahrain have raised human rights about
    their minority religious status.
        I suspect this is something that you have worked on in the
    past, and I want to give you a chance to address that issue.
        Governor Brownback. It is something I have worked on in the
    past, and I will work on it in this job, if confirmed for it,
    as well.
        I believe in the fundamental right to practice religion as
    you see fit, whoever you are, whatever your belief, if it is a
    Muslim group, if it is a Christian group, if it is Buddhist,
    Hindu, Baha'i, any, Jewish group. Whatever it is, you have that
    right. And I will fight for protection so that you will be able
    to exercise your religious freedom in peace from any government
    or group, period. That is what I have done in the past.
        The Rohingya is a terrible situation. I pushed back against
    the Government in Burma before when I was here. They were
    persecuting a tribe of people in the north that were being
    trafficked into Bangkok into a number of prostitution places.
        I worked on the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act. That
    was a Muslim, generally, population that was being persecuted
    there, and I was one of the original carriers of that bill.
        You read the International Religious Freedom report, and
    you see how much persecution there is of Muslims around the
    world, to your specific point. That is wrong. It should not
    take place. I will stand up and fight for those communities, as
    I have in the past. I will do that in the future.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you for that answer. I agree with you.
    This is foundational. It is in our First Amendment for a
    reason.
        We have a little bit of Virginia pride in Jefferson's
    authorship of the Statute for Religious Freedom that became the
    basis of the First Amendment that was drafted by another
    Virginian, Madison. And it could have been put in the Fourth or
    Fifth Amendment, but it was put up front for a reason, and it
    is so very important. And I appreciate that answer.
        And I think, with that, I think the chair gave me the
    permission to close this portion of the hearing. Other members
    may ask questions in writing. If they do, I would appreciate
    you all responding promptly. We will leave the record open
    until 5 o'clock tomorrow afternoon for members to submit
    questions. Try to respond promptly, if you can.
        And thank you again for appearing today. Congratulations on
    your nominations.
        With that, this portion of the hearing is adjourned. And we
    will wait until the return of our chair, and start a second
    hearing about the treatment of minorities in Iraq.
        [Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
               to Michele J. Sison by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations
    since 2014, I have negotiated a number of key resolutions relating to
    the protection of human rights in the U.N. General Assembly, including
    spearheading successful passage of human rights resolutions critical of
    both Iran and Syria. I also led negotiations on behalf of the United
    States that led to the U.N. General Assembly voting to establish the
    International, Impartial, and Independent Mechanism to support the
    investigation and prosecution of those responsible for violations of
    international humanitarian law and human rights violations and abuses
    in Syria. In addition, I worked to secure U.N. accreditation for the
    U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists, which had repeatedly been
    denied such accreditation due to the efforts of undemocratic U.N.
    member states.
        I have promoted human rights and democracy throughout my 35-year
    career as a Foreign Service officer, and have listed a number of
    additional examples below.
    Sri Lanka
        As the U.S. Ambassador 2012-2014, I led our Embassy's work related
    to investigating and documenting allegations of war crimes and other
    abuses and to supporting civil society in the face of a ban by the
    former government on NGO press conferences and workshops. When
    government-sanctioned mob and police actions limited the right of
    peaceful assembly, we successfully countered the closing space for
    civil society through U.S. Embassy social media activities and a WiFi-
    enabled bus to bring "citizen journalist" outreach to remote areas. Our
    Embassy's extensive documentation of human rights defender
    intimidation, targeting of members of Christian and Muslim minority
    communities, and restrictions on media freedom was credited with
    contributing to the successful passage of successive U.N. Human Rights
    Council resolutions on Sri Lanka and the creation of a U.N. fact-
    finding mission.
    Iraq
        As Assistant Chief Mission for Rule of Law Assistance 2011-2012, I
    oversaw a $500 million program aimed at improving access to justice,
    providing police and corrections training, and strengthening an
    independent judiciary. Our trainers integrated instruction on
    protection of human rights and counter-trafficking in persons into Iraq
    law enforcement development programs. The programs I oversaw also
    supported local NGOs and law schools in providing legal aid to
    underserved and disadvantaged populations across Iraq, including women,
    internally displaced persons, persons with disabilities, and
    minorities.
    Lebanon
        As the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon 2008-2010, I oversaw U.S.
    Government programming that supported the development and strengthening
    of civil society (including, notably in areas controlled by terrorist
    group Hizballah). Our programming also strengthened the independence of
    the judiciary and access to justice for members of vulnerable
    populations (including legal aid clinics for refugees), as well as
    inaugurated a first-ever police training program. We built Lebanon's
    judicial training institute's curriculum and infrastructure, and,
    working with Lebanese authorities, supported improvements to the
    recruitment/selection process for judicial candidates and judicial
    ethics reform.
    United Arab Emirates
        During my tenure as U.S. Ambassador to the UAE 2004-2008, my
    sustained advocacy led to UAE Government action to rescue and shelter
    more than 800 child victims of human trafficking, repatriate hundreds
    of trafficking victims, and pass a law criminalizing the exploitation
    of child camel jockeys. The Department of State's Office of Trafficking
    in Persons named me the 2005 "Abolitionist Ambassador of the Year" in
    recognition of these efforts.
    Earlier Tours
        As Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the South Asia Bureau, I
    argued successfully for increased democracy funding and programing for
    Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Cote D'Ivoire as political counselor in
    the 1990's, I brought in new U.S. elections assistance programming and
    lobbied successfully for the first-ever international elections
    observers. As a young desk officer for Nicaragua in the 1980's, I
    developed a reliable data base on the country's human rights record.
    And in my first Foreign Service tour--Haiti--I was responsible for the
    Embassy's human rights reporting 1982-1984. This included visiting
    activists under house arrest and reporting on their conditions in order
    to show visible support for the important work of these human rights
    defenders.

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

        Answer. The most pressing human rights issues in Haiti include the
    trafficking issues related to an estimated 286,000 children working in
    domestic service; the chronic prolonged pretrial detention problem;
    squalid prison conditions; corruption; weak rule of law; and violence
    against women.
        If confirmed, I will work with the Government of Haiti, civil
    society, international partners, and religious leaders to
    institutionalize the rule of law and uphold more transparent,
    accountable institutions to improve the future of Haitian citizens. Our
    U.S. Embassy team will continue to build the capacity of Haiti's
    National Anti-Trafficking Committee and Child Welfare Agency to prevent
    child exploitation. I will also work to create public messaging about
    the benefits of children being raised at home with their families. We
    will continue to support an innovative three-year alliance with the
    Government of Haiti for the protection of children, to reduce violence
    against children, mitigate human trafficking, including forced labor of
    children, protect unaccompanied and separated children, and explore
    alternative care and protection services for children through pilot
    interventions. We will also continue to work with local NGOs and the
    Government of Haiti to raise awareness about trafficking risks in
    Haitian orphanages.
        In addition, through the justice system strengthening program our
    USAID colleagues will continue to be a partner to Haitians building a
    professional, accountable, and modern justice system. I will support
    USAID programs that support justice and legal aid. Since 2011, USAID
    interventions have helped provide legal aid for over 24,000
    individuals. Our State Department Bureau of International Narcotics and
    Law Enforcement (INL) has spent decades working with the Haitian
    National Police, and is helping make badly-needed administrative and
    organizational reforms to improve conditions for Haiti's prison
    population. In addition, through our PEPFAR, INL, and USAID programs,
    we are training law enforcement officials to better investigate gender-
    based violence, improving women's access to medical treatment, and
    empowering women to play a larger role in government and civil society
    to raise the national profile of the challenges they face.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Haiti advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Political instability, corruption, and weak rule of law are
    all major challenges to sustained human rights improvements in Haiti.
    Today, after two years of political impasse, Haiti has a
    democratically-elected government and a window of opportunity to
    implement democratic reforms to ensure that constant political crises
    no longer threaten to derail Haiti's future. Yet only 20 percent of
    Haitians turned out for the most recent Presidential elections. After
    years of political strife, the trust between Haiti's Government and its
    people must be restored.

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

        Answer. I am absolutely committed to meeting with human rights,
    civil society, and other NGOs both in the United States and in
    Haiti.October 5, 2017

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Haiti to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by Haiti?

        Answer. While Haiti does not at present have high-profile cases of
    political prisoners, our U.S. Embassy team will remain vigilant and
    engaged with the Government of Haiti, civil society, and human rights-
    defenders to protect members of Haiti's vulnerable populations.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure all agencies at the U.S.
    Embassy continue to adhere to the Department's Leahy policy to ensure
    that U.S. security assistance programs promote and advance human
    rights.

        Question 7. Will you engage with the people of Haiti on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will indeed engage personally with Haitian
    civil society on matters of human rights, including civil rights, and
    governance. I will also ensure Embassy Port-au-Prince continues to
    engage with Haitian civil society on matters of human rights, including
    civil rights, and good governance. Embassy Port-au-Prince has created
    an internal interagency democracy, human rights, and governance working
    group to ensure that all of our U.S. Embassy efforts work to
    incorporate these key U.S. values, and I intend to keep the working
    group's responsibilities a key U.S. Embassy priority.

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

        Answer. I firmly believe that diversity of experience and
    background enhances our diplomatic and representational work as
    Department of State employees. Throughout my career, including as
    Director for Career Development and Assignments in State's Bureau of
    Human Resources (HR/CDA), I have focused on the need to promote and
    support diversity. I also worked to foster a work environment free of
    discrimination by maintaining an affirmative outreach program as HR/CDA
    director (2010-2011) and served as the mentor for a number of the
    Department's affinity group employee organizations to help strengthen
    and support diversity during that tour. If confirmed, I will build upon
    this experience to promote diversity at Embassy Port-au-Prince through
    personal mentoring and serving as a role model for the Embassy with
    respect to fairness, equity, and inclusion.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure a diverse, inclusive,
    nondiscriminatory workplace environment, making sure that any Equal
    Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints or harassment inquiries are
    appropriately investigated and handled. I will ensure that EEO liaisons
    are provided for both U.S. and Locally Employed Staff to coordinate EEO
    counseling and training. I will also ensure that EEO refresher training
    for the mission-wide U.S. and locally employed staff and their EEO
    liaisons is available. In doing so, I will emphasize EEO and diversity
    training is mandatory for all managers and supervisors.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Haiti?

        Answer. No.

        Question 13. Please provide your assessment of current U.N. efforts
    to address the cholera in Haiti, U.S. investments and response to
    addressing the cholera epidemic in Haiti, and your goals as Ambassador,
    if confirmed, in addressing the issue going forward.

        Answer. The United States remains deeply concerned by Haiti's
    tragic cholera epidemic and its impact. If confirmed, my goal will be
    to support the Haitian Government in its efforts to prevent, detect,
    and respond to cholera, among other diseases. To ensure sustained focus
    on this disease, the U.S. Government, through the Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention (CDC), is helping Haiti to improve cholera
    surveillance and laboratory testing capacity. Additionally, CDC and
    USAID support investments to improve water, sanitation, and hygiene
    infrastructure and related behavior change. The U.S. Government team
    works closely with the Haitian Government and partners to ensure U.S.
    Government activities complement the Government of Haiti's Medium-Term
    Plan for the Elimination of Cholera in Haiti. Over the last seven
    years, the United States has provided more than $100 million for
    cholera detection, treatment, and prevention efforts in Haiti. This
    assistance has promoted improved water, sanitation, and hygiene
    facilities; supported the establishment and operation of cholera
    treatment centers; provided training for Haitian health care workers in
    preventing, diagnosing, and treating cholera; supported the
    establishment of a national cholera surveillance system; and provided
    cholera treatment and prevention materials.
        If confirmed, I will seek to coordinate continued U.S. bilateral
    assistance to Haiti to prevent, detect, and treat cholera among other
    communicable diseases, as well as to continue the U.S. Mission's work
    side-by-side with the Government of Haiti and other partners on the
    public promotion of safe health and hygiene practices and support to
    Haiti's overall health system. Of course, the United States recognizes
    the international community must do more, and we recognize and commend
    the United Nation's ongoing efforts to design and implement an
    assistance package for those most affected by cholera. If confirmed, I
    commit to addressing these issues directly with U.N. leadership,
    including regular contact with the U.N. Secretary General's recently-
    named special envoy for Haiti, Josette Sheeran, and her team. This is
    an issue in which I have engaged as the Deputy Permanent U.S.
    Representative to the United Nations, and I look forward to continuing
    to work with the United Nations to ensure that its approach is tailored
    in a manner that best addresses the unique and pressing situation in
    Haiti.

        Question 14. Do you believe that conditions in Haiti have improved
    to the point where TPS is no longer needed for Haitian nationals in the
    United States?

        Answer. Section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act gives
    the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to designate a foreign
    state for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) after consultation with
    appropriate agencies of the U.S. Government, which typically includes
    the Department of State. As the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
    works to review Haiti's TPS designation prior to its expiration, the
    Department of State will contribute to DHS's review process. This input
    will draw upon the State Department's country and regional expertise to
    evaluate country conditions against the criteria set out in the TPS
    statute, as well as any relevant foreign policy considerations.

        Question 15. Do you assess that the Haitian Government has
    sufficient capacity and the needed policies and programs to repatriate
    more than 50,000 individuals in an orderly manner that ensures people's
    health and safety?

        Answer. Following two years of political impasse and stalled
    elections, Haiti now has a new government in place with an elected
    president, a confirmed cabinet, and a full parliament. We are
    encouraged by this progress in Haiti and believe the post-election
    stability, combined with President Moise's private sector experience,
    should lead to more effective development. The Government of Haiti is
    focused on reforms to bolster economic opportunities that will allow
    Haitian citizens to help build their country. In addition, the Haitian
    Government affirmed its commitment to ensuring that those Haitian
    citizens, who may be affected in the event that TPS is not extended,
    return to Haiti safely, with dignity, and to opportunities.

        Question 16. If the repatriation of the 50,000 Haitian TPS
    beneficiaries did not proceed in an orderly manner, what could be the
    potential negative outcome; how would it affect the people and
    government of Haiti; and how would such an outcome affect U.S. national
    interests?

        Answer. The U.S. Government through the Department of Homeland
    Security (DHS) continues to work with the Government of Haiti to ensure
    that repatriations occur in the most humane manner possible. As a long
    standing partner of Haiti, the U.S Government remains committed to the
    country's long-term security, democratic development, and economic
    growth.
        DHS consults all relevant government agencies to review the
    conditions of the country in question to determine whether conditions
    for the TPS designation continue to be met. There is no requirement in
    statute that the Secretary of State provide the Department's
    recommendation to the Secretary of DHS, although the Secretary has
    traditionally done so for countries for which there are significant
    Department of State foreign policy or national security equities.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
          to Hon. Samuel Dale Brownback by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I was honored to help pass the Victims of Trafficking and
    Violence Protection Act of 2000 while serving in the United States
    Senate. This important piece of legislation was significant both in its
    means and its ends. Working with a thoroughly bi-partisan group of
    advocates and elected officials, we passed a bill that helped push back
    on the rising epidemic of human trafficking. There is much work still
    to be done, but this important early step allowed us to prove that
    Americans of all backgrounds and political affiliations could come
    together to promote human rights and human dignity. It helped show that
    we can, and still do, stand in united opposition to the scourge of
    human trafficking.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights (ICCPR), which broadly encompass the freedom to
    adopt a religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change
    one's beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to
    one's children, and to worship, individually or in community with
    others, in public or in private.
        While my focus will be on religious freedom, if confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the State Department to promote
    respect for fundamental freedoms, human rights and democratic
    governance. It is my firm belief that protecting the panoply of rights
    enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and in the ICCPR begins with the
    protection of religious freedom which often serves as a bellwether for
    those other rights.

        Question 3. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service? What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I have a deep respect for the institution of the Foreign
    Service and recognize the important efforts within the State Department
    to ensure that these representatives of the United States at our
    diplomatic missions abroad reflect the diversity of America. The Office
    of International Religious Freedom should, like the rest of the
    Department, foster an atmosphere of diversity and inclusion. If
    confirmed, I will take seriously my role to promote, mentor, and
    support the employees in our office as I have throughout my career.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. No.

    Engaging with Diverse Religious Communities
        Question 7. Given that the position of Ambassador-at-Large for
    International Religious Freedom is responsible for promoting freedom
    and respect for all religions as a fundamental human right, how will
    you build trust, respect, and acceptance across all faiths, including
    in the Muslim communities around the world?

        Answer. Religious freedom is a universal human right of every
    individual, regardless of creed, and should never be arbitrarily
    abridged by any government. If confirmed, I will pursue all means to
    engage governments and civil society leaders to promote every
    individual's right to freedom of religion or belief. To be effective, I
    will directly consult with individuals of varying religious beliefs and
    communities to intimately understand their experiences, the challenges
    they endure, as well as their policy concerns. This includes Muslims,
    many of whom face heavy restrictions on their ability to freely
    practice their faith in many countries around the world. I would rely
    on my own professional and personal contacts, in addition to those
    established by my colleagues, to reach out to these communities,
    continue to build and maintain strong and lasting relationships, and
    collectively work towards promoting and protecting religious freedom
    for all individuals, regardless of their faith or beliefs.
        Building trust and respect with members of vulnerable religious
    communities will be critical to my success as Ambassador-at-Large, and
    if confirmed, I will prioritize this responsibility.
    Interpretation of ``Religious Freedom''
        Question 8. As Governor, you supported the passage of the Campus
    Religious Freedom Bill, which became law in March 2016, which requires
    public colleges and universities in Kansas to recognize and fund
    religious student associations, even those that discriminate in their
    membership against LGBT individuals, women, African Americans, students
    with disabilities, or anyone else, so long as the student group's
    discrimination is rooted in a religious belief.

       Do you believe that a religious belief should allow a person,
            business, or government entity to discriminate against another
            person based on his religion, sexual orientation, race or
            ethnicity, or disability? Do you believe that funding can be
            granted to entities that discriminate as long as that
            discrimination is based on religious conviction?

        Answer. I respect the fundamental right of people to hold whatever
    religious beliefs they hold; and that extends to those who hold no
    beliefs at all. But that respect cannot extend to condoning violence or
    persecution in the name of religion towards of any minority or group.
    Violence or persecution in the name of religion against members of the
    LGBT community is wrong, as is persecution or violence based on gender,
    race, faith, age, heritage, national origin, or disability.
    Refugees
        Question 9. As Governor you banned state agencies in 2016 from
    assisting in the resettlement of Syrian refugees to Kansas and later
    suspended Kansas' refugee resettlement program entirely citing security
    concerns in vetting as the reason for the suspension, although we know
    the vetting procedure is stricter than any other class of those who
    seek entry into the United States, including immigrants and tourists.

       With over 65 million refugees worldwide how will you support and
            defend the rights of refugees fleeing religious persecution and
            oppression in the world?

        Answer. The global refugee crisis should be a concern for all of
    us. In many cases, these refugees--and internally displaced persons--
    are fleeing religious persecution and discrimination or conflict born
    of repression on the basis of religious identity or association.
    Notably, however, the repression of religious freedom may not end
    simply because a refugee has left their country. If confirmed, I will
    use all means at my disposal to address the causes of forced
    displacement as they relate to the repression of religious freedom. I
    will also work to ensure that the religious freedom of refugees is
    fully protected. Doing so will require that I and my office engage the
    United Nations, governments, and civil society leaders to promote every
    individual's right to freedom of religion or belief, wherever they are.
    Given the enormity of this crisis, a focus on refugees will be a
    priority for my work.
    Minorities in the Middle East
        Question 10. ISIS' brutal treatment of religious and ethnic
    minorities in the Middle East has drawn a great degree of attention
    over the last few years, including towards Yezidis, Christians, and
    Shia Muslims in areas it controlled. ISIS is also responsible for
    crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing directed at these same
    groups, and in some cases against Sunni Muslims, Kurds, and other
    minorities.

       How do you plan on defending the rights of all groups including
            religious and ethnic minorities in the Middle East from being
            persecuted in the Middle East?
       In your view, should the U.S. be working towards ensuring that
            religious minorities have a place in their home country or
            should we instead focus on resettlement of these communities in
            other countries?

        Answer. The right to exercise one's freedom of thought, conscience,
    and religion is a universal human right for all people. It is enshrined
    in our Constitution's First Amendment and remains a core American value
    along with the interconnected freedoms of expression and peaceful
    assembly. If confirmed, I intend to advocate both publically and
    privately on behalf of all those seeking to live their lives peacefully
    in accordance with their conscience. While limitations vary widely from
    country to country, I expect to utilize all diplomatic and programmatic
    tools available to encourage foreign governments to respect the
    religious freedom of everyone within their borders, including
    responding vigorously to persecution or victimization of members of any
    group, providing emergency assistance, encouraging and facilitating
    accountability for violations of such freedoms, promoting equality and
    diversity, and building coalitions with our international partners to
    do the same.
        I am committed to cultivating the conditions where all
    individuals--including members of religious and ethnic minorities--have
    a secure future in their countries. When needed, we should also assist
    members of all religions, ethnicities, and nationalities who are
    fleeing persecution, consistent with U.S. refugee law.
        I am deeply concerned about the plight of vulnerable religious
    minorities in Iraq, including Christians, Yezidis, and other groups. If
    confirmed, I will engage regularly with representatives of these groups
    in addition to officials in Baghdad and Erbil to hear their views and
    ideas. I will work with colleagues to help address the myriad issues--
    such as security, services, governance, employment, education, and
    justice important to members of minority groups, and indeed to all
    Iraqis. Our comprehensive response to assist the victims of atrocities
    and related crimes is reflected in the recently-passed ISIS
    accountability United Nations Security Council Resolution, but must
    also include provisions to strengthen the rule of law, and provide
    humanitarian, stabilization, and recovery assistance to all conflict-
    affected individuals, including members of religious and ethnic
    minority groups in Iraq. The U.S. government has supported demining
    operations, human rights programs, and other across Iraq, but has
    especially focused on traditional minority enclaves in newly liberated
    areas, including Sinjar and the Ninewa Plains. Though a significant
    amount of need-based contributions have benefitted conflict-affected
    members of minority communities, more remains to be done to enable
    their safe and voluntary return to their homes.
    Rohingya
        Question 11. The brutal violence we've seen over the past month in
    Burma has left nearly 800,000 Rohingya refugees fleeing for their
    lives. The Rohingya who are a Muslim minority group in Burma have been
    persecuted for decades and this latest crisis demonstrates the
    unfortunate, but predictable, consequence of oppressing a religious
    minority denying them citizenship or options for livelihoods.

       How will you engage the government of Burma in urging them to end
            their persecution of the ethnic Rohingya Muslims and push for
            the recommendations offered in the Kofi Annan Commission report
            on Rakhine?

        Answer. I am deeply disturbed by the recent reports of violence and
    human rights abuses in Rakhine State in Burma, including allegations of
    extrajudicial killings, burning of villages, massacres, and rape, by
    security forces and by vigilante groups acting alongside security
    forces.
        Rohingya Muslims in Burma have long faced discrimination and harsh
    treatment by the government, including severe restrictions on freedom
    of movement and access to citizenship, and coercive population control
    measures, including forced abortion. Since 1999, Burma has been
    designated by the U.S. government as a Country of Particular Concern
    for ``systematic, ongoing, egregious'' violations of religious freedom.
        I understand that the State Department welcomed the release of the
    final report of the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State on August 24,
    and also welcomed the Government of Burma's commitment to review and
    carry out the recommendations as quickly as possible. The continuing
    violence underlines the importance and need to implement the report
    recommendations. The United States has offered its support to the
    government as it works to address the long-term challenges addressed in
    the Commission's report, including poverty, underdevelopment,
    shortcomings in government services, as well as the need for security
    sector reform and accountability to address human rights violations and
    abuses, and better treatment of local populations, including ensuring a
    credible, transparent citizenship process for all people in Rakhine and
    lifting restrictions on freedom of movement.
        If confirmed, I intend to work to ensure that Burma's Government
    and military acts consistently with to their human rights commitments,
    to press for access for humanitarian organizations so that the survival
    and needs of those displaced by violence are being met, to hold Burma
    to its commitment that those who fled to Bangladesh are able to
    voluntarily and safely return, and to seek justice and accountability
    on behalf of the victims of these mass atrocities.
    On Protection of the LGBT Community
        Question 12. In many parts of the world, we continue to see
    widespread violence and discrimination against the lesbian, gay,
    bisexual and transgender--or LGBT--community. Unfortunately, some of
    the attacks against this population come from actors, both governmental
    and non-governmental, who cite religion as the basis for their abusive
    actions. At the same time, we see religious leaders who are positively
    engaged in pushing back against such mistreatment and who are
    exhibiting leadership in support of this marginalized population.

       How will you work to ensure that the LGBT individuals are as worthy
            of protection by religious communities, and how would you use
            your position to help foster positive movement forward?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to cooperate and coordinate
    the United States efforts to protect the rights of persecuted groups
    and minorities. The office of International Religious Freedom has
    prioritized working with State Department partners to protect the
    rights of persecuted minorities, including the LGBT community. I have
    had several productive conversations with fellow Kansan Randy Berry,
    the former Special Envoy for Human rights of LGBTI Persons. I am
    confident in our ability to work cooperatively to foster positive
    international movement.

        Question 13. After the June 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling making
    same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states, you issues a `religious
    objection' executive order in July 2015 allowing taxpayer-funded social
    service organizations to deny services to LGBT citizens, and
    specifically exempting all religiously affiliated organizations from
    having to recognize legal same-sex marriages or accommodate them in any
    way. Your opposition was so extreme, a federal judge put the state on
    probation and Kansas is being monitored for every aspect of the state's
    implementation of same-sex marriage for the next three years.

       Do you believe that religious conviction allows individuals or
            governments to discriminate or deny rights to someone based on
            his sexual orientation? What is your view on Uganda's ``Kill
            the Gays'' law?

        Answer. I will respect the fundamental right of people to hold
    whatever religious beliefs they hold; and that extends to those who
    hold no beliefs at all. But that respect cannot extend to condoning
    violence or persecution in the name of religion towards of any minority
    or group. Violence or persecution in the name of religion against
    members of the LGBT community is wrong, as is persecution or violence
    based on gender, race, faith, age, heritage, national origin, or
    disability.
    Women's Health
        Question 14. The Trump administration has stated that women's
    economic empowerment is a critical goal for our foreign aid programs.
    Access to health care, especially reproductive health care, is
    essential to ensuring women are able to participate and contribute to
    the growth of local economies.

       How will you work with colleagues in the office of Global Women's
            Issues and Bureau of Democracy, Rights, and Labor to combat
            religious traditions that discriminate against women and
            undermine their full human rights and economic empowerment?

        Answer. As Secretary Tillerson said during his confirmation,
    investing in women produces a multiplier effect--women reinvest a large
    portion of their income in their families and communities, which also
    furthers economic growth and stability. Around the world, there are
    restrictions that prevent women from fully participating in in the
    economy as workers, entrepreneurs, and consumers. Such barriers range
    from inheritance rights to early and forced marriage. If confirmed, I
    will work with colleagues in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and
    Labor and the office of Global Women's Issues to ensure that women are
    able to fully exercise their religious freedom around the world.
    Anti-Semitism on the Rise in Europe
        Question 15. In the last several years, there has been a steady and
    disturbing increase in attacks and acts rooted in antisemitism in
    Europe, including Jews murdered in Paris and Copenhagen, synagogues
    attacked by mobs and firebombed, and increasing Jewish emigration
    attributed to fear of more attacks.

       How will you address this disturbing trend and work within the
            inter-faith communities in Europe to help them tackle and
            reverse this trend and build a more secure and tolerant
            environment or all those who reside in these communities?

        Answer. Combating anti-Semitism internationally is a priority for
    the Trump administration. If confirmed, I would denounce anti-Semitism
    and would urge governments in Europe and around the world to condemn
    anti-Semitism and to provide security for Jewish communities. I would
    work to encourage other governments and organizations to adopt a common
    working definition of anti-Semitism that covers contemporary as well as
    classical anti-Semitic acts and rhetoric. I understand that the Office
    of International Religious Freedom currently devotes significant
    resources to combatting anti-Semitism, and I am a strong supporter of
    such efforts. I would also work closely with other key officials,
    including the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism to
    strengthen and advance our collective policy and programming
    initiatives in combatting anti-Semitism globally.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
         to Hon. Samuel Dale Brownback by Senator Christopher A. Coons

        Question 1. LGBTQ people often face persecution in the same
    countries where religious minorities face persecution, so you will need
    to work colleagues in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
    (DRL) to create a comprehensive human rights agenda that takes all
    human rights concerns into account.

       How will you work with your DRL colleagues who focus on promoting
            the human rights of LGBTQ people abroad?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        As Secretary Tillerson said in June, the Department affirms its
    support for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons.
    Dignity and equality are core American values underpinned by our
    Constitution. If confirmed as Ambassador-at-Large, I will stand up for
    the religious freedom of all persons, including LGBTI persons, and will
    work with other relevant officials throughout the Department of State
    to ensure protection for the human rights of all individuals,
    regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, or sexual
    orientation.

        Question 2. LGBTQ people often face persecution in the same
    countries where religious minorities face persecution, so you will need
    to work colleagues in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
    (DRL) to create a comprehensive human rights agenda that takes all
    human rights concerns into account.

       Are you committed to working with your colleagues on promoting the
            human rights of all people, and not just religious minorities?

        Answer. Yes. The protection of the human rights of all persons is a
    priority of the Trump administration. President Trump has stated that
    the United States looks forward to a day when, ``people of all faiths,
    Christians and Muslims and Jewish and Hindu, can follow their hearts
    and worship according to their conscience.'' And Vice-President Pence
    has said, ``Since the founding of our nation, America has stood for the
    proposition that the right to believe and the right to act on one's
    beliefs is the right of all peoples at all times. . . .  Under
    President Trump, America will continue to stand for religious freedom
    of all people, of all faiths, across the world.''
        Freedom of religion or belief goes hand in hand with other
    universal human rights. If confirmed, as I work to promote freedom of
    religion and conscience throughout the world, I will welcome
    opportunities to work with my colleagues in support of the United
    States government's broader human rights agenda.

        Question 3. LGBTQ people often face persecution in the same
    countries where religious minorities face persecution, so you will need
    to work colleagues in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
    (DRL) to create a comprehensive human rights agenda that takes all
    human rights concerns into account.

       How will you ensure that countries and development aid implementers
            do not use ``religious freedom'' as a cover for discriminating
            against LGBTQ people?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        While my focus will be on religious freedom, if confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the State Department to promote
    respect for fundamental freedoms, human rights and democratic
    governance, for all people, including LGBTI persons. As Secretary
    Tillerson said in June, the Department affirms its support for the
    human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons. The State
    Department's global policy is to oppose violence and discrimination
    targeting LGBTI persons, including from governments, and non-state
    actors such as some civil society organizations and some religious
    groups.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
           to Hon. Samuel Dale Brownback by Senator Edward J. Markey

    Chechnya LGBTQ

        Question 1. The situation facing lesbian, gay, bisexual,
    transgender and queer people in Russia can be extremely challenging.
    They often face violence and government crackdowns, with a strict
    ``anti-propaganda'' law that potentially criminalizes any discussion of
    homosexuality.
        The Trump administration's response to these attacks on this
    vulnerable community has been weak. This could have dangerous
    implications for security and stability in the region. In my
    experience, raising this issue, in this committee, and with our Russian
    interlocutors sends an important signal that the United States is
    watching.
        Senator Toomey and I have a resolution pending before this
    committee condemning the abuses in Chechnya, calling on the Russian
    Government to protect its citizens, calling on our Government to demand
    the release of individuals wrongfully detained, and also to hold
    perpetrators accountable through sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.

       How do you plan to raise human rights concerns with your Russian
            counterparts, and especially with regards to the LGBTQ
            community, particularly with respect to Chechnya?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        The situation for religious freedom in Russia is of significant
    concern, particularly on account of authorities' broad use of anti-
    extremism legislation to harass and target members of religious
    minorities, including the Government's efforts to dissolve the
    Jehovah's Witnesses community.
        While my focus will be on religious freedom, if confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the State Department to promote
    respect for fundamental freedoms, human rights and democratic
    governance, for all people, including LGBTI persons. As Secretary
    Tillerson said in June, the Department affirms its support for the
    human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons. The State
    Department's global policy is to oppose violence and discrimination
    targeting LGBTI persons, including from governments, and non-state
    actors such as some civil society organizations and some religious
    groups.
        We continue to follow the human rights situation in Chechnya very
    closely, including the allegations of widespread extrajudicial
    detentions and torture, and in some cases killings of LGBTI persons. In
    July, Secretary Tillerson sent a letter to Russian Foreign Minister
    Lavrov encouraging swift and independent investigations into these
    troubling allegations and urging that any perpetrators of violations be
    held accountable under Russian law. The letter from Secretary Tillerson
    followed multiple U.S. statements condemning the violence in Chechnya,
    including from U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley, the U.S.
    representative to the OSCE, and the State Department Spokesperson in
    Washington. We were also proud to sign on to a joint statement of the
    Equal Rights Coalition--the first such statement from this new, like-
    minded group of governments committed to equality and dignity for all--
    and that statement called for a stop to the violence in Chechnya and an
    immediate investigation

        Question 2. The situation facing lesbian, gay, bisexual,
    transgender and queer people in Russia can be extremely challenging.
    They often face violence and government crackdowns, with a strict
    ``anti-propaganda'' law that potentially criminalizes any discussion of
    homosexuality.
        The Trump administration's response to these attacks on this
    vulnerable community has been weak. This could have dangerous
    implications for security and stability in the region. In my
    experience, raising this issue, in this committee, and with our Russian
    interlocutors sends an important signal that the United States is
    watching.
        Senator Toomey and I have a resolution pending before this
    committee condemning the abuses in Chechnya, calling on the Russian
    Government to protect its citizens, calling on our Government to demand
    the release of individuals wrongfully detained, and also to hold
    perpetrators accountable through sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.

       If confirmed, will you commit to raising a comprehensive human
            rights agenda that includes the concerns of the LGBTQ community
            with your interlocutors in Russia and around the globe?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        While my focus will be on religious freedom, if confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the State Department to promote
    respect for fundamental freedoms, human rights and democratic
    governance, for all people, including LGBTI persons. As Secretary
    Tillerson said in June, the Department affirms its support for the
    human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons. The State
    Department's global policy is to oppose violence and discrimination
    targeting LGBTI persons, including from governments, and non-state
    actors such as some civil society organizations and some religious
    groups.
    Engaging with Muslim Communities

        Question 3.As noted in a recent letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Senator Corker, the Office of International Religious Freedom will
    assume the functions of the U.S. Special Representative to Muslim
    Communities. The Special Representative is responsible for driving the
    Secretary of State's engagement with Muslim communities around the
    world.
        In 2012, as the Governor of Kansas, you supported so-called ``anti-
    sharia'' legislation prohibiting state courts and agencies from using
    foreign law. These laws are rooted in false and hateful conspiracy
    theories that sharia law will overtake U.S. law. They advance the
    divisive, distorted, and fear-based narrative that Islam is
    incompatible with American values, which serves to demonize Muslims.

       What message do you think this sends to Muslim communities around
            the world? What impact do you think your prior support of this
            legislation will have on your ability to engage these
            communities?

        Answer. The American legal tradition rests on the idea that there
    is one law for everyone. It is just as important to recognize the
    autonomy of the law from any particular religious tradition as it is to
    recognize the freedom of religious organizations and religious people
    to conduct their lives according to their own beliefs, within the
    framework provided by our laws. I signed the Kansas bill with the goal
    of limiting the ability of decisions of foreign jurisdictions to
    restrict of undermine rights protected by the Kansas and United States
    constitutions.
        Overall, I believe in the fundamental freedom to practice religion
    as ones sees fit, whoever one is, whatever one's belief. If confirmed,
    I will vigorously advocate for the right to be able to exercise one's
    religious freedom without interference from the Government. I have a
    track record to support that commitment. While in the Senate, I
    supported sanctions against the Government of Burma to uphold the
    religious freedom of members of religious minority communities,
    including Muslims. The U.S. Department of State's International
    Religious Freedom report demonstrates the extent of persecution of
    Muslims around the world. I believe that persecution is wrong and
    should not take place, and I will stand up and fight for members of
    those communities in the future, as I have in the past.
        I also believe that religious leaders, institutions, and
    communities--including the approximately 1.6 billion Muslims in the
    world--can be critical interlocutors on many issues central to U.S.
    foreign policy. There is the potential to engage with religious groups
    as powerful civil society actors, influencers, and catalysts for
    positive social change and as potential partners in key areas of mutual
    concern--including advancing international religious freedom or other
    policy objectives.

        Question 4.As noted in a recent letter from Secretary Tillerson to
    Senator Corker, the Office of International Religious Freedom will
    assume the functions of the U.S. Special Representative to Muslim
    Communities. The Special Representative is responsible for driving the
    Secretary of State's engagement with Muslim communities around the
    world.
        In 2012, as the Governor of Kansas, you supported so-called ``anti-
    sharia'' legislation prohibiting state courts and agencies from using
    foreign law. These laws are rooted in false and hateful conspiracy
    theories that sharia law will overtake U.S. law. They advance the
    divisive, distorted, and fear-based narrative that Islam is
    incompatible with American values, which serves to demonize Muslims.

       Given that the position of Ambassador-at-Large for International
            Religious Freedom is responsible for promoting freedom and
            respect for all religions as a fundamental human right, how
            will you build trust, respect, and acceptance across all
            faiths?

        Answer. Religious freedom is a universal human right of every
    individual, regardless of creed, and should never be arbitrarily
    abridged by any government. If confirmed, I will pursue all means to
    engage governments and civil society leaders to promote every
    individual's right to freedom of religion or belief. I will directly
    consult with individuals of various religious communities, and those of
    no faith, to understand their experiences, the challenges they endure,
    and their policy concerns. I would rely on my own professional and
    personal contacts, in addition to those established by my colleagues,
    to reach out to these communities, continue to build and maintain
    strong and lasting relationships, and collectively work towards
    promoting and protecting religious freedom for all individuals,
    regardless of their faith or beliefs. Building trust and respect with
    members of vulnerable religious communities will be critical to my
    success as Ambassador-at-Large, and if confirmed, I will prioritize
    this responsibility.
    Religious Freedom and Reproductive Rights

        Question 5.As the Ambassador-at-Large for the State Department's
    Office of International Religious Freedom, you would be charged with
    safeguarding the ability for individuals to make their own decisions
    about religion and the role it plays in their lives. This includes
    reproductive choice. However, of the 95 votes you took during your time
    in Congress related to reproductive choice, you cast 94 against
    protecting a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive
    health care.

       Do you agree that religious freedom includes individual choices
            about reproductive health?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        My role as Ambassador-at-Large would not concern policies related
    reproductive health. If confirmed, I will work to ensure all
    individuals, including women, are able to fully exercise their
    religious freedom around the world.
        Question 6.As the Ambassador-at-Large for the State Department's
    Office of International Religious Freedom, you would be charged with
    safeguarding the ability for individuals to make their own decisions
    about religion and the role it plays in their lives. This includes
    reproductive choice. However, of the 95 votes you took during your time
    in Congress related to reproductive choice, you cast 94 against
    protecting a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive
    health care.

       If confirmed, will you protect the rights of individuals to make
            personal decisions that you may not agree with?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        If confirmed, I will work to ensure all individuals are able to
    fully exercise their religious freedom around the world.

        Question 7.As the Ambassador-at-Large for the State Department's
    Office of International Religious Freedom, you would be charged with
    safeguarding the ability for individuals to make their own decisions
    about religion and the role it plays in their lives. This includes
    reproductive choice. However, of the 95 votes you took during your time
    in Congress related to reproductive choice, you cast 94 against
    protecting a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive
    health care.

       If confirmed, will you protect the right of women to make their own
            choices about their reproductive health care, including
            protecting access to comprehensive reproductive health care
            services?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private. If confirmed, I will work to ensure all
    individuals, including women, are able to fully exercise their
    religious freedom around the world.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
              to Hon. Samuel Dale Brownback by Senator Jeff Merkey

        Question 1. The State Department's Ambassador-at-Large for
    International Religious Freedom is charged with monitoring global cases
    of religious discrimination, recommending policies to protect religious
    minorities around the world, and developing and implementing programs
    that promote religious freedom for all. This should include a
    responsibility to protect individuals' right to make their own
    decisions about religion and the role it plays in their lives,
    including when making reproductive choices. Do you pledge to protect
    individual's rights to make reproductive choices in your role, should
    you be confirmed?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private. My role as Ambassador-at-Large would not concern
    policies related to abortion or other questions of reproductive health.
    If confirmed, I will work to ensure all individuals, including women,
    are able to fully exercise their religious freedom around the world.

        Question 2. LGBTQ people often face persecution in the same
    countries where religious minorities face persecution, necessitating a
    comprehensive human rights agenda, one which takes all human rights
    concerns into account, not just religious freedom. As Secretary of
    State Tillerson has said, the United States supports ``the fundamental
    freedoms of LGBTI persons to live with dignity and freedom.''

       How will you work with your colleagues at the Bureau of Democracy,
            Human Rights and Labor (DRL) who focus on promoting the human
            rights of LGBTQ people abroad?
       How will you ensure that countries and development aid implementers
            do not use ``religious freedom'' as a cover for discriminating
            against LGBTQ people?

        Answer. If confirmed, my role as Ambassador-at-Large will be to
    promote the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration
    of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil
    and Political Rights, which broadly encompass the freedom to adopt a
    religion or belief of one's choosing, the freedom to change one's
    beliefs, to speak about one's beliefs, teach one's beliefs to one's
    children, and to worship, individually or in community with others, in
    public or in private.
        While my focus will be on religious freedom, if confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the State Department to promote
    respect for all other fundamental freedoms, human rights and democratic
    governance, for all persons, including LGBTI individuals. As Secretary
    Tillerson said in June, the Department affirms its support for the
    human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons. The State
    Department's global policy is to oppose violence and discrimination
    targeting LGBTI persons, including from governments, and non-state
    actors such as civil society organizations and faith groups.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson [presiding], Murphy, Shaheen, and
    Kaine.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Johnson. Good afternoon. This hearing of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. This has to be
    one of the first times one of these started actually ahead of
    schedule.
        I want to welcome the witnesses, and their friends and
    family. We certainly thank you for your willingness to serve in
    this capacity.
        We gather today to consider the nominations of
    ambassadorships to Denmark and Croatia. These two European
    countries are important relationships for the United States,
    presenting both opportunities and challenges.
        Denmark and the U.S. have long had a close relationship.
    Like the U.S., Denmark is one of the founding members of NATO
    and has been a strong supporter of expanding the alliance. The
    Danish people, like many of our European allies, stood by
    America's side following the terror attacks of September 11th,
    and have made significant contributions and sacrifices to the
    war on terror in Afghanistan.
        Croatia is a success story of post-Cold War Europe.
    Emerging from the breakup of Yugoslavia and the wars that
    followed, Croatia's tremendous progress led it to join NATO in
    2009 and the EU in 2013. United States was a forceful advocate
    for Croatia's accession.
        As the highest representative of the United States to these
    countries, you will be tasked with maintaining and
    strengthening these crucial relationships.
        Before I introduce the nominees, I would like to recognize
    the distinguished ranking member for his comments.
        Senator Murphy?

                 STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER MURPHY,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Senator Johnson.
        Welcome, both of you, to the committee. Thank you for your
    willingness to serve.
        Let me just reinforce the comments of Senator Johnson.
        This is a trying time for the United States and Europe.
    Clearly, the bonds are not as strong in this administration as
    they were in the past. Yet, whenever we have a big problem
    anywhere around the world that needs to be solved, the first
    place we turn is to Europe, to old legacy partners like
    Denmark, and to newer members, of at least the European Union
    community, in Croatia.
        So I am really eager to hear a little bit more about you
    and your background and your vision to take up these important
    posts. You will serve with some truly, truly amazing Americans
    who have chosen to dedicate their entire lives to a very, very
    difficult job of traveling the world representing our country.
        And I look forward to your testimony.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
        Again, I encourage the nominees to introduce their family
    and friends when you make your opening statement.
        Our first nominee is Ms. Carla Sands. Ms. Sands is the
    President's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador of Denmark. Since
    2015, Ms. Sands has been the chairman of Vintage Capital Group,
    a highly successful real estate firm in Los Angeles. She is
    also a doctor of chiropractic and has been a television and
    film actress.
        Ms. Sands is a leader in the nonprofit sector, working with
    organizations to improve the lives of children and others in
    need. She has served as a board member of Pepperdine University
    and on the boards of numerous organizations supporting the arts
    and culture.
        While she now resides in California, I understand that Ms.
    Sands is a proud daughter of Pennsylvania, having grown up
    there and still returning frequently to visit family.
        Ms. Sands?

       STATEMENT OF CARLA SANDS OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                   AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK

        Ms. Sands. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy,
    distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to
    appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the
    United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of Denmark.
        I am humbled that the President has charged me with this
    opportunity to work with the White House, Secretary Tillerson,
    and our gifted and hardworking officers at the State Department
    and Mission Denmark to lead our engagement with such a longtime
    and trustworthy ally.
        I also want to take a moment to thank my family: my
    daughter, Allie Sands; my two sisters, who are with me today,
    Dr. Rhonda Carver and Deborah Sicchitano; and my parents. Their
    love and support has sustained me through the many phases of my
    life and the diverse hats I have worn in both the public and
    the private sector. I take this journey knowing I have their
    enthusiastic support.
        Though now a resident of California, I am a native of
    Pennsylvania and come from a long line of patriots and
    supporters of the United States. My ancestors fought in the
    Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, and more recently
    have served in the Air Force, Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy.
        It is with their legacy in mind that I approach my own
    government service. And if confirmed, I can assure you that I
    will carry this history with me to Denmark as well.
        If confirmed, I bring to the job of chief of mission
    experience in the business sector and the nonprofit world, as I
    have practiced as a doctor of chiropractic, and raised funds
    for abused and neglected children, the arts, the police,
    homeless rehabilitation, and many other deserving causes.
        In my younger years, I was a working actress. And since my
    husband's death in 2015, I have been the chairman of Vintage
    Capital Group.
        If I am confirmed, these varied leadership roles will serve
    me well in the different facets of chief of mission in Denmark,
    and I could not be more excited about the opportunity to lead
    this team.
        Denmark is a key ally, contributing troops and equipment to
    international operations, including the coalition to defeat
    ISIS; U.N. operations in the Middle East, Africa, and South
    Korea; and enhancing NATO's presence in the Baltic.
        Our relationship is supported by many men and women right
    here in Washington, whether it is our Denmark desk at the State
    Department or the many departments and agencies that work with
    their counterparts at Mission Denmark every day.
        This is an important time for Europe and Denmark. The
    aftershocks of Brexit combined with the threats of terrorism
    and Russia's aggressive actions make clear that we must work
    with our allies like Denmark to face these challenges together
    in a united way.
        Of course, there may be issues on which our two countries
    do not totally agree. However, our shared appreciation for
    freedom, security, and opportunity give us a mutual destination
    guiding us in our relationship moving forward.
        If confirmed, my first priority will always be the welfare
    and security of U.S. citizens and our mission staff. Beyond
    that, I will work with our outstanding leadership at Mission
    Denmark to fulfill three primary goals.
        First, I will endeavor to promote bilateral trade and
    economic prosperity. There are more than 700 subsidiaries of
    Danish companies in the United States employing over 70,000
    people. The United States is Denmark's largest trading partner
    outside of Europe, and I believe we can increase our sales of
    military aircraft and equipment, machinery, medical and
    technical equipment, and other outstanding American products.
        Second, Denmark is a trusted and dependable ally in an
    increasingly unstable and unpredictable world. It is the only
    Nordic country that is both a member of the EU and NATO, and
    our alliance with Denmark is crucial for peace and stability in
    the Nordic, Baltic, and Arctic regions.
        If confirmed, I will work with the regional commander to
    further our close military alliance with Denmark to deter
    aggressors in the region and promote stability worldwide.
        Third, and if confirmed, my goal is for our public
    diplomacy to engage with as many of the almost 6 million Danes
    as I can, including citizens in the kingdom's self-governing
    areas of Greenland the Faroe Islands.
        I hope to promote the people-to-people partnerships between
    Danes and Americans through study abroad and exchange programs,
    cultural programming, and community outreach. I plan to do so
    by blending classical engagement with new and innovative ways
    to reach all, especially young people, to continue to foster a
    close and deep mutual respect and appreciation between our two
    countries.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today. If confirmed, I will do my very best on behalf of our
    Nation, and I welcome any questions you may have.
        [Ms. Sands's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Carla Sands

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, distinguished members of the
    committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    Denmark. I am humbled that the President has charged me with this
    opportunity to work with the White House, Secretary Tillerson, and our
    gifted and hardworking officers at the State Department and Mission
    Denmark to lead our engagement with such a longtime and trustworthy
    ally.
        I also want to take a moment to thank my family--my daughter Allie
    Sands, my sisters who are with me today, Dr. Rhonda Carver and Deborah
    Sicchitano, and my parents. Their love and support has sustained me
    through the many phases of my life and the diverse hats I have worn in
    both the public and the private sector. I take this journey knowing I
    have their enthusiastic support.
        Though now a resident of California, I am a native of Pennsylvania
    and come from a long line of patriots and supporters of the United
    States. My ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War, Civil War, World
    War II and more recently have served in the Air Force, Marine Corps and
    U.S. Navy. It is with their legacy in mind that I approach my own
    government service. And, if confirmed, I can assure you that I will
    carry this history with me to Denmark as well.
        If confirmed, I will bring to the job of Chief of Mission
    experience in the business sector and the nonprofit world as I have
    practiced as a Doctor of Chiropractic, raised funds for abused and
    neglected children, the arts, the police and homeless rehabilitation
    and many other deserving causes. In my younger years, I was a working
    actress and since my husband's death in 2015 I have been the Chairman
    of Vintage Capital Group. If I am confirmed, these varied leadership
    roles will serve me well in the different facets of Chief of Mission in
    Denmark and I could not be more excited about the opportunity to lead
    this team.
        The Trump administration has made it clear in words and actions the
    high-priority it places on our alliance, partnership and friendship
    with Denmark. The President hosted Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen
    at the White House just two months after his inauguration. His early
    engagement with Denmark underscores the strength and importance of our
    security alliance and overall bilateral relationship.
        Denmark is a key ally, contributing troops and equipment to
    international operations including the Coalition to Defeat ISIS, U.N.
    operations in the Middle East, Africa, and South Korea, and enhancing
    NATO's presence in the Baltic. Our Embassy in Copenhagen supports one
    of our nation's closest and most mutually supportive relationships, and
    I could not be more excited about the opportunity to lead this team, if
    confirmed. Our relationship is supported by many men and women right
    here in Washington, whether it is our Denmark desk at the State
    Department or the many departments and agencies that work with their
    counterparts at Mission Denmark every day.
        This is an important time for Europe and Denmark. The aftershocks
    of Brexit combined with the threats of terrorism and Russia's
    aggressive actions make clear that we must work with our allies like
    Denmark to face these challenges together in a united way.
        Of course, there may be issues on which our two countries do not
    totally agree. However, our shared appreciation for freedom, security,
    and opportunity give us a mutual destination guiding us in our
    relationship moving forward.
        If confirmed, my first priority will always be the welfare and
    security of U.S. citizens and our Mission staff. Beyond that, I will
    work with the outstanding leadership at Mission Denmark to fulfill
    three primary goals:
        First, I will endeavor to promote bilateral trade and economic
    prosperity. There are more than 700 subsidiaries of Danish companies in
    the United States employing over 70,000 people. The United States is
    Denmark's largest trading partner outside of Europe and I believe we
    can increase our sales of military aircraft and equipment, machinery,
    medical and technical equipment and other outstanding American
    products.
        Second, Denmark is a trusted and dependable ally in an increasingly
    unstable and unpredictable world. It is the only Nordic country that is
    both a member of the EU and NATO and our alliance with Denmark is
    crucial for peace and stability in the Nordic, Baltic, and Arctic
    regions. If confirmed, I will work with the regional commander to
    further our close military alliance with Denmark to deter aggressors in
    the region and promote stability worldwide.
        Third, and if confirmed, my goal for our public diplomacy is to
    engage with as many of the almost six million Danes as I can, including
    citizens in the Kingdom's self-governing areas of Greenland and the
    Faroe Islands. I hope to promote the people to people partnerships
    between Danes and Americans, through study abroad and exchange
    programs, cultural programming, and community outreach. I plan to do so
    by blending classical engagement with new and innovative ways to reach
    all, especially young people, to continue to foster a close and deep
    mutual respect and appreciation between our two countries.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy and members of the committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. If confirmed,
    I will do my very best on behalf of our nation and I welcome any
    questions you may have.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Sands.
        Our next nominee is Mr. Robert ``Bob'' Kohorst. Mr. Kohorst
    is the President's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Croatia.
    Mr. Kohorst is a prominent American businessman with expertise
    in law, real estate, and finance. He is President and founder
    of Everest Properties, a large commercial enterprise that
    purchases and operates properties throughout the United States.
        Mr. Kohorst has contributed to public service organizations
    and educational institutions, including as director and
    chairman of the Young Presidents' Organization and regent of
    Loyola Marymount University.
        Mr. Kohorst currently lives in California, but has strong
    Midwest ties, having earned a bachelor of science degree from
    the University of Dayton and a J.D. from the University of
    Michigan Law School.
        Mr. Kohorst, pay no attention to the 2-minute mark. You can
    read your full opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF W. ROBERT KOHORST OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                   AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA

        Mr. Kohorst. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, and
    members of the committee, it is a pleasure and a privilege to
    appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to serve
    as the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia.
        I am honored by the confidence placed in me by the
    President and the Secretary of State.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
    and the Congress in advancing the interests of the United
    States in Croatia.
        I would like to introduce my wife, Shelley; our son Kevin
    and his wife, Kate; and our other son Matt. Two of our
    grandchildren, William and Charlotte, unfortunately, are too
    young to be here today, but we miss them.
        I am humbled at the opportunity to appear before this
    historic committee, and I look forward to starting an ongoing
    dialogue with all of you.
        Although I do not have any recent government or Foreign
    Service experience, I have enjoyed business and personal
    successes that will suit me well, if I am confirmed to
    represent the United States in Croatia. I have practiced law,
    worked for a large public company, and started my own business
    more than 20 years ago. I have learned how to manage people,
    transactions, and money in both large and small settings. I
    have been actively involved in a number of philanthropic
    organizations.
        All of this requires hard work, good judgment, strong moral
    values, and the ability to work with others. If confirmed, I am
    prepared to bring all of these skills to my new
    responsibilities. And maybe best of all, I will be supported by
    my wife, Shelley, who may be the real asset the United States
    Government is getting in this deal.
        Last summer, Shelley and I and a group of friends traveled
    throughout Croatia. We first visited the Dalmatian coast, from
    Kotor to Split. We then travelled to Zagreb, with a side trip
    to Plitvice Park, one of the truly amazing wilderness settings
    in the world. We were thrilled with the beauty of the country
    and the friendliness of the people.
        I look forward to the opportunity to spend time working
    with everyone in Croatia and building an even better
    relationship between our two nations.
        In preparing for today's hearing, I have been truly
    impressed with how well our bilateral relationship with Croatia
    has been managed. Ambassador Noyes has been a terrific steward
    of the office, and it is clear that she has a great support
    team in Zagreb.
        I look forward to working with the Embassy staff in an
    open, friendly, and cooperative manner to achieve common goals.
    My management style is to respect everyone for their
    contributions to the effort, help each employee succeed,
    promote good moral values, and insist on great work.
        If confirmed, my foremost priority as Ambassador will be
    promoting the United States' interests in Croatia and support a
    Europe that is whole, free, and at peace.
        Of course, our interests can best be achieved if they are
    compatible with Croatian interests. I intend to work hard to
    identify areas where we can mutually support each other.
        My team and I will focus on: strengthening the capabilities
    of a willing NATO ally; supporting Croatia's role in promoting
    regional stability, cooperation, and Euro-Atlantic integration;
    encouraging Croatia's contribution to regional energy security,
    while opening new markets to U.S. gas exports; and, finally,
    bolstering Croatia's economic recovery to make it a more
    attractive partner for American businesses and exporters.
        Croatia has been a strong supporter of NATO, including
    providing troops for the NATO mission in Afghanistan. I look
    forward to strengthening our support of Croatia's military and
    making sure the working relationship between the United States
    and the Republic of Croatia is a model for the region and the
    world.
        I am particularly excited for Croatia as it expands on its
    opportunities within the European Union. The country has made
    great strides since it entered the European Union in 2013, and
    I intend to do my best to assist in maintaining that progress.
    Croatia's planned accession to the Schengen Area will only help
    deepen its integration to the European community and expand
    opportunities, especially in tourism.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the
    committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you
    today. If confirmed, I look forward to hosting your visit to
    Croatia and to working closely with you all to advance the
    interests of the United States.
        [Mr. Kohorst's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of W. Robert Kohorst

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the committee,
    it is a pleasure and a privilege to appear before you today as
    President Trump's nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to
    the Republic of Croatia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by
    the President and the Secretary of State.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the
    Congress in advancing the interests of the United States in Croatia.
        I would like to introduce my wife, Shelley Allen, our son, Kevin,
    and his wife, Kate, and our other son, Matt. Two of our grandchildren,
    William and Charlotte, unfortunately are too young to fly here and sit
    through these hearings, but I miss having them here with us.
        I am humbled at the opportunity to appear before this historic
    committee, and I look forward to starting an ongoing dialogue with all
    of you. Although I do not have any recent government or Foreign Service
    experience, I have enjoyed business and personal successes that will
    suit me well if I am confirmed to represent the United States in
    Croatia. I have practiced law, worked for a large public company, and
    started my own business more than 20 years ago. I have learned how to
    manage people, transactions and money in both large and small settings.
    I have been actively involved in a number of philanthropic
    organizations. All of this requires hard work, good judgement, strong
    moral values, and the ability to work with others. If confirmed, I am
    prepared to bring all of these skills to my new responsibilities. And,
    maybe best of all, I will be supported by my wife, Shelley, who may be
    the real asset the United States Government is getting in this deal.
        Last summer, Shelley and I and a group of friends traveled
    throughout Croatia. We first visited the Dalmatian coast, from Kotor to
    Split. We then travelled to Zagreb, with a side trip to Plitvice Park,
    one of the truly amazing wilderness settings in the world. We were
    thrilled with the beauty of the country and the friendliness of the
    people. I look forward to the opportunity to spend time working with
    everyone in Croatia and building an even better relationship between
    our two nations.
        In preparing for today's hearing, I have been truly impressed with
    how well our bilateral relationship with Croatia has been managed.
    Ambassador Noyes has been a terrific steward of the office, and it is
    clear that she has a great support team in Zagreb. I look forward to
    working with the Embassy staff in an open, friendly, and cooperative
    manner to achieve common goals. My management style is to respect
    everyone for their contributions to the effort, help each employee
    succeed, promote good moral values, and insist on great work.
        If confirmed, my foremost priority as Ambassador will be promoting
    the United States' interests in Croatia and support a Europe whole,
    free and at peace. Of course, our interests can best be achieved if
    they are compatible with Croatian interests. I intend to work hard to
    identify areas where we can mutually support each other.
        My team and I will focus on:

       Strengthening the capabilities of a willing NATO ally.
       Supporting Croatia's role in promoting regional stability,
            cooperation, and Euro-Atlantic integration.
       Encouraging Croatia's contribution to regional energy security,
            while opening new markets to U.S. gas exports.
       Bolstering Croatia's economic recovery to make it a more attractive
            partner for American businesses and exporters.

        Croatia has been a strong supporter of NATO, including providing
    troops for the NATO mission in Afghanistan. I look forward to
    strengthening our support of Croatia's military and making sure the
    working relationship between the United States and the Republic of
    Croatia is a model for the region, and the world.
        I am particularly excited for Croatia as it expands on its
    opportunities within the European Union. The country has made great
    strides since it entered the European Union in 2013, and I intend to do
    my best to assist in maintaining that progress. Croatia's planned
    accession to the Schengen Area will only help deepen its integration to
    the European community and expand opportunities, especially for
    tourism.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, and members of the committee,
    thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. If
    confirmed, I look forward to hosting your visit to Croatia and to
    working closely with you all to advance the interests of the United
    States.

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Kohorst.
        Let me just start out, for both nominees, you both
    mentioned, in some way, shape, or form, talking about
    bolstering economic ties. Can you talk about, in each
    particular country, Croatia and Denmark, what are the greatest
    opportunities, in terms of economic relations between our two
    countries?
        Mr. Kohorst, I will let you go first.
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator, for that very important
    question.
        There is a tremendous opportunity in Croatia to build a
    natural gas terminal off the Island of Krk in the Adriatic.
    That program is currently in process, with an expected opening
    in 2019.
        That is an economic program that will provide three
    terrific benefits. One is it will expand the economic benefits
    and economy in Croatia. Second, it will have the potential to
    deliver energy supplies to Southeastern Europe, which has the
    potential of reducing the Russian energy influence in the area.
    And third, it is a source of export for the United States
    delivering natural gas to Southeastern Europe.
        Senator Johnson. Ms. Sands?
        Ms. Sands. Thank you, Senator, for that important question.
        My understanding is that our trade is very important to the
    present administration. Some of my goals regarding trade will
    be to open new markets to American products and to receive more
    investment in the United States from Denmark.
        So I believe that we do have a trade deficit with Denmark.
    One of my goals is to reduce that deficit through great
    American products finding their way to Denmark.
        Senator Johnson. Ms. Sands, when you were in our office, we
    were talking a little bit about the 2 percent goal, which
    neither country is meeting currently. One of the things you
    pointed out, and I think is true, and I do not think we do
    enough of this, is pointing out the fact that Denmark has also
    sacrificed its sons and daughters as a strong ally.
        Can you just talk about how we need to make that point, in
    your role as future Ambassador?
        Ms. Sands. Yes. Definitely, the President and Secretary
    Tillerson feel strongly about the member commitment to NATO of
    2 percent. While it is true that Denmark is not there yet, my
    understanding is that the Prime Minister is intending to
    increase the defense budget in the new budget from 2018 to
    2022. Of course, that is an important piece.
        But Denmark also is small but mighty. They punch above
    their weight. They give blood and treasure right alongside
    Americans. They have one of the highest rates per capita of not
    only troops but also loss of life in defending freedom and
    prosperity in the world. They have also given funds to
    Afghanistan and other countries in the world to help restore
    these countries.
        So I believe that while it is important that they give
    more, Denmark is definitely a great ally to the United States
    and to NATO, and a very close partner in defense in the world.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you.
        Mr. Kohorst, Senator Murphy and I met with Serbian
    President Vucic a couple months ago. I was just in Serbia and
    Kosovo about a month ago. I think our sense was that President
    Vucic is somebody who is willing to take some risks to help
    stabilize that region.
        I was a little disappointed to hear that the meeting
    between Serbia and Croatia was called off, I guess just
    yesterday, because of increased tension.
        Can you just kind of speak to, first of all, the imperative
    of trying to stabilize the Southeast European region, and
    particularly the crucial role that Croatia and Serbia play in
    that?
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator.
        Croatia has been a longtime ally of the United States, a
    very strong supporter of NATO, and a source of stability in
    Southeast Asia. It is very important that the United States
    continues to encourage Croatia to work on bilateral issues of
    conflict with their neighbors, so that stability can be
    achieved for all parties.
        I was aware that the Presidents decided not to meet, but I
    have not yet been read in to any specifics of that, so I,
    unfortunately, cannot comment about why that meeting was
    canceled.
        But Croatia has shown a willingness to meet and talk with
    Serbia on the outstanding issues. There are several. There are
    legacy war issues. There are property rights issues. And there
    are some border issues that need to be resolved.
        In addition, Croatia needs to continue to support the
    population in Bosnia, and Bosnia's accession into the European
    Union. And they need to continue to work on areas where they
    can agree, so that we truly have stability in that part of the
    world.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Kohorst.
        Senator Kaine has to go to the same budget hearing markup
    that I am going to have to leave for shortly, so, Senator
    Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you. And thank you to my ranking
    member, Senator Murphy, for letting me jump ahead.
        I just wanted to come briefly to congratulate you for your
    nomination and to hear your statements. These are both
    important countries, and our relationships with them have been
    strong. And their membership in NATO, their commitment of
    troops in Afghanistan, the Danish commitment recently to put
    more troops in Estonia to help us deal with issues on the
    Russian border, these are important relationships.
        I will only just offer one piece of advice. I do not have
    questions.
        One of the things I do when I travel and go to embassies is
    I tell the Ambassador to depart the room, and I sit down with
    first- and second-tour of FSOs, and I congratulate them for
    having a great job and for getting through the difficult
    vetting and being selected for such an important position. Then
    I say, ``Tell me what will make the difference between you
    making this a career and maybe just doing it for a few years.''
        That is usually all I have to say to have about a 1.5 hour-
    long discussion. You will be glad to know that the deal-
    breakers are never, ``I don't like by Ambassador.'' But they do
    talk a little more freely sometimes when the Ambassador is out
    of the room. A lot of it is about paperwork and organizational
    structure that they feel inhibits their natural creativity and
    ability to do a good job.
        So when you come in new and they do not have any history
    with you and any complaints yet, I would encourage, especially
    with some of the younger members of the Foreign Service in each
    of your embassies, to really let them know what a wonderful
    thing it is that they have these jobs, and obviously express
    appreciation for doing them, but just ask them to share with
    you candidly the joys and frustrations of the life.
        Some of the frustrations they are volunteers for, the
    challenging travel, and sometimes being assigned to a place
    they like and sometimes not, and family sacrifices. There are
    huge challenges and frustrations, and we need to all give them
    our appreciation for that.
        But you will probably learn some things if you talk to the
    newbies especially that will help you work well and serve them
    well and serve the mission well during the course of the time
    that you are there, should you be confirmed.
        So congratulations.
        And I will hand it back. Thanks.
        Senator Johnson. Thank you. I am going to have to go to the
    same budget hearing markup as Senator Kaine, so I am going to
    have to leave now.
        Again, I want to congratulate you for your nominations.
    Thank you for your service. Thank your families for their
    service.
        I will turn it over to Senator Murphy.
        Senator Murphy. [Presiding.] Thank you very much, Mr.
    Chairman. I should have done a little bit of research about
    what power I now have as the holder of the gavel as a minority
    party member. [Laughter.]
        Senator Murphy. Let me just add my thanks to both of you
    for your willingness to serve. This is not easy, and you are
    good to do it.
        Just a few additional questions. Senator Johnson really
    picked out some of the priorities for me as well.
        Mr. Kohorst, you are, for all intents and purposes, going
    to be the first political Ambassador, political appointee to
    Croatia. Historically, this has been a career Foreign Service
    post, the exception being the first Ambassador, Peter
    Galbraith, who had a long history of experience in foreign
    policy and international affairs.
        So I just say that because I think the burden will be
    greater on you to get up to speed very quickly, because, as
    Senator Johnson referenced, the Balkans are a place where many
    global conflicts start. And it is still, in many ways, a
    tinderbox of ethnic and nationalist tensions.
        He referenced this cancellation of an important meeting
    between the Croatians and the Serbs, but the Croatians have
    also been a real thorn in the side of Serbia's desire to
    eventually join the European Union. One of the things that
    holds that region together is the aspiration of many countries
    there, particularly in the Western Balkans, to eventually be
    members of the EU.
        You may not have the answer to this question, but I will
    ask it anyway. President Trump cheered on Britain as they left
    the European Union and has put a U.S.-EU trade deal on ice. Do
    you know, going into Croatia, being in the middle of a region
    with many EU aspirants, what the administration's policy is as
    to EU enlargement, whether we are going to be asking
    Ambassadors such as yourself to work in a manner that would
    allow countries to join the EU? You are obviously going to an
    EU country, but they are often trying to stop other countries
    from joining.
        I wonder whether, in your preparation for this, you have
    been given any indication as to whether you are going to be
    going to Europe to try to help grow Europe or you are going to
    Europe to try to cheer on, not its disintegration, but those
    who might wish to leave.
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        First of all, I am aware that the Serbians and the Bosnians
    are interested in joining the European Union, and that there is
    some dispute about that. But I have not yet been briefed about
    any specific aspects about our position on that issue.
        Senator Murphy. Again, I know you well. You have been
    successful in everything you have done in your life, so I trust
    you will be successful in this endeavor as well. But I think
    you will have to be a very quick study, again, building on the
    work of some great career diplomats who have been there. So I
    wish you luck.
        Ms. Sands, let me ask you a question about that trade
    agreement that I referenced. Denmark was maybe one of the
    strongest supporters of T-TIP. This is the U.S.-EU bilateral
    trade agreement that was being negotiated in the Obama
    administration that, from what we understand, is now not moving
    forward. There is one poll showing public support at about 71
    percent.
        You were part of the President's economic council, so you
    have been in a position to give him advice. What is your
    position on the prospects of a future U.S.-EU trade agreement?
    You are going to be going to a country that is a big fan of
    that agreement and is very nervous that the prospects for that
    agreement are pretty dim today.
        Ms. Sands. Thank you, Senator, for that very important
    question.
        As you know, both the United States and Denmark hold trade
    very high. We are both trading nations and innovative
    countries.
        While it is true that this trade agreement has been paused,
    my understanding is that the administration is working through
    how they are going to proceed. And if I am confirmed to serve
    in Denmark, I will wait to hear what the President and
    Secretary Tillerson, what agreement they come to. And I will
    implement the policies of the administration.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you. I hope you are right, that we
    are going to get that trade agreement restarted. There are
    still plenty of nontariff barriers that hurt companies in the
    United States.
        Just one more question for you, Ms. Sands, on the Danes
    relationship with Russia. They have to be talking to the
    Russians, in particular because of their concerns with respect
    to the Arctic, but they have been partners with us in
    continuing sanctions against Russia with respect to their
    action in Ukraine.
        I expect that you will have orders to continue to work with
    the Danes on Russia sanctions, but I just wonder if you might
    speak for a moment about the work that you expect to be doing
    to try to make sure that Denmark and the U.S. are working in
    concert to make sure that Russia continues to pay a price for
    their invasion of Ukraine while also trying to find ways that
    we can work together, the Arctic being a good example of it.
        Ms. Sands. Thank you, Senator.
        This is a very complicated issue. While I know the
    administration is working through how this is going to go
    forward, the Russian sanctions, they are going to be very
    serious. And I look forward, if I am confirmed, to being at
    post and being fully briefed on the issues regarding the
    Russian sanctions and how it will impact both Denmark and the
    United States.
        Senator Murphy. Mr. Kohorst, let me ask you the same
    question. Croatia, obviously, is an important country with
    respect to holding European and U.S. sanctions against Russia
    together. How do you expect to work with the Croats on making
    sure that they continue to be part of a coalition that holds
    Ukraine-related sanctions together against the Russians?
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator.
        Croatia has been a strong and important ally of the United
    States for 25-plus years. I expect that relationship to
    continue. And if confirmed, I will do my best to maintain a
    positive relationship with the Croatian Government and its
    people.
        Croatia has been fully supportive of the U.S. sanctions
    against Russia and the Ukraine. From what I understand, they
    will continue to do so.
        Senator Murphy. I was vamping, waiting for Senator Shaheen.
    So now that Senator Shaheen is here, I will let her settle
    herself and turn it over to her for a few final questions.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Murphy, for
    keeping the hearing open so that I could come over and get my
    questions in.
        Congratulations to both of you on your nominations and on
    your willingness to serve the country.
        As you know, both Croatia and Denmark are very important to
    the United States. I am sure you covered many of the questions
    that I had, but I really wanted to ask you about energy,
    because as we look at the proposals for Nord Stream II
    pipeline, obviously, there are concerns in both Croatia and
    Denmark about that pipeline and what that would mean in the
    countries.
        So as you are thinking about your role as Ambassador,
    should you be confirmed, how do you view being able to support
    your host country as they continue to keep that pipeline from
    being built and continue to address the energy issues that they
    have in each country?
        I will ask you, Mr. Kohorst, if you would like to go first
    on that.
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator.
        Energy is a critical issue in Croatia, in the past few
    years and going forward. They are currently in the process of
    building and LNG terminal off the Island of Krk, which will
    have the potential, with the pipeline being built through to
    Hungary, has the potential to deliver substantial energy to
    Southeastern Europe, which will dramatically reduce the
    Russians' influence in that area. It provides economic benefits
    to the country of Croatia, reduces Russian influence, and has
    the potential to allow American companies to export liquefied
    natural gas to the area.
        Senator Shaheen. Ms. Sands?
        Ms. Sands. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        The pipeline is a very important topic. Denmark is
    concerned, and so is the United States. The pipeline would go
    through Danish territorial waters. And I believe that, of
    course, I will look forward, if I am confirmed, to learning
    more about this at post, but Denmark is very progressive in
    their energy. They are, actually, I think the only EU net
    exporter of energy. And I believe that they are so innovative
    that they, along with the United States, are finding new ways
    to power Denmark.
        But as far as the Nord II, it is a complicated issue, and I
    look forward to learning more about it.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        I want to go back to Croatia, because Croatia has been very
    helpful to its neighbors in the Western Balkans, in terms of
    encouraging them in their efforts to join the EU and to look
    west and continue to support those values. I think it is
    probably more important now than it has been in the last
    several decades, perhaps since Yugoslavia broke apart, to have
    countries in the Western Balkans who are offsetting some of the
    influence from Russia.
        I noticed recently that Serbia, we have seen a big change
    in public opinion in Serbia about their interest in joining the
    EU and in their support for the West versus support for Russia.
        So as you think about your role as Ambassador, what can you
    do to continue to support Croatian efforts to work with their
    neighbors on continued EU integration?
        Mr. Kohorst. Thank you, Senator.
        Croatia joined the EU in 2013 after 10 years of going
    through the process. It is a very difficult process, but they
    were able to make changes in their society and their economy to
    satisfy the requirements for joining. I believe their
    neighboring countries, Serbia and Bosnia, are attempting to
    make those changes. To the extent that we can help that
    process, I believe that is in the United States' interests.
        So I would encourage Croatia, without interfering with the
    bilateral relationships between those two countries, to support
    the EU whenever possible.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Senator Shaheen.
        We do not have an ambassador to Hungary yet, but when we
    do, you will get to know them very well, because at the heart
    of these energy issues in the region is one of the most
    complicated energy relationships in Europe between Croatia and
    Hungary.
        We look forward to working with you to try to settle some
    of those issues around reverse gas flows, because if we put
    that LNG terminal into Croatia, it does not do much good if we
    cannot then turn that around and help out neighboring countries
    that today are dependent on Russian oil.
        Thank you both for providing us with your testimony and
    responses. The hearing record is going to remain open, Senator
    Johnson tells me to report, for 2 days until October 7 at 5
    p.m. So if you do get any questions from members of the
    committee who were not here or who were here, we hope that you
    will turn those around as fast as possible.
        Senator Murphy. And with that, as I reach for his gavel,
    the hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                  to Carla Sands by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have worked in my local community
    to benefit and advance the rights of the most vulnerable and
    disadvantaged populations, such as at risk-youth. These efforts have
    been a commitment of my entire family as we have raised funds and
    personally volunteered to benefit local groups that provide support and
    healing for abused and neglected children and homeless populations.
        If confirmed, I will continue my commitment to assisting these and
    other vulnerable populations as a firm advocate for those without a
    voice, particularly women and children who have been victims of human
    trafficking.

        Question 2.  What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Denmark today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Denmark and,
    working in partnership with Denmark, to promote human rights around the
    globe? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to addressing the
            specific human rights issues you have identified in your
            previous response? What challenges will you face in Denmark
            advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?
        Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil society and
            other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with local
            human rights NGOs in Denmark?

        Answer. Denmark is an important and active ally on democratic
    values and the rule of law upon which the NATO Alliance was founded,
    supporting the United States' efforts to strengthen human rights around
    the globe. Denmark is among the most generous donor nations in the
    world, providing $2.8 billion--the equivalent of nearly one percent of
    its GDP--each year in official development aid, which is allocated (in
    part) to promoting human rights and democracy. Respect for human rights
    is a core Danish value. At the same time, Denmark, in recent years, has
    drawn international criticism for the treatment of irregular migrants
    from outside Europe, and tough immigration rules and legislation to
    deter asylum seekers. If confirmed, I will continue to encourage
    Denmark to remain firmly committed to protecting human rights at home
    and abroad. And if confirmed, I will regularly engage with
    representatives from government, political parties, and nongovernmental
    organizations to stress the importance of tolerance and diversity and
    to share best practices and new ideas promoting human rights, including
    programs, at the local level.

        Question 3. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Denmark to address the unjust targeting of key political prisoners and
    other persons around the world?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Danish Government to
    call out cases involving victims of politically-motivated prosecution
    and encourage their resolution in a manner that respects human rights
    and the rule of law.

        Question 4. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively
    support the Leahy Law and similar efforts to ensure that provisions of
    U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities reinforce
    human rights?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that staff have access to
    training on Leahy Law restrictions on providing assistance to foreign
    military units that violate human rights and will ensure Embassy
    Copenhagen thoroughly vets individuals and units that it nominates to
    participate in U.S.--funded security assistance activities.

        Question 5. Will you engage with the people of Denmark on matters
    of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to strengthening the people to
    people partnerships between Danes and Americans, whether through study
    abroad or exchange programs, cultural programming, or community
    outreach. I plan to do so by blending traditional engagement with new
    and innovative ways to reach a diverse audience, especially youth, to
    continue to foster a close and deep mutual respect and appreciation
    between our two countries and to emphasize areas of shared values
    including human rights, civil rights, and governance.

        Question 6. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff members who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented
    groups in the State Department?

       What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors at the Embassy
            foster an environment that is diverse and inclusive, including
            in terms of gender, ethnicity, and other characteristics?

        Answer. As a business executive, I appreciate the importance of
    fostering diverse and inclusive teams, and understand the value of
    having minorities in leadership positions. In keeping with Secretary
    Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, if confirmed, I will develop
    an inclusive work environment at Embassy Copenhagen that encourages
    different perspectives, and I will ensure that all supervisors receive
    regular formal training and guidance on EEO principles, diversity, and
    inclusion.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Denmark?

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

        Question 10. Have there been any material changes to your financial
    assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE financial
    disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please list and
    explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report. I am committed to ensuring that my official
    actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain
    vigilant with regards to my ethics obligations.

        Question 11. Russia Sanctions: Unity with European partners on
    Russia sanctions is critical to their success. What is your diplomatic
    plan to build support within Denmark for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. Denmark has been a steadfast supporter of EU sanctions
    against Russia, which are designed to impose costs on Russia sufficient
    to change the Russian Government's behavior. Denmark also remains
    committed to challenging Russian influence campaigns in Europe and has
    taken part in and supported international efforts to restore Ukraine's
    integrity. If confirmed, I will work to ensure U.S. and Danish policies
    towards Russia remain closely coordinated. Close coordination with
    allies, like Denmark, is vital to ensure the sanctions effectively
    support our work in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, and to push back
    against Russian efforts to influence the domestic affairs of other
    countries.

        Question 12. Russian Malign Influence: How will you seek to boost
    resilience to Russian meddling within Danish institutions and civil
    society? What assistance priorities will you push with Danish
    counterparts to shore up resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support a larger effort to build the
    resilience of European partners against Russia's whole-of-government
    efforts to undermine democratic processes through programs like media
    messaging, bilateral exchanges (e.g. student outreach in Denmark and
    Greenland), cultural programs, and regional networks. I will encourage
    direct government-to-government collaboration to address and push back
    on Russian influence campaigns through grant assistance, training, and
    exchange programs.

                                   __________

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Robert Kohorst by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Over the course of my career, I have been active with a
    number of charitable organizations that focus on youth, education and
    health care.
        I was a long-term board member and a 2 term President of the San
    Gabriel Valley Chapter, Boy Scouts of America, which serves thousands
    of young men. During my tenure, I was an advocate for the Boy Scouts to
    change their policies to be more inclusive.
        My wife and I have also been active supporters of Dolores Mission
    School, a Catholic grade school that supports education in the Hispanic
    community, which includes a significant immigrant population. Dolores
    Mission School has made a noticeable advancement in the number of youth
    in the community that graduate high school and go on to college. I have
    also been a long-term Trustee for La Salle High School, which has a
    mission under the Christian Brothers to provide education for an
    inclusive demographic, with a particular focus on the educating the
    poor and disadvantaged community.
        My wife and I have also been significant contributors to Huntington
    Hospital, which provides key services to all members of our community
    and is the main critical care facility in our area.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in
    Croatia today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Croatia and,
    working in partnership with Croatia, to promote human rights in the
    Europe and Eurasia region? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. Croatia is still addressing issues related to the wars that
    followed the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Some of these legacy
    issues continue to have human rights implications. Although the
    government generally tries to address these issues, relations with
    members of ethnic minorities-most notably the Serb community-could be
    better. Isolated instances of anti-Serb protests and the vandalizing of
    Serb churches and monuments have occurred. Some extreme elements of
    Croatian society have engaged in sporadic anti-Semitism or Holocaust
    revisionism. The recent controversy surrounding the placement of a
    veteran's group plaque bearing an Ustasha-era slogan near the World War
    II-era Jasenovac concentration camp and a lack of progress in resolving
    the property restitution claims of Croatian Jews or their descendants
    highlight the need for more resolute, timely action by the government.
        Promoting human rights and democratic governance is a core element
    of U.S. foreign policy. Fortunately, we have a willing partner in the
    current Croatian Government, although our priorities in Croatia and the
    region may, at times, differ. As a party to a number of UN human rights
    treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political
    Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, and having met
    human rights-related criteria during its accession to the European
    Union, Croatia has undertaken obligations to uphold human rights and
    democratic ideals.
        If confirmed, I will remind the Croatian Government of such
    obligations when needed. I will also cooperate with the Government in
    the promotion of human rights and democracy in the region, notably in
    constructively supporting democratic and electoral reform efforts in
    Bosnia and Herzegovina and resolving war legacy and other contentious
    issues with Serbia. Through these actions I hope to contribute to
    regional stabilization and respect for human rights and democracy, and
    to the deepening of European and Euro-Atlantic integration.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Croatia advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. As I mentioned, some of the human rights-related issues in
    the Balkans are linked to historical events, going back in some cases
    to the Second World War. These deep-seated legacy issues often require
    cultural, and even generational, change to fully resolve. If confirmed,
    I may encounter some resistance when addressing these issues in my
    public role as Ambassador to Croatia, but addressing such issues is
    something I intend to do.
        If confirmed, I look forward to engaging with the young people of
    Croatia, whose youth was not shaped by war and who look forward to
    Croatia's bright future in the European Union. I will leverage cultural
    and educational exchange programs, person-to-person ties and our
    outstanding relationship with the Croatian government to further
    promote human rights and respect for democracy.

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

        Answer. Yes, I am committed to meeting with and supporting civil
    society organizations who work in the promotion of democracy and human
    rights in both the U.S. and in Croatia.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Croatia to address the unjust targeting of key political prisoners and
    other persons around the world?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will address such practices in my role as
    U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, and my Embassy team will continue to
    execute U.S. Government policy to help resolve significant cases of
    political persecution.

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

        Answer. As our security cooperation with Croatia has expanded over
    recent years, our Embassy has executed a significant International
    Military Education and Training (IMET) program ($1.1 million last year,
    $850K for FY 2018). This means they send security force personnel from
    the Croatian military to mutually-beneficial training programs in the
    U.S. and elsewhere. As part of the nomination process for such
    training, candidates are vetted by several offices in the Embassy to
    ensure that no assistance is provided to members of security force
    units credibly implicated in gross human rights violations, in
    accordance with the Leahy Law. Several past courses executed through
    the IMET program focused on human rights and international humanitarian
    law; these courses supported the spirit of the Leahy Law by promoting
    human rights in our security partnerships. If confirmed, I will ensure
    the Embassy continues properly vetting candidates per existing
    Department policy, in close coordination with the Department's Office
    of Democracy Human Rights and Labor. I will continue to include the
    subject of human rights in the dialogue of our security partnership.

        Question 7 Will you engage with the people of Croatia on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. Yes, I am committed to meeting with and supporting civil
    society organizations and Croatian citizens who work in the promotion
    of democracy and human rights in both the U.S. and in Croatia.

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

        Answer. Embassy Zagreb already works actively to promote and
    support staff members from diverse backgrounds, and if confirmed I
    intend to continue those efforts. The first step in promoting diversity
    in the State Department is recruitment; building a workforce that
    reflects our nation's broad diversity is a top priority of the
    Department and one I share. In accordance with this guidance, Embassy
    Zagreb recruits from a diverse, qualified group of potential applicants
    to secure a high-performing workforce drawn from all segments of
    society. The mission welcomes and recruits diversity in all forms,
    including gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Senior leaders in
    the embassy mentor and support staff members through various means.
    Embassy Zagreb also promotes diversity and inclusion through its active
    First and Second Tour Officer group and Federal Women's Program. If
    confirmed, I pledge to continued support of these efforts.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors at
    the Embassy foster an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. I will ensure Embassy Zagreb continues to cultivate a
    culture that encourages collaboration, flexibility, and fairness.
    Transparency in decision-making is an essential part of ensuring
    diversity and inclusion. I understand the mission likewise promotes a
    diverse and inclusive environment that attracts new talent from diverse
    backgrounds, enhances professional development, and encourages
    supervisors to value and respect unique perspectives. If confirmed, I
    will continue to honor those principles.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Croatia?

        Answer. No.

        Question 13. Have there been any material changes to your financial
    assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE financial
    disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please list and
    explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. My financial condition, income and other information
    requested by OGE has not changed in a material way since that date I
    signed my financial disclosure form. Although I would not characterize
    these changes as material to my overall financial condition, please
    note that I have sold a significant number of the assets requested to
    be sold by the Ethics Agreement I signed. All of the proceeds of such
    sales have been deposited in money market accounts. Upon confirmation,
    I will sell the remaining assets requested to be sold pursuant to the
    terms of the Ethics Agreement.

        Question 14. Croatia's relations with neighboring Bosnia and
    Herzegovina have always been delicate, and in recent weeks have taken a
    downturn. While formally respecting its neighbor's territorial
    integrity, Zagreb is not as helpful as it could be in countering the
    unhelpful positions of Bosnian Croat political leaders that block
    needed reforms to improve effective government, to remove ethnicity as
    dominant and discriminatory forces in politics to fight corruption. The
    stability and sovereignty of Bosnia, of course, has been a priority of
    concern for the United States and for Europe. What plan of action do
    you have to encourage Croatia to be a more positive partner in helping
    to bring about change in Bosnia?

        Answer. If confirmed, most immediately, I will urge Croatian
    leaders to use their influence with Bosnian Croats to gain support for
    electoral reforms consistent with the Dayton framework of one state,
    two entities, and three constituent peoples (Bosniaks, Croats and
    Serbs), and with European Court of Human Rights decisions which Bosnia
    and Herzegovina (BiH) must implement. Longer term, Croatia can play an
    important role by supporting the accession of BiH to the EU and NATO--
    steps which would have a stabilizing effect on the entire region. I
    will encourage Croatia to continue to work with BiH on the technical
    aspects of EU and NATO accession, including sharing its own lessons
    learned, and to support political reforms that move BiH further along
    the path toward accession.

        Question 15. Croatia, like many countries in Europe, has a Romani
    population that faces various and widespread forms of discrimination,
    in particular in regard to education. The State Department also reports
    a rise in anti-Serb and anti-Semitic incidents in recent years. As
    Ambassador, how will you engage in outreach to Roma and other minority
    groups in Croatia to determine how the United States can actively
    assist in supporting tolerance and non-discrimination efforts across
    the country, including improving conditions and living standards for
    the Roma?

        Answer. As in many other European states, Roma face challenges in
    Croatia. Discrimination occurs and Roma are generally disadvantaged in
    their access to education, housing, employment and even documentation
    of citizenship. According to the Council of Europe, as few as 6.5
    percent of Roma in Croatia are in formal employment. Full equality for
    Roma will remain a challenge, but as the Department reported in
    previous years' Annual Human Rights Reports, the Government of Croatia
    has taken positive steps forward. For instance, the Government has
    financially supported Romani integration initiatives, applying state
    and EU funding to educational, occupational, linguistic and housing
    programs, and subsidizing businesses that formally employed Roma.
        Isolated instances of anti-Serb protests and the vandalizing of
    Serb churches and monuments have also occurred. Some extreme elements
    of Croatian society have engaged in sporadic anti-Semitism or Holocaust
    revisionism. The recent controversy surrounding the placement of a
    veteran's group plaque bearing an Ustasha-era slogan near the World War
    II-era Jasenovac concentration camp and a lack of progress in
    addressing the property restitution claims of Croatian Jews or their
    descendants highlight the need for more resolute, timely government
    action.
        Promoting human rights and democratic governance is a core element
    of U.S. foreign policy. If confirmed, I will engage directly with the
    leaders of minority communities to hear about their concerns and the
    status of the groups they lead. I will ensure embassy outreach,
    programs, and exchanges include representatives from minority
    communities. And, I will encourage the Croatian Government to continue,
    or expand, initiatives that work towards the integration of Romani
    communities and the improvement of relations with other minority groups
    in Croatian society.
    Russia Sanctions

        Question 16. Unity with European partners on Russia sanctions is
    critical to their success. What is your diplomatic plan to build
    support within Croatia for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will be committed to working closely with
    the Government of Croatia to maintain unity on Russia sanctions and
    their implementation. The U.S. Government has employed a collaborative
    and consultative approach on sanctions, which Croatia has strongly
    supported. Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic was an outspoken
    critic of Russia's occupation of Crimea during his time in the European
    Parliament, and his second official foreign visit was to Ukraine,
    drawing intense Russian criticism. I will engage high-level Croatian
    officials to ensure they understand they must fully implement existing
    sanctions and maintain strong EU support for sanctions, including the
    Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act recently passed
    by Congress. As a NATO and EU member, and a country that strongly
    supports the transatlantic relationship, Croatia can play a more active
    role in ensuring the EU responds decisively to Russian influence and
    aggression in the region. Close coordination with our allies is crucial
    to enabling the sanctions to achieve their ultimate goal: imposing
    costs on Russia sufficient to change the Russian Government's behavior.
    Russian Malign Influence

        Question 17. How will you seek to boost resilience to Russian
    meddling within Croatian institutions and civil society? What
    assistance priorities will you push with Croatian counterparts to shore
    up resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue and expand exchange programs
    that highlight the importance of a vibrant civil society, independent
    press, and government transparency. As an EU member, Croatia is not
    eligible for most U.S. foreign assistance, but Croatia is a recipient
    and also a co-leader in our regional rule of law training program,
    which brings prosecutors and judges from around the region together to
    learn how to fight corruption and protect human rights. If confirmed, I
    will push to continue this program and maximize Croatia's
    participation. I will explore opportunities to provide targeted
    assistance that helps mitigate Croatia's vulnerabilities to Russian
    pressure, as is evident in the $1,000,000 in technical support we are
    providing to facilitate the development of a planned liquefied natural
    gas (LNG) terminal at Krk Island. This assistance will address key
    components of the terminal's pre-development phase, helping to ensure
    its timely completion and, in doing so, enabling greater European
    energy security through diversified gas supplies. I will also work with
    Croatian leaders to accelerate their transition to NATO-interoperable
    weapons systems, in order to reduce Croatia's dependence on Russia-
    maintained equipment. Finally, I will encourage Croatian officials and
    institutions to share their successful EU integration experience with
    their neighbors, by growing as a donor and by partnering with the
    United States through mechanisms such as the Emerging Donors Challenge
    Program.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Johnny Isakson,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Isakson [presiding], Gardner, Young,
    Shaheen, Murphy, and Kaine.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

        Senator Isakson. I call this meeting of the Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee hearing together.
        And we welcome our testimony today from those who are here
    to give it.
        And I want to welcome Jeanne Shaheen, who will be serving
    as my co-chair of this hearing.
        I appreciate the other members that are here and that will
    come.
        This is a very important hearing, particularly the people
    in front of us because we are talking about all of you, and we
    are going to give you a chance to talk about yourself. But it
    is important to the country as well because you have been
    nominated for positions that are extremely important to
    represent the United States of America as principal legal
    adviser to the U.S. Department of State on legal matters, U.S.
    economic, political, and security interests of international
    economic policies that mandate open markets, and ensuring
    safety and security of our diplomats in 275 United States
    posts.
        Our first nominee today is Thomas L. Carter of South
    Carolina, next to my home State of Georgia. We welcome you, Mr.
    Carter. He will be representing the United States on the
    Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization with
    the rank of Ambassador. A tremendous post. And Mr. Carter has
    tremendous experience as a pilot in the military, a pilot
    commercially, and a private pilot as well. And we welcome you
    here and your family that are here today.
        Ms. Jennifer Newstead has been nominated for Legal Adviser
    of the Department of State. Ms. Newstead is a partner in the
    law firm of Davis Polk and Wardwell where she has a global
    practice representing clients in cross-border regulatory
    enforcement and litigation matters. It sounds like you are well
    qualified for the State Department.
        Ms. Newstead previously served as General Counsel of the
    Office of Management and Budget, Principal Deputy Assistant
    Attorney General in the Justice Department Office of Legal
    Policy, and Associate Counsel to the President. She also
    clerked for Justice William Breyer, United States Supreme
    Court, and is a graduate of Yale University and Harvard
    University, two pretty well known schools in the Northeast that
    do not just let you out easy.
        Ms. Manisha Singh is nominated to be Assistant Secretary of
    State for Business Affairs and Economic Affairs. Ms. Singh is
    Chief Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Senator Dan
    Sullivan. Is Dan here? I will make sure and introduce him when
    he gets here. Dan is a tremendous member of the United States
    Senate representing the State of Alaska, and she worked with
    him. She worked with a fine Senator, and she must have done a
    fine job because he is pretty temperamental about stuff like
    this. I will call on him when he gets here for sure, I promise.
        She earned an LLM in international legal studies from
    American University College of Law and a juris doctorate from
    the University of Florida College of Law and bachelors of
    administration from the University of Miami.
        Mr. Michael Evanoff is nominated to be Assistant Secretary
    for Diplomatic Security. Mr. Evanoff is Vice President of Asset
    Protection and Security in international stores of Walmart
    stores, a position he has held since 2014. And if anybody has
    had experience in security in retail, it would be somebody
    representing Walmart. He has already told me that he helped
    them open a store in Nigeria, a place if any of you have ever
    been, you understand how important security is. Nigeria is a
    place you really need to have security. So we welcome you being
    here today and look forward to hearing your testimony.
        Mr. Evanoff is Vice President of Asset Protection and
    Security at International Walmart stores, and he has held that
    position for the last 5 years.
        Previously he served as Chief Security Office at Coca-Cola,
    an Atlanta company which I am very proud of, in Switzerland and
    Greece and a Special Agent in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security
    from 1985 to 2011, holding senior posts with the Overseas
    Security Advisory Council, NATO Office of Security position,
    the State Department, and details of eight United States
    missions overseas.
        He also was a diplomatic security officer for the United
    States European Command in Germany.
        It is a pleasure for me to recognize my ranking member, who
    will co-chair this hearing with me, Ms. Jeanne Shaheen from New
    Hampshire, for any remarks you may have.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE

        Senator Shaheen. Just to thank all of you for your
    willingness to serve. Congratulations on your nominations, and
    we look forward to hearing from you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Isakson. In the introduction, I have pretty much
    introduced all of you and your backgrounds. So I am going to
    leave the rest of it for you to say about yourself except to
    tell you the following. You will have up to 5 minutes to tell
    us your story. Your prepared remarks will be submitted for the
    record and made permanent, as will any responses you have to
    make today. We thank you for your willingness to serve your
    country.
        After your opening testimony, we will open it the floor for
    the members of the committee to ask any questions that they
    might have.
        We will start with you, Mr. Carter. Welcome.
        And by the way, please introduce any family members that
    are here or acknowledge them if they are here.

    STATEMENT OF THOMAS CARTER, OF SOUTH CAROLINA, FOR THE RANK OF
     AMBASSADOR DURING HIS TENURE OF SERVICE AS REPRESENTATIVE OF
          THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON THE COUNCIL OF THE
               INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

        Mr. Carter. Yes, sir. Well, I am very honored today to have
    Ms. Mary Graham from Charleston, South Carolina, joining me
    here and the leading lady of my life.
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen, and members of
    the committee, it is truly an honor for me to appear before you
    today as President Trump's nominee for United States
    Representative to the Council of the International Civil
    Aviation Organization, or ICAO as it is commonly known. I am
    very grateful to the President, Secretary Tillerson, and
    Ambassador Haley for their confidence and support. And I must
    admit that I have attended many hearings like this over the
    years, but it is truly humbling to finally be the nominee at
    the table.
        Mr. Chairman, since its creation at the Chicago Convention
    in 1944, ICAO has been a critical partner of the United States
    in efforts to promote the development of our crucial aviation
    industry and keep pace with the evolution of its safety and
    security requirements. Throughout its existence, ICAO has
    served as an effective forum in which the nations of the world
    can find common approaches to complex aviation challenges, such
    as emerging technologies, airspace management and air
    navigation, and environmental issues including aircraft noise
    and engine emissions.
        Unfortunately, over the past decades, we have witnessed an
    increase in terrorism, cyber attacks, and the rapid spread of
    pandemic disease, all of which have emerged to threaten civil
    aviation. ICAO is working to mitigate these threats but it can
    and must do more. ICAO's member states look to the United
    States for leadership on these and other aviation-related
    issues, and if confirmed, I will reinforce that leadership to
    promote American national security and strengthen aviation
    safety.
        Certainly, if anyone ever nominated for this position could
    fully appreciate the value of such a concept, I hope that it
    might be me. My life of 65 years has been a unique combination
    of military and civilian flying, key positions dealing with
    national security policy, and private sector experience
    relating to aviation-related products.
        I had the incredible experience as an Air Force pilot to
    command heavy jets internationally wile flying both numerous
    peacetime humanitarian missions, as well as into an active
    combat zone with dozens of paratroopers aboard. Later, when
    realizing my Air Force Reserve flying career might be coming to
    an end, I signed on to USAirways where I flew three separate
    aircraft types and eventually upgraded to captain of the Boeing
    737.
        Interspersed with this flying, I had the incredible
    experience to serve Republican Leader Bob Dole as a staffer
    dealing with national security issues. Those Senate years were
    absolutely some of the most rewarding of my life, and I
    coordinated critically important issues between the Senate
    leadership, Armed Services, Appropriations, and yes, this very
    committee chaired by Senator Pell.
        In my most recent work, I was very active with the major
    associations dealing with international and domestic aviation
    issues and, due to my personal flying experiences mentioned
    earlier, was frequently sought out for expertise on policy
    positions.
        All of this to say is that, if confirmed by this committee,
    I hope that my life's work has prepared me to represent this
    great country and all of you in a very dignified and
    knowledgeable manner.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to answer any
    questions your committee members might have. Thank you.
        [Mr. Carter's prepared statementy follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Thomas L. Carter

        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen and members of the
    committee, it's truly an honor for me to appear before you today as
    President Trump's nominee for United States Representative to the
    Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization or ICAO as
    it's commonly known. I'm very grateful to the President, Secretary
    Tillerson, and Ambassador Haley for their confidence and support, and I
    must admit that I've attended many hearings like this over the years
    but it's truly humbling to be an actual nominee.
        I'm accompanied today by some very significant people to me
    personally and none is more important than the leading lady in life,
    Mary Graham, of Charleston, SC. I also have three other particularly
    dear friends from my Senate days of old who, although we're evenly
    divided between Democrats and Republicans, we have remained close
    friends and confidants for over 30 years. They're very special to me so
    I'd like to introduce Ann Sauer, Charlie Smith and Jane Mattias. They,
    along with Mary, are my most reliable friends and advisors.
        Since its creation at the Chicago Convention in 1944, ICAO has been
    a critical partner of the United States in efforts to promote the
    development of this crucial industry and keep pace with the evolution
    of its safety and security requirements. Throughout its existence, ICAO
    has served as an effective forum in which the nations of the world can
    find common approaches to complex aviation challenges, such as emerging
    technologies, airspace management and air navigation, and environmental
    issues including aircraft noise and engine emissions. Over the past
    decades, we have witnessed an increase in terrorism, cyberattacks, and
    the rapid spread of pandemic disease, all of which have emerged to
    threaten civil aviation and our national safety and security. ICAO is
    working to mitigate these threats but it can and must do more. ICAO's
    member states look to the United States for leadership on these and
    other aviation related issues, and if confirmed, I will reinforce that
    leadership to promote American national security, strengthen aviation
    safety and security, and enhance protections for travelers.
        ICAO's breadth and purpose is best illustrated through the preamble
    written to establish the ICAO during the Chicago Convention of late
    1944, the member states quoted ``it is desirable to avoid friction and
    to promote that co-operation between nations and peoples upon which the
    peace of the world depends.''
        Certainly, if anyone ever nominated for this position could fully
    appreciate the value of such a concept, I hope that it might be me. My
    life of 65 years has been a unique combination of military and civilian
    flying, key positions dealing with national security policy and private
    sector experience relating to aviation- related products and
    capabilities.
        I had the incredible experience as an Air Force pilot to command
    heavy jets internationally while flying both numerous peacetime
    humanitarian missions as well as into an active combat zone with dozens
    of paratroopers aboard. My special operations experience included
    dropping Delta Team members from altitudes in excess of 20,000 feet and
    Navy Seals in the water at night off the coast of foreign countries.
    These were some of the most important flights of my aviation career.
    Later, when realizing that my Air Force Reserve flying career might be
    coming to an end, I signed on to USAirways where I flew three separate
    aircraft types and eventually upgraded to Captain on the Boeing 737.
        Interspersed with this flying, I also had the incredible experience
    to have served Republican Leader Bob Dole as a staffer dealing with
    national security issues. Those Senate years were absolutely some of my
    most rewarding of my life as I coordinated critically important issues
    between the leadership, Armed Services, Appropriations and yes, this
    very committee, then lead by Senator Pell.
        Ironically, I then lead Chairman Pell, Ranking Member Helms and
    many other of your committee members to the Persian Gulf one month
    after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August of 1990 as a Deputy
    Assistant Secretary of Defense. Getting off a helicopter in the middle
    of the afternoon in the Saudi desert where the temperature was 125
    degrees is forever seared into my memory, and I would add, the soles of
    the penny loafers I was wearing as well.
        In my most recent work in the private sector, I was very active
    with the major associations dealing with international and domestic
    aviation issues and due to my personal flying experiences mentioned
    earlier, was frequently sought out for expertise on policy positions.
        All of this is to say that, if confirmed by this committee, I hope
    that my life's work since leaving Memphis, Tennessee in 1975 as a
    first-generation high school and college graduate has prepared me to
    represent this great country and all of you in a dignified and
    knowledgeable manner.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to answer any
    questions your committee members might have of me.

        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Carter.
        Ms. Newstead?

      STATEMENT OF JENNIFER GILLIAN NEWSTEAD, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
                LEGAL ADVISER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

        Ms. Newstead. Well, thank you, Chairman Isakson and Ranking
    Member Shaheen and members of the committee. It is an honor to
    appear before you as the President's nominee to serve as Legal
    Adviser to the Department of State. I want to thank President
    Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence in me.
        Several members of my family are here today: my husband,
    Alexander Mishkin; our children, Henry and Charlotte Mishkin,
    of whom we are both very proud.
        Senator Isakson. A good looking group. [Laughter.]
        Ms. Newstead. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And my parents, Dr. Gillian Maclaine Newstead and Dr.
    Graham Newstead, and my sister, Dr. Caroline Maclaine, are all
    here as well.
        As a personal introduction, I was born on an Army base
    where my father was stationed as a doctor during the Vietnam
    War. My mother has spent her medical career pioneering new
    technologies to diagnose cancer in women. And though I am the
    first lawyer in my family, I am actually the third generation
    of women to pursue a professional career. My grandmother, who
    was born in 1914, was also a doctor. So my family's example has
    inspired me to seek out opportunities for public service
    throughout my career.
        If confirmed, it would be my honor to lead the team of more
    than 250 career lawyers and professionals who make up the
    Office of the Legal Adviser, a group that is deservedly
    recognized as the most talented collection of international
    lawyers in the world. The mission of the office is simple but
    critical: to provide rigorous and objective legal advice to the
    Secretary of State and other officials as they carry out the
    foreign policy of the United States.
        The office also plays a unique role, supporting the
    Department's mission to promote our values, the rule of law,
    and respect for human rights and democracy around the world.
        In the 23 years since I graduated from Yale Law School, I
    have served as a law clerk to two distinguished jurists, Judge
    Laurence Silberman and Justice Steven Breyer, and in senior
    positions at the Department of Justice and in the White House
    Counsel's Office. I also served, as you mentioned, Mr.
    Chairman, as General Counsel of the Office of Management and
    Budget where I worked closely with the general counsels of
    agencies across the government on a range of initiatives
    impacting national security and foreign policy. Through that
    role, I gained insight into the broad scope of the State
    Department's operations and worked on treaty issues and
    humanitarian relief efforts. And in my 20 years of practice at
    a global law firm, I have acted as a counselor, a litigator,
    and a negotiator on a range of international issues. If
    confirmed, those experiences should serve me well in carrying
    out the Legal Adviser's role in the negotiation and
    ratification of treaties and international agreements and in
    representing the United States before international tribunals.
        But most importantly, each of these roles has strengthened
    my conviction that a lawyer advising a critical function of
    government must have an unwavering commitment to integrity and
    independence. The most effective lawyers are pragmatic problem-
    solvers who identify the range of lawful options available to
    policymakers. But at the same time, a lawyer must be willing to
    speak hard truths and identify limits where law and
    circumstances require.
        If confirmed, I would seek at all times to act with
    fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law, and I would
    also be guided by the wisdom, articulated by one of my mentors,
    that the demands of honor have special application to
    government service.
        I thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to
    answering your questions.
        [Ms. Newstead's prepared statement follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Jennifer Gillian Newstead

        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen, and members of the
    committee, it is an honor to appear before you as the President's
    nominee to serve as Legal Adviser to the Department of State. I thank
    President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence in me. I
    would also like to thank the members of the committee and their staff
    for the courtesies you have shown me since my nomination.
        Several members of my family are here today: my husband, Alexander
    Mishkin; and our children, Henry and Charlotte Mishkin, of whom we are
    both very proud. Also with us are my parents, Dr. Gillian Maclaine
    Newstead and Dr. Graham Newstead, and my sister, Dr. Caroline Maclaine.
        I am privileged to come from a family that instilled in me respect
    for public service. I was born on an Army base at Fort Dix, New Jersey,
    where my father was stationed during the Vietnam War. My mother, a
    naturalized citizen, came to the United States from the United Kingdom
    and has spent her career developing new technologies to diagnose and
    treat cancer in women.
        Though the first lawyer in my family, I am actually the third
    generation of women to have pursued a professional career. My
    grandmother, born in 1914, was also a doctor who treated patients
    injured in bombing raids in World War II. A pioneer for her time, who
    sought no such recognition, she exemplified the values of hard work,
    personal responsibility, and strength in adversity. My family's example
    has inspired me to seek out opportunities for public service throughout
    my career.
        If confirmed, it would be my honor to lead the team of more than
    250 career lawyers and professionals who make up the Office of the
    Legal Adviser--a group that is deservedly recognized as the most
    talented collection of international lawyers in the world. The mission
    of the office is simple, but critical: to provide rigorous and
    objective legal advice to the Secretary of State, other Department
    officials, and policymakers across the Federal government as they
    formulate and implement the foreign policy of the United States.
        The Office of the Legal Adviser provides counsel and represents the
    United States on a broad array of issues affecting our vital national
    interests. These include counterterrorism and nuclear non-
    proliferation; economic sanctions and law enforcement efforts; the
    protection of U.S. citizens abroad; expanding U.S. trade and investment
    and promoting U.S. businesses overseas. The office also plays a unique
    role supporting the Department's critical mission to promote our
    values, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and democracy
    around the world.
        On a personal note, the career path that led me here today began
    more than thirty years ago, when I first had the privilege of serving
    in the State Department as an intern. I was assigned to a delegation in
    Vienna negotiating confidence and security-building measures to support
    the reduction of conventional armed forces in Europe. The experience
    left an indelible impression of the dedication and skill of the foreign
    service officers and civil servants who perform critical missions every
    day on behalf of the United States.
        That early experience also shaped my path in the law, and my desire
    to combine an international legal practice with opportunities for
    public service. In the 23 years since I graduated from Yale Law School,
    I have served as a law clerk to two distinguished jurists, Judge
    Laurence Silberman and Justice Stephen Breyer; in senior positions at
    the Department of Justice and the White House Counsel's Office; and as
    General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget.
        I joined the Justice Department several months before the terrorist
    attacks of September 11, 2001. In the aftermath of those terrible
    events, I worked with a dedicated team of attorneys at the Department,
    and with the bi-partisan staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to
    develop legislation to modernize longstanding law enforcement tools to
    better equip our government to fight terrorism.
        In the White House Counsel's Office and as General Counsel of OMB,
    I worked closely with the General Counsels of agencies across the
    government, including the Departments of Defense, State and the
    Treasury, on a range of initiatives impacting our national security and
    international relations. In leading the legal function at OMB, I gained
    insight into the broad scope of the State Department's operations, and
    worked on regulatory issues involving treaty implementation and
    humanitarian efforts such as the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS
    Relief.
        In my twenty years of private practice at a global law firm, I have
    acted as a counselor, litigator and negotiator on a range of
    international issues. I have advised clients on compliance with U.S.
    laws aimed at preventing corruption and money laundering; imposing
    economic sanctions; and protecting the integrity of the financial
    markets. If confirmed, those experiences should serve me well in
    carrying out the Legal Adviser's role in the negotiation and
    ratification of treaties and international agreements, and in
    representing the United States before international tribunals.
        Most importantly, each of these roles has strengthened my
    conviction that a lawyer advising a critical function of government
    must have an unwavering commitment to integrity and independence. The
    lawyer's role is always to provide her client with the highest-quality
    advice. The most effective lawyers are pragmatic problem-solvers, who
    identify the range of lawful options available to policymakers.
        At the same time, a lawyer must be willing to speak hard truths and
    identify limits where law and circumstances require. A lawyer must also
    be prepared to provide her best judgment on the wisdom of proposed
    actions, as well as their legality.
        If confirmed, I would at all times seek to act with integrity,
    independence, and fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law. I
    would also be guided by the wisdom, articulated by one of my mentors,
    that the demands of honor have special application to government
    service.
        Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your questions.

        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Ms. Newstead.
        Ms. Singh?

        STATEMENT OF MANISHA SINGH, OF FLORIDA, TO BE ASSISTANT
           SECRETARY OF STATE, ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS AFFAIRS

        Ms. Singh. Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen, and
    members of the committee, thank you for your time today. I am
    humbled and grateful to be considered to serve as the Assistant
    Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs.
        I want to express my gratitude to President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for the confidence and trust they have
    placed in me.
        I am particularly honored to appear before this committee.
    I had the privilege of being on the staff for several years.
        I want to thank my friends for being here today. My family
    was not able to make it here for the hearing, but they are
    watching from home and I would like to tell you about them. My
    parents both grew up in small rural villages in India. Neither
    set of my grandparents were able to read or write. My mom and
    dad knew that an education was the key to moving forward. We
    moved from India to Florida where my father earned a Ph.D. at
    the University of Florida. I was 2 years old when I came here.
    My parents impressed on me and my sister how lucky we were to
    be immigrants to this great country. Here in America, a young
    girl could grow up to be anything she wanted. Never have I
    believed this more than as I sit before you today.
        If confirmed, I would be the first woman installed to lead
    this bureau. I have experience there, previously managing a
    division as a Deputy Assistant Secretary. It is composed of
    over 200 talented men and women in Washington, as well as
    economic officers posted all over the world.
        In an era of global competition, we have to make sure that
    U.S. companies have every opportunity to succeed. The bureau
    plays a key role in a healthy American economy by ensuring a
    level playing field for our companies. We have to make sure
    that economic resources are fully employed as carrots and
    sticks in the interest of American stability and prosperity.
        I would utilize both my government and private sector
    experience to successfully lead this bureau. My legislative
    service has afforded me the privilege of hearing the concerns
    of everyday Americans. If confirmed, I will work to make sure
    that everyone in the bureau is proud to be a member of my team
    and to make sure that we put the interests of the American
    people first.
        I thank you again, and I am happy to answer any questions
    you may have.
        [Ms. Singh's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Manisha Singh

        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen and members of the
    committee, thank you for your time today. I am humbled and grateful to
    be considered to serve as the next Assistant Secretary of State for
    Economic and Business Affairs.
        I want to express my gratitude to President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for the confidence and trust they have placed in me to take
    on this important role.
        I am particularly honored to appear before this committee--I had
    the privilege of being on the staff for several years.
        I want to thank my friends for being here today. My family was not
    able to make it to the hearing, but they are watching from home, and
    I'd like to tell you about them. My parents both grew up in small rural
    villages in India. Neither set of my grandparents were able to read or
    write. My mom and dad knew that an education was the key to moving
    forward. We moved from India to Florida where my father completed a PhD
    at the University of Florida. I was two years old when I came here. My
    parents impressed on me and my sister how lucky we were to be
    immigrants to this great country. Here in America, a young girl could
    grow up to be anything she wanted.
        My parents still live in Florida and my sister lives with her
    husband and their daughters in northern Georgia. I'd like to say the
    same thing to my nieces as my parents always said to me. Here in
    America, a young girl can grow up to be anything she wants. Never have
    I believed this more than as I sit before you today.
        If confirmed, I would be the first woman installed to lead the
    Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs. I have experience in the
    bureau, previously managing a division as a Deputy Assistant Secretary.
    It's composed of over 200 talented men and women in Washington as well
    as economic officers posted in every U.S. mission around the world.
        In an era of global competition, we have to fight unfair practices
    and make sure that U.S. businesses have every opportunity to succeed.
    If confirmed, I would ensure that small and medium size enterprises,
    women and minority-owned businesses are a particular focus of our work.
    The bureau plays a key role in a healthy American economy by ensuring a
    level-playing field for our companies and by encouraging foreign
    investors to create good jobs here in America.
        If confirmed, I would work closely with my counterparts to use our
    full range of instruments to partner with those who work with us and to
    enact serious consequences against global bad actors. We must make sure
    that economic resources are fully employed as carrots and sticks in the
    interest of American prosperity and stability.
        I would utilize both my government and private sector experience to
    lead successfully. In the private sector, it was my job to understand
    the real life consequences of government decisions.
        My legislative service has afforded me the privilege of hearing the
    concerns of every day Americans. If confirmed, I will work to make sure
    that everyone in the bureau is proud to be a member of my team and to
    make sure that we put the interests of the American people first.
        I thank you again, and I would be happy to answer any questions you
    may have.

        Senator Isakson. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Evanoff.

     STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T. EVANOFF, OF ARKANSAS, TO BE ASSISTANT
                SECRETARY OF STATE, DIPLOMATIC SECURITY

        Mr. Evanoff. Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Shaheen, and
    members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you
    today as President Trump's nominee to the Department of State's
    Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. I am
    grateful for the confidence that the President and Secretary
    Tillerson have placed in me, and I am humbled by the
    designation of becoming the only second DS special agent in the
    bureau's 101-year history to come through the ranks and to be
    nominated to serve as Assistant Secretary.
        As a former senior DS Agent for 26 years, I want to thank
    you for your continuing unwavering support for both the
    Department and the Diplomatic Security. I am very proud to be
    associated with the outstanding men and women who labor
    tirelessly to protect America's diplomatic facilities, critical
    information, and most importantly, American lives. They also
    conduct extensive, important investigations necessary to keep
    our country safe.
        I first want to thank my wife Kate, my soul mate Kate, my
    son Luke, who could not be with us today because he would tear
    the place apart if he was here. He is 2 and a half. I would
    also like to introduce to you my sister-in-law Karen Evanoff;
    and my niece, Olivia Evanoff; and my nephew, Tommy Evanoff. I
    would also like to introduce my brother-in-law, Raunt DeWinter;
    and his son Mack DeWinter; and my great mother-in-law, Eleanor
    Milner; and her friend and partner, John Casey. They all came
    down from North Carolina and Groton, Connecticut.
        My thoughts today, though, are also with my parents, Walter
    and Lyle Evanoff, who first showed me the value of law
    enforcement service through their distinguished careers as
    police officers right here in the District of Columbia. So I
    want to thank them and know that I am with them on this special
    day.
        I first joined Diplomatic Security 32 years ago in 1985 in
    the wake of the Beirut bombings and the subsequent approval of
    Admiral Bobby Inman's recommendations calling for the creation
    of a more robust and professional Diplomatic Security Service
    for the Department of State. The Inman report identified the
    need for increased funding for stronger overseas embassies and
    consulates and led to additional hiring of special agents,
    security engineers, couriers, and other key positions. Thanks
    in large part, Chairman, to the work of this Senate committee
    right here, the recommendations were formally authorized by
    Congress 1 year later to form the Omnibus Diplomatic Security
    and Antiterrorism Act of 1986.
        In the 3 decades since my hiring as part of the Inman
    tranche of DS special agents, I have served in eight overseas
    postings, four of which were designated as high threat. Among
    other things, I established the first DS liaison position for a
    U.S. military regional command and managed the largest spy case
    and damage assessment in NATO history. I also helped designing
    the post-9/11 informant walk-in program at our embassy in
    Islamabad that contributed to the capture of Khalid Sheik
    Muhammad.
        My work with the Department, combined with my private
    sector experience leading international security programs for
    two Fortune 100 companies, has given me a unique perspective on
    DS's inherent strengths and challenges, as well as future
    security changes that may be necessary to ensure the continued
    conduct of American diplomacy in a safe and effective manner.
        With support and continued guidance from members of this
    committee and Congress as a whole, one of my goals will be to
    enable stronger and more effective collaboration with our
    colleagues throughout the Department, the military, the IC
    community, and this body here. This enhanced collaboration
    needs to be both strategic and operational, and we need to
    establish key performance indicators to measure the value of
    the work with our partners in protecting our people and
    facilities worldwide.
        In a world of rapid technological innovation and constantly
    evolving cyber and terrorism threats, the appropriate sharing
    of actionable security information also needs to remain a top
    priority for DS. If confirmed, I intend to closely monitor our
    operational and strategic planning objectives with the
    Department and with the intelligence community when it comes to
    opening and maintaining posts in high threat and potentially
    hostile environments. There need to be clear goals and
    objectives if we are to consistently and successfully operate
    in hostile environments with little or ineffective host
    government support.
        I will also put special focus on continued overhaul and
    refinement of security training for the Department of State
    employees. This includes intensified specialized training for
    all DS agents and the ongoing expansion of the Foreign Affairs
    Counter Threat, FACT, course for all government employees
    working overseas under the Chief of Mission authority. It also
    includes the completion of the Department's Foreign Affairs
    Security Training Center, FASTC, at Fort Pickett, Virginia.
        Finally, if confirmed, I also hope to strengthen the
    organization's morale. Everyone in DS, whether part of the
    Foreign Service, the Civil Service, or a contractor, deserves
    to be recognized for the vital role they play on a daily basis.
    There needs to be a broader recognition and appreciation for
    the fact that we are one team with one mission.
        Thank you for your time and consideration, and I am happy
    to answer any questions that you might have.
        [Mr. Evanoff's prepared statement follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Michael T. Evanoff

        Senator Isakson, Senator Shaheen, and members of the committee. I
    am honored to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to
    be the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of
    Diplomatic Security and am very grateful for the confidence that the
    President and Secretary Tillerson have placed in me.
        First, as a former senior DS Agent for 26 years, I want to thank
    you for your continued unwavering support for both the Department and
    Diplomatic Security. I am very proud to be associated with the
    outstanding men and women who labor tirelessly to protect America's
    diplomatic facilities, critical information, and, most importantly,
    American lives. They also conduct extensive, important investigations
    necessary to keep our country safe.
        At any given time, there are thousands of Americans living overseas
    under the authority of the Chief of Mission or otherwise representing
    American interests. Those men, women and children deserve no less than
    the full commitment of the U.S. Government to do everything in our
    power to ensure they can live and operate safely. If I am fortunate
    enough to be confirmed, it will be my mission to honor that commitment
    every day.
        I want to thank my wife Kate, my son Luke, and my extended family
    for their love and support, and for allowing me to rejoin an
    institution that I love. My thoughts today are also with the memory of
    my parents, Walter and Lyle, who first showed me the value of law
    enforcement service through their distinguished careers as police
    officers right here in the District of Columbia.
        Finally, I want to thank the President and Secretary Tillerson for
    the confidence they have placed in me to lead DS in an increasingly
    complex and dangerous world. I am humbled and proud by the designation
    of becoming only the second DS Special Agent in the Bureau's 101-year
    history to come up through the ranks and be nominated to serve as
    Assistant Secretary.
        I first joined Diplomatic Security 32 years ago, in 1985, in the
    wake of the Beirut bombings and the subsequent approval of Admiral
    Bobby Inman's recommendations calling for the creation of a more robust
    and professional Diplomatic Security Service for the Department of
    State. The Inman report identified the need for increased funding for
    stronger overseas embassies and consulates, and led to additional
    hiring for more Special Agents, Security Engineers, Couriers and other
    key positions. Thanks in large part to the work of this Senate
    committee, the report's recommendations were formally authorized by
    Congress one year later in the form of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security
    and Antiterrorism Act of 1986.
        In the three decades since my hiring as part of the first ``Inman''
    tranche of DS Special Agents, I have served in eight overseas postings,
    four of which were designated as High Threat at the time. Among other
    things, I established the first DS liaison position with a U.S.
    military regional command, managed the largest Russian spy case and
    damage assessment in NATO history, and designed a post-9/11 informant
    ``walk-in'' program at our Islamabad embassy that contributed to the
    capture of Khalid Sheik Muhammad.
        My work with the Department combined with my private sector
    experience leading international security programs for two Fortune 100
    companies has given me a unique perspective on DS's inherent strengths
    and challenges, as well as future security changes that may be
    necessary to ensure the continued conduct of American diplomacy in a
    safe and effective manner.
        If confirmed, I will ensure DS does its part to support the
    implementation of the Department's policy priorities while always
    remaining cognizant of our obligations to the American taxpayer. With
    support and continued guidance from members of this committee and
    Congress as a whole, one of my top goals will be to enable stronger and
    more effective collaboration with our colleagues throughout the
    Department, the military, and the intelligence community. This enhanced
    collaboration needs to be both strategic and operational, and we need
    establish key performance indicators to measure the value of our work
    with our partners in protecting our people and facilities worldwide.
        In a world of rapid technological innovation and constantly
    evolving threats, the appropriate sharing of actionable security
    information also needs to remain a top priority for DS. If confirmed, I
    intend to closely monitor our operational and strategic planning
    objectives with the Department and the intelligence community when it
    comes to opening and maintaining posts in high threat and potentially
    hostile environments. There need to be clear goals and objectives if we
    are to consistently and successfully operate in hostile environments
    with little or ineffective host-government support.
        I will also put special focus on the continued overhaul and
    refinement of security training for Department of State employees. This
    includes intensive specialized training for all DS agents and the on-
    going expansion of the Foreign Affairs Counter Threat (FACT) course for
    all employees working overseas under the authority of the Chief of
    Mission. It also includes the completion of the Department's Foreign
    Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC) at Fort Pickett, Virginia.
    Once fully up and running, this state-of-the-art facility will allow DS
    to provide more efficient and effective hard skills training--such
    firearms, explosives, antiterrorism driving techniques, and defensive
    tactics--for roughly 10,000 students annually.
        Finally, if confirmed, I also hope to strengthen our organization's
    morale. Everyone in DS--whether part of the Foreign Service, the Civil
    Service, or a contractor--deserves to be recognized for the vital role
    they play on a daily basis. There needs to be a broader recognition and
    appreciation of the fact that we are one team with one mission.
        To be considered to lead DS at this moment is the most rewarding
    professional opportunity of my career. If confirmed, I look forward to
    undertaking this responsibility and collaborating closely with the
    members of this committee in the months and years ahead.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. I am happy to answer any
    questions you may have.

        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Evanoff.
        We will open the floor for 5-minute questions, and I am
    going to open real quickly.
        Mr. Evanoff, you mentioned Fort Pickett.
        Mr. Evanoff. Yes, sir.
        Senator Isakson. As a good Senator and a good politician, I
    cannot help but tell you there are two great facilities in
    Georgia called FLETC, the Federal Law Enforcement Training
    Center, and the Guardian Center outside of Perry, Georgia,
    which are two outstanding situational training areas for law
    enforcement antiterrorism activities, military activities, and
    the like. So when you are looking at Fort Pickett and all the
    others, also do not forget those two. They are great
    facilities.
        Mr. Evanoff. Absolutely, sir. I was trained at FLETC in
    Georgia. So I know exactly what they provide.
        Senator Isakson. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Evanoff. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Isakson. Mr. Carter, I am scared to death with what
    North Korea is doing. You and I had a conversation yesterday
    that scared me worse last night when I started thinking about
    our conversation. I had not thought about where those missiles
    are going between the time Kim Jong-un launches them and they
    fall in the South China Sea or wherever.
        Will your representation on this organization of civil
    aviation have some voice in bringing about requirements on
    countries to notify civil aviation on any use of
    intercontinental ballistic missiles or other missiles that
    might be done on a testing basis?
        Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, this is probably one of the most
    sensitive top issues that is going to be handled at the council
    starting on the 30th of October, this month. Launching
    ballistic missiles into international airspace is absolutely
    unacceptable. It is an enormous risk to civil aviation. As a
    person who commanded multi-engine jets, the worst thing I can
    think of is to be sitting at altitude and see a ballistic
    missile come through your airspace. And through my research in
    preparation for this, it is clear that one of these ballistic
    missile launches did, indeed, go through the flight path of an
    international flight. You are supposed to issue notices to
    airmen anytime you are doing any type of missile testing like
    that in international airspace.
        So I know that the mission at ICAO is working closely with
    the council members to deal with this issue, and they have made
    it a priority for the 30 October meeting. And if confirmed, I
    guarantee you this will be one of my top priorities and I will
    certainly work with you and this committee to make sure that
    this is being dealt with.
        Senator Isakson. Well, thank you. That is of the utmost
    importance. I had not thought about that risk until we talked
    yesterday, but it is obviously huge and a big one.
        Mr. Carter. Yes, sir.
        Senator Isakson. Ms. Singh, you are going to be an advisor
    on economic affairs. Is that not correct?
        Ms. Singh. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Isakson. I think soft power is the most powerful
    tool the United States has to win friends and influence enemies
    around the world and certainly far better than fighting wars
    all the time, if you can help it.
        The Millennium Challenge Corporation and other things like
    that have proven that good investment in foreign countries to
    be our friends and helping them to develop and subscribe
    themselves to a better way they treat their workers and better
    ways for them to interact with people. Are you going to promote
    the Millennium Challenge Corporation in your work, or will it
    be a part of your work at the State Department?
        Ms. Singh. Yes, absolutely, sir. The Millennium Challenge
    Corporation--the Economic Bureau is the link at the State
    Department for the MCC. And I very much believe, as you have
    said, that good governance, transparency in governments all
    around the world is of great benefit to us. I think we cannot
    underemphasize at all the emphasis of soft power and diplomacy
    to prevent conflicts. It is very much in the American interest
    to build up institutions such as the MCC. And I commit to you
    that it will be a priority of mine, if confirmed for this
    position, Senator.
        Senator Isakson. Well, I think it is critically important,
    and I think your experience and the conversation we had
    yesterday encourages me of the high priority you have given to
    that.
        The gentleman I talked about in your introduction is here
    now, Dan Sullivan. Senator Sullivan came and wanted to be a
    part of this hearing because you work with him now. He is a big
    fan of yours, and I am going to let him say anything he wants
    to say, as long as it does not take longer than a minute and 26
    seconds. [Laughter.]

                    STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I just want
    to thank the committee for an opportunity to say a few words
    about Manisha Singh. I think she is extremely well qualified
    for this position, given her vast amounts of experience.
        I will just tell you a little story, Mr. Chairman. I was a
    marine who was coming off active duty 11 years ago. I spent a
    year and a half in the Middle East, and I came back and was
    nominated for the Assistant Secretary position that Manisha
    Singh is getting ready to take, if confirmed, which I am
    confident she will be. And when I got back, there was a Foreign
    Relations Committee staffer who was actually helping me prepare
    for my hearing, just like this hearing, 11 years ago, and it
    was Manisha Singh. So this is kind of karma, good karma, I
    would say. And then she later became my Deputy Assistant
    Secretary of State in charge of all trade and economic issues.
    So enormously important back then, maybe even more important
    now. So she is an expert in that area. I am sure you will get
    good answers from your questions about that.
        And then later I had the honor of having Manisha work for
    me in the Senate. Right now she does as a counselor and top
    foreign policy official. So I think she is very well qualified.
        I want to thank the President and Secretary Tillerson for
    the great nomination, and she will do a great job for the
    country. And I just wanted to thank you for the opportunity to
    say a few words on this committee.
        Senator Isakson. I would never turn Ms. Singh down for any
    request that she makes to talk about you. [Laughter.]
        Senator Isakson. My ranking member, Ms. Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Carter, again congratulations on your nomination, and I
    am delighted to know that you have agreed to be considered for
    this post.
        In October of 2016, the International Civil Aviation
    Organization agreed on international carbon dioxide emission
    standards for aircraft beginning in 2020 and also on a system
    for offsetting future carbon dioxide emissions from aviation.
    Both U.S. airlines and the aircraft manufacturers were part of
    and agreed to those negotiations' resulting agreements, and the
    emission standards would be implemented by the U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency regulations issued under the
    Clean Air Act.
        So if confirmed, will the United States continue to proceed
    with actions to implement these standards?
        Mr. Carter. Well, Senator, it is always great to see you
    again. And I think this is a terribly important issue that you
    brought up because as you well know, there some EU legislation
    in 2012. The 2013 assembly basically outlined all of these
    market-based measure requirements.
        So in 2016, as you stated, CORSIA, was supported. The
    Carbon Offsetting Reduction Scheme, was supported by the United
    States and all the other nations. Once again, as I just said
    earlier about North Korea, the standards and recommended
    procedures for implementing CORSIA are going to be considered
    by the council that is meeting on the 30th of October, this
    month. So basically all the nations on the council, including
    the United States, in 2016 approved CORSIA. Now they will be
    approving the actual standards and the procedures. And
    certainly, if confirmed, I will keep your committee and the
    staff that I discussed this with, Josh and those guys,
    completely up to speed on this because it is very, very
    important. And of course, as you know, Airlines for America,
    IATA, everyone is supporting this right now. So, yes, ma'am.
        Senator Shaheen. It is still not clear to me. Are you
    saying that you will continue to take the position on the part
    of the United States to support these standards?
        Mr. Carter. Well, the administration itself, as I
    understand it--obviously, I have not been able to talk to
    people, but the administration has not taken a formal position
    yet. But as soon as I do hear about that, I will get back to
    you. But as of right now, I do not see why we will not be
    taking the standards and recommended procedures seriously.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Mr. Carter. Yes, ma'am.
        Senator Shaheen. Ms. Newstead, first of all, again thank
    you for agreeing to be considered for this nomination. You
    clearly have the experience and credentials to do an excellent
    job.
        As you know, the position of Legal Counsel in the State
    Department carries a very heavy burden in terms of the issues
    which confront you. And I want to begin with asking you about a
    question that I asked another nominee for a high State
    Department post about, and I was not adequately satisfied with
    the answer that I heard and that has to do with impoundment.
        As I am sure you are aware, the Senate appropriations
    committee that deals with the State Department's budget
    recently passed out a budget that was much more generous than
    that recommended by the administration. And there has been some
    speculation as to whether the administration would try to just
    not spend that money if it came to the Department.
        So can you tell me whether you think the Department could
    legally do that, or are you under obligation, if the Congress
    has passed a budget, to spend the money as directed by
    Congress?
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, thank you for that question. I
    would be happy to address it.
        In general, Senator, of course, when Congress passes
    legislation that is enacted through the President's signature,
    there is a duty to spend those funds in accordance with the
    terms that Congress has specified.
        I am, of course, aware, Senator, as you know, about the
    federal statute that provides specific situations in which the
    administration can notify Congress either of a need to delay or
    possibly a proposal to not spend funds as appropriated. And
    there are specific situations and standards that the statute
    lays out and notification procedures to the Congress. So if I
    am confirmed, it will be my intention, Senator, to apply the
    law as written by the Congress, including with respect to that
    statute.
        Senator Shaheen. And I am sure you are aware of the court
    that determined that Congress does have the responsibility to
    pass the budget and that agencies have a requirement to spend
    those dollars.
        Ms. Newstead. Yes, I am. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. I am out of time, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Isakson. Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
        I want to congratulate all of our nominees.
        Ms. Newstead, thanks so much for the meeting yesterday. You
    will not be surprised, based on our meeting, that I have a
    number of follow-up questions pertaining to the situation in
    Yemen. I explained to you my interest in the situation
    surrounds the largest humanitarian crisis in the world. Our
    relationship with Saudi Arabia, I believe, creates a real
    opportunity for the United States to alleviate suffering in
    Yemen and also stabilize the region.
        I want to get some moral and legal clarity about a number
    of different matters. So I am going to go very quickly here. I
    ask that you provide clear and concise--concise--responses to
    my questions, please.
        On July 18, I convened a subcommittee hearing on the four
    famines. I gave you a transcript of that hearing. Have you had
    an opportunity to review that?
        Ms. Newstead. I have. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Young. So you are familiar with many of the facts
    associated with this horrific situation.
        I asked about the Saudi-led coalition's pattern of impeding
    humanitarian assistance. I asked this question of Executive
    Director of the World Food Programme, David Beasley. He said
    the United Nations--he indicated, quote, I think it is an
    abhorrent activity and a violation of not just humanitarian
    international laws. Morally it is just a terrible thing.
        Now, section 620(i) of the Foreign Assistance Act prohibits
    the provision of security assistance or assistance under the
    Arms Export Control Act, quote, to any country when it is made
    known to the President that the government of such country
    prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the
    transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance. Do you
    agree that is what the statute plainly states?
        Ms. Newstead. It sounds like a correct summary to me. Yes,
    sir.
        Senator Young. Thank you.
        Based on your preparation for this position and for this
    hearing and based on the facts you have reviewed, is it your
    professional, your personal, your legal judgment that Saudi
    Arabia has prohibited or otherwise restricted, directly or
    indirectly, the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance? Yes or no, please.
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, if I may, just before I answer
    that question directly, I did appreciate our conversation
    yesterday, and I have had an opportunity to look initially at
    the materials you----
        Senator Young. I am going to give you 10 seconds, please.
    Yes or no.
        Ms. Newstead [continuing]. Well, Senator, in order to be
    able to give you a legal judgment on that, I would need to
    spend time consulting with the Department's experts on both the
    facts and legal----
        Senator Young. You will not be providing a personal
    opinion. We will pivot to the Department of State, please. You
    are nominated to serve as the principal Legal Adviser to the
    Department of State on all legal matters, domestic and
    international. Based on your work with the Department to
    prepare for this position and this hearing, what is the
    Department of State's current view on this question?
        Ms. Newstead [continuing]. Well, Senator, I am aware that
    the Department has responded to some inquiries that you made
    before, but I believe there is more information that should be
    provided. And I can tell you, Senator, that if I am confirmed,
    I would make it a priority to study the issue and consult with
    the Department in order to provide additional information to
    you.
        Senator Young. So it is well known and broadly understood
    by those who immerse themselves in the facts that the Saudi-led
    coalition has deliberately and precisely bombed U.S.-funded
    cranes that were supposed to be delivered to the major port of
    Hodeidah. That port was to receive humanitarian supplies,
    again, in part funded by U.S. taxpayers. The Saudi-led
    coalition also bombed a World Food Programme warehouse I
    mentioned to you yesterday in Hodeidah. The Saudi-led coalition
    continues to delay shipments going into Hodeidah for days that
    would end up going to vulnerable Yemenis, which has created the
    largest humanitarian crisis in the world or certainly
    exacerbated it. And according to the UN, the Saudi-led
    coalition continues to delay commercial vessels going into
    Yemen's Red Sea port.
        So in light of these facts, assuming they are correct, how
    can you or the Department--would you defend a judgment that
    there would be no violation of the Foreign Assistance Act?
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, I think with the facts that
    you have identified and the facts that we discussed yesterday,
    they certainly raise a very meaningful question in my mind
    whether the responsibilities under that provision have been
    triggered. And let me explain, if I could, Senator, because I
    believe as we discussed, what that statute provides is that if
    the President or the Secretary become aware or it is made known
    to them that a recipient of federal foreign assistance is
    essentially delaying or obstructing the delivery of assistance,
    then there is an obligation to prohibit providing further
    assistance to that government. And as we discussed, an
    exception that the President can find it in the national
    interest to waive that, in which case notification to the
    committee is required. And, Senator, in our discussion, we
    discussed many factors which would suggest----
        Senator Young. Let me interject respectfully because my
    time is running out. I commend you. You do seem to have a
    command of other provisions of the law, indicating that the
    President can, under certain circumstances, waive. They would
    have to notify Congress. Is there any evidence the President
    has notified Congress?
        Ms. Newstead [continuing]. Well, Senator, that is one of
    the questions I have been trying to look into since we
    discussed this yesterday. I am not aware that a notification
    has been made. And I agree with you from our discussion
    yesterday that that raises an implication as to what
    determination has the Department made. So I certainly, Senator,
    can commit to follow up on this question and try to get back to
    you with more information.
        Senator Young. Okay.
        Well, I am a little over my time. I thank the chairman for
    his indulgence.
        I will be submitting some more fulsome questions for you to
    answer on the record, also one pertaining to violation of
    Customary International Humanitarian Law rule 55. I for one am
    going to need clear and unambiguous responses to these
    questions from you and the Department before we vote on your
    confirmation on the floor. Thank you so much, and I am sorry
    for the rush.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Senator.
        I want to keep the committee open for a few more minutes
    for a couple of follow-up questions. I have one. I think there
    may be another one or two. So if it is okay with you all. We
    have six votes coming up beginning at 3 o'clock. So we will
    have to adjourn by then. I know you all want to get to your
    markup as soon as we can in the next week or so. So we will
    make sure we get this finished today.
        But I have a question. Mr. Evanoff, back when the Benghazi
    attack took place and we had the tragic loss of the U.S.
    Ambassador and two CIA personnel and other personnel
    representing the United States of America, Secretary Clinton,
    then Secretary of State, and President Obama had an
    accountability review board that reviewed everything that was
    done in Benghazi for security and protection and backup, et
    cetera and ended up making recommendations that we were $2.2
    billion short having enough security improvements in our
    embassies around the world to truly protect our individuals on
    duty.
        Have you seen that report?
        Mr. Evanoff. I have.
        Senator Isakson. Do you know if anything is being done
    post-Benghazi in the Department to build up and beef up the
    security diplomatically and ambassador-wise around the world?
        Mr. Evanoff. Sir, it is an excellent question. I thank you
    for the question.
        Yes, having been in the private sector at that time, I too
    was a little concerned about what was happening to the
    Department security-wise. So when I was given this opportunity,
    the first thing I read was the unclassified ARB report, but
    also I read the best practices report that came out of it and
    also what DS has done. And two major things have really struck
    me and something I wish I had when I was in Pakistan in 9/11,
    during that time.
        One is that we have a high threat post division now that
    focuses on the 32 posts that need assistance at any given time.
    We did not have that back in 2001. That gives us a 911 call to
    allow the division to answer anything that the RSO would want
    or need for that high threat posting. So there is dedicated
    people that would go and help them for that.
        The second thing is that we put together an operations
    planning group where we look at why we are going into a country
    that has hostile intention before we even get there. Why do we
    even need to be there at that point? Can we build the security
    around it? So we made it transparent, and we allowed all
    stakeholders to come around the table and give their thoughts
    and views on why we should go to country X and why we need the
    national security agenda to make that. If there is a risk,
    there should be a reward. If there is no reward and you have a
    high risk, then that venue will capture it.
        So those two things are the most important ones I have
    seen, to include also the training centers that will open up in
    Virginia. So I believe those three things is what we did not
    have when I was there.
        Senator Isakson. We always want to have our country in a
    position to protect those who represent us diplomatically
    around the world. And what happened in Benghazi was something
    we should react to and make sure it does not happen again to
    the maximum extent possible.
        Ms. Shaheen, do you have a question?
        Senator Shaheen. I do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to follow up, Mr. Evanoff, because one of the things
    that we have seen recently is the Russians have harassed our
    embassy officials who are stationed in Russia. Do you have
    strategies for how you think we could respond to those kinds of
    activities on the part of a host country?
        Mr. Evanoff. Senator, it is a good question, and I thank
    you for it.
        We have seen this to the point where Russian intelligence
    services have broken into our residences in Moscow. They have
    actually poisoned our pets. They have harassed, left nasty
    notes.
        I look at it this way not to lower ourselves to that. But I
    know that the FBI monitors this here domestically, and we do
    not do anything at all to them like that. That is not who we
    are. But at that point, I think it should be known more
    publicly that this is happening. Before it used to be a closed
    secret that our diplomats get harassed in Moscow and St. Pete
    and nobody really knew about that except the Foreign Service
    families themselves. If this became transparent and the general
    public knew that there are hostile intelligence services going
    into our residences on diplomatic grounds, then I believe we
    would get more pressure from Russia to back off. I think we
    have got to shine the light on this situation more.
        Senator Shaheen. And so is that something that you would
    expect the Secretary of State to do, or who would do that,
    shining the light?
        Mr. Evanoff. Sure. I think the Secretary has already
    demonstrated that with Cuba, the fact that we identified 15
    people to leave, what they have done to us in Havana, then we
    will then push them out of Washington, D.C. I think this
    Secretary has an appetite to bring it to Secretary Lavrov and
    tell him to cut that out, that this is something that is not
    something that a first-rate country should do to another
    country like that. I do believe the Secretary has the ability
    and would want to do that.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Ms. Newstead, President Trump has used language on multiple
    occasions that threaten North Korea with the use of military
    force. Specific legislative authority to use military force
    against North Korea has not been enacted. In your opinion, does
    the President have the authority to use military force to
    prevent North Korea from advancing its nuclear weapons program
    without a North Korean attack?
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, thank you for that important
    question.
        It is my view the law generally provides the President may
    act to defend the United States, and that includes in some
    circumstances acting preemptively when there is an imminent
    threat, military threat for example. That is certainly one
    scenario that could arise in the case of North Korea.
        So in answer to your question, I would say my starting
    point would be to consider those authorities, those
    constitutional authorities, and as a matter of international
    law.
        Senator Shaheen. Ms. Singh, finally, I had the opportunity,
    when I was Governor, to take several trade missions overseas,
    and one of the biggest helps to us was the commercial service
    within the Department of State in terms of identifying partners
    to do business with and helping us. So can you talk about how
    you would approach that role of economic statecraft and how you
    would coordinate with the Department of Commerce in working
    with businesses abroad who want to improve their bottom line?
        Ms. Singh. Thank you, Senator. That is such an important
    issue right now because, as you know, we need to provide
    American companies with every opportunity to succeed and
    prosper globally. And I have been lucky to be able to take part
    in the trade missions such as the one you are mentioning when
    you were Governor. I think it is critically important that we
    continue these.
        I would closely with my counterparts at the Department of
    Commerce to identify markets not only in which our companies
    are doing well, but in which our companies are having problems.
    If there is a particular country where their companies are able
    to come into the United States and invest freely and our
    companies are suffering from regulatory barriers or restrictive
    approval processes that are prohibiting them from prospering in
    those markets, I would work with my counterparts at the
    Department of Commerce to take trade missions which would
    involve speaking to commercial officials in these governments
    at the highest levels, introducing them to our companies, and
    saying our companies are having difficulty getting through your
    approval process, what can we do to help them.
        And then I would also find partners that might be
    interested in partnering with our companies over there. In the
    cases of joint ventures, sometimes it is easiest to navigate
    commercial markets when you are doing so with a company who
    knows the landscape there.
        I thank you for that question. I think it is critically
    important.
        Senator Shaheen. Me too. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Isakson. It is a good thing we are dealing with
    diplomacy because I have a diplomatic challenge. Mr. Young
    would be next to be called on in a second round, but Mr. Kaine
    has arrived and he has not asked any questions yet. So I tell
    you what I am going to do, with the concurrence of everybody in
    the room up here--and if any of you all have an opinion, you
    can let me know--I am going to recognize Senator Kaine for 5
    minutes and then go to Senator Young for another 5 minutes. And
    if my timing is right, that will put us right at the time we
    got to get out of here to go vote anyway. Does that sound all
    right with you?
        Senator Isakson. Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very diplomatic.
        So I appreciate you all and thank you for your service and
    congratulations on your nominations by the President.
        If I can start with Mr. Evanoff, I understand, before I
    came in, you talked a little bit about the FASTC facility under
    construction. I look forward to working with you on that.
        I wanted to talk to you about the FASTC. It was responsive
    to one of the ARB, accountability review board, recommendations
    following Benghazi. There were 29 recommendations. 26 have been
    closed out. And the outstanding recommendations are ongoing
    upgrades in construction to embassy facilities. Talk a little
    bit about, to the extent you understand it, the Department's
    timeline for completing these last three ARB recommendations so
    that they can be closed out as well.
        Mr. Evanoff. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        I am told that basically out of the three, both of them
    have been--two of them have been closed. One is still hanging
    because it belongs into the classified realm. And of course, I
    have not had access to that. But I am pretty much sure we are
    going to be closing that out very soon.
        Senator Kaine. Well, that is something, should you be
    confirmed, that I would want to come back to you on. I have
    been worried about the overall budget cuts to the State
    Department as they might impact this most important function. I
    mean, of all the folks at the State Department, you are the one
    they should get a life insurance policy on because I think it
    is really, really critical that folks be protected, especially
    given the increases, as you are describing, whether it is Cuba
    or Russia--the increases in some of the security challenges our
    folks face. So I want to reach back out to you about the last
    three.
        Mr. Evanoff. I would welcome that, Senator. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
        To Ms. Singh, congratulations to you. And I wanted to ask
    you a question about cyber. Is the Bureau of Economic and
    Business Affairs in an appropriate position right now, do you
    think, to advance State Department equities around cyber
    threats in consultation with other departments in the
    interagency process? Is this where some of sort of the
    interagency work--is your department where this would take
    place?
        Ms. Singh. Well, thank you, Senator.
        I think you might be referring to the Secretary's plans for
    reorganization----
        Senator Kaine. Yes.
        Ms. Singh [continuing]. In which it has been indicated that
    the cyber function will be moved to the Economic and Business
    Affairs Bureau.
        And I would answer your question to say I think that it is.
    There are complementary capabilities within the bureau
    currently. For instance, as you may know, the International
    Telecommunications Office is managed by the Bureau of Economic
    and Business Affairs. We have a very strong component that
    deals with international telecommunications issues. Cyber fits
    hand in hand with that. We deal with Internet issues,
    commercial issues. Many of those functions already exist within
    the bureau. I think adding cyber would be very complementary,
    and we would make sure to keep cybersecurity at the highest
    level of the utmost importance.
        Senator Kaine. Can you see organizationally--if that is
    added within your section, are there additional resources or
    kinds of personnel that you would need that you do not
    currently have?
        Ms. Singh. Well, Senator, speaking from outside the
    department, I think I would have to reevaluate that if I was
    confirmed for the position. But at this time, it is my
    understanding that positions are being reallocated from the
    Cybersecurity Office to combine in the Bureau of Economic
    Affairs. And we might have to create a separate section to look
    at where those capabilities would best fit. And I would review
    the existing resources, what could be reallocated and
    reprogrammed specifically devoted to a new cyber office. If I
    felt that the resources were insufficient, I would certainly
    consult with the bureau staff to figure out what we needed,
    whether it is personnel, monetary resources, or other sorts of
    things. And I would certainly request that from the Secretary.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
        Ms. Newstead, one of my passions on this committee is the
    question of authorized use of military force, to sort of follow
    up a little bit on Senator Shaheen. I am on the Armed Services
    Committee too. And it is interesting that the authority over
    AUMF questions is in this committee, and often we are talking
    about sort of the issues that pertain to it more in the Armed
    Services Committee. Senator Shaheen and I serve on both.
        One of the things that has been frustrating--and I just
    really want your commitment to cooperation--is in this
    administration, we have heard over and over again from key
    officials, Secretary Mattis, General Dunford, we would really
    like to work with Congress on a new authorization. But anytime
    there is any draft of anything put on the table, no, we like
    what we have just fine. So there is sort of lip service paid to
    the idea we would like to cooperate on a new authorization
    after 16 years, but when it gets down to any proposal, instead
    of saying, well, could you adjust this or that, instead what we
    hear from the administration is, well, we like what we have
    just fine. And then we are not really given a response.
        I am going to continue to push this committee to tackle
    this issue. And I would like to be able to have a dialogue with
    both State, DOD, the White House about if we put proposals on
    the table, what is good, what is bad. In the what is bad
    category, you could make it more acceptable to at least the
    administration. It is our prerogative ultimately, but it would
    be more acceptable if you did the following.
        Would you commit to having that kind of back-and-forth
    dialogue and giving us your best advice on behalf of the
    administration on these questions?
        Ms. Newstead. Senator, I would be happy to commit to that.
    I am aware of the work that you and other members of the
    committee have done on this issue, and I certainly would be
    eager to be helpful on behalf of the Department, if confirmed.
        Senator Kaine. All right. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Isakson. Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for a second
    round here.
        I do not think I will have to go quite as quickly this go-
    around, Ms. Newstead. But let me turn to something I had
    mentioned I was curious about, and it pertains to Customary
    International Humanitarian Law rule 55, which says the parties
    to the conflict must allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded
    passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need, which is
    impartial in character and conducted without any adverse
    distinctions, subject to the right of control. That is it in
    its entirety.
        On June 28, at my direction, my staff asked the Department
    of State whether the Saudi refusal to permit the delivery of
    U.S.-funded cranes to the port of Hodeidah constitute a
    violation of this rule. What is your personal professional
    answer to this question?
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, first of all, I appreciate the
    opportunity to speak to that, and it is an important point. We
    did discuss it briefly.
        I certainly agree with you that it is extremely important
    that we promote compliance with the law of armed conflict by
    the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen for all the reasons that you
    have identified, sir, and at the prior hearing as well.
        I do think that the standard that you described raises many
    of the same questions as we were talking about in our prior
    round in relation to the Foreign Assistance Act. And I would
    only say that it would be my expectation, if confirmed, that I
    would be able to dig into this issue with the benefit of more
    consultation with the Department to be more specific in talking
    to you about the ways in which those standards are implicated
    here.
        Senator Young. I guess your answer would be the same as it
    relates to Saudi Arabia's compliance or noncompliance based on
    the same fact pattern. I am referring to in Yemen compliance
    with article 14 of the Additional Protocol 2 of the Geneva
    Conventions.
        Ms. Newstead. Yes, Senator. In order to give you a legal
    view that would really take account of all the factors, legal
    and factual and otherwise, I would want to have the opportunity
    to study that and consult more with the Department. But again,
    I can certainly say that I understand and agree with your focus
    on the issue.
        Senator Young. So if I do not appear frustrated, I am a bit
    frustrated. It took almost 3 months after my staff asked that
    question pertaining both to Customary International
    Humanitarian Law rule 55 and article 14 of the Additional
    Protocol 2 of the Geneva Conventions--3 months for me to get an
    answer. And the answer that we received was, quote, the
    Department of State is not able to provide Senator Young with
    an advisory legal opinion. Unquote.
        As a member of the Department of State's oversight
    committee and based on Congress' Article I constitutional
    authorities, what do you think? Do you believe that is an
    acceptable answer?
        Ms. Newstead. Well, Senator, of course, I was not part of
    the discussions in the Department, as you know. But I would say
    that it would be my hope that if I am confirmed, we could
    provide answers to you more quickly. And while I would
    certainly want to consult on where the Department's practices
    have been in terms of any limits the Department feels it needs
    to maintain, I would also seek to engage with you and your
    staff closely in discussing the legal standards and issues. And
    I know from our discussion yesterday, you had a number of
    particular questions about implications of what the Department
    had and had not done. It would be my expectation to work as
    closely with you as I could on those issues.
        Senator Young. Well, I do not think it is acceptable.
    Period. But thank you.
        Let me lastly return to one final matter. Will you please
    tell me how you define the term ``assistance'' in the Foreign
    Assistance Act, specifically telling me whether the definition
    of security assistance as defined in 22 U.S.C. 2304 applies to
    section 2378-1? If you would like me to say those numbers
    again, I am happy to. That is why I gave you the hearing
    transcript so you could familiarize yourself. And you seem
    quite conversant in the law. So I am impressed with that.
        Ms. Newstead. Thank you, Senator.
        Well, the definition, as I understand it, Senator, is quite
    broad under the act. It is a question of law that, if possible,
    I would prefer to come back to you on with the benefit of more
    consideration. But I believe that the stated principle is quite
    broad, and its application to the facts here, as I said, is
    something that I would like, if possible, to have the
    opportunity to discuss with the Department.
        Senator Young. I believe it is broad as well. And so I will
    just provide that and some other written questions to you for
    your response. Thank you so much.
        Ms. Newstead. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Young. I yield back.
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Senator.
        Thank you for your attendance today. Congratulations on
    your nomination. To your siblings, mothers, fathers,
    significant others that all came, thank you all for coming.
    Kids. Do not forget the kids. That is right.
        And I want to thank the members for being here.
        We will report to the committee soon. You will be hearing
    shortly on a markup and hopefully a vote on the floor shortly
    after that. We appreciate your commitment to the country and
    your willingness to accept this nomination.
        We stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Thomas L. Carter by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my career, I have demonstrated a commitment to
    defending and promoting human rights and democracy. Specifically, I
    have personally commanded United States Air Force C-141s on numerous
    international humanitarian missions throughout the world in support of
    U.S. objectives towards creating stability and saving lives. I've also
    flown in support of deploying U.S. forces in many other engagements
    wherein the United States leadership felt it necessary to defend
    democratic peoples in their respective countries. I was decorated for
    flying into an active combat zone in October 1983 inserting the 82nd
    Airborne Division into Grenada to rescue U.S. students endangered
    there.
        Further, I had the honor of monitoring Ukraine's very first
    parliamentary elections in 2006. It was truly an inspiration to see the
    Ukrainian's enthusiasm when we introduced ourselves as Americans, and
    to also watch entire voting locations work for over 24 hours straight
    to count the many paper ballots. These unique people really inspired me
    to continue my own polling manager duties back in South Carolina.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the representatives to
            ICAO foster an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. USICAO is a small mission with only five employees, and one
    supervisor other than myself. I will share my strong commitment to
    equal opportunity and to ensuring that each and every employee is
    treated with respect and dignity, and will maintain an open door policy
    to ensure that all in the mission know that they can reach out to me.

        Question 3.  Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 4.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 5.  Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in any country abroad?

        Answer. Neither I nor any members of my immediate family have any
    financial interests in any country abroad.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Over the course of my career, I have worked in various
    capacities on issues relating to the promotion of human rights and
    democracy. Beginning in college and law school and continuing during my
    prior government service, I have devoted time to pro bono and other
    legal matters relating to combating violence against women. While
    serving as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal
    Policy at the Department of Justice in 2001, I worked on policy and
    regulatory actions relating to the implementation of the Trafficking
    Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), including the issuance of
    regulations in July 2001 providing protections for and assistance to
    human trafficking victims as their cases were investigated and
    prosecuted. Those regulatory actions, which DOJ issued jointly with the
    Department of State shortly after the release of the State Department's
    first Trafficking in Persons Report in July 2001, were part of the
    first wave of efforts to implement the TVPA, which were a priority of
    the Justice Department during my tenure there. In the years since my
    time at DOJ, there have been further legislative and regulatory
    enforcement efforts on these critical issues, and today those efforts,
    and the State Department's annual TIP Report, remains a principal
    diplomatic tool to engage foreign governments on human trafficking
    issues.
        During my time as General Counsel of OMB, I had the opportunity to
    work on various legal issues which impacted humanitarian assistance
    efforts, including implementation of the President's Emergency Plan for
    AIDS Relief. In private practice, I have worked on pro bono matters on
    various issues relating to orders of protection for victims of domestic
    violence, resentencing of criminal defendants, and promotion of civics
    education.
        If confirmed as Legal Adviser, it would be my privilege to support
    the Department's ongoing efforts to promote human rights and democracy.

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

        Answer. I recognize the important efforts within the State
    Department to promote a workforce that reflects the diversity of the
    American people. Like the rest of the Department, the Office of the
    Legal Adviser should foster an atmosphere of diversity and inclusion.
    If confirmed, I will take seriously the role of mentor to the employees
    in the office and will be personally committed to supporting the goals
    of diversity and inclusion.

        Question 3.  What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Office of the Legal Adviser are fostering an
    environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. I am firmly committed to equal employment opportunity
    principles. If confirmed, I will work with the supervisors in the
    Office to foster a work environment that recognizes the contributions
    of all employees and will encourage all supervisors to take available
    courses on equal employment opportunity principles, diversity, and
    related issues and to promote an atmosphere of transparency by
    providing opportunities to all employees. I will also urge supervisors
    to underscore the importance of valuing and respecting diversity when
    they mentor junior colleagues.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. No.

        Question 7.  What legal frameworks govern the U.S. use of lethal
    force abroad, including through the use of armed drones? How should the
    U.S. determine if it is in an armed conflict such that international
    humanitarian law applies?

        Answer. There is no legal question that is more consequential, or
    more serious, than the question of when and under what circumstances
    the United States may use force. If confirmed, I will be committed to
    providing the best possible legal advice to the Secretary and the U.S.
    Government concerning these legal questions.
        With respect to your first question, I generally understand that
    the President's principal current domestic law authorities to use
    military force abroad include his constitutional powers as Commander in
    Chief and Chief Executive, the Authorization for Use of Military Force
    of 2001, and the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq
    Resolution of 2002. In addition to considering domestic legal issues,
    if confirmed I would also want to give careful consideration to whether
    any proposed use of military force abroad would be consistent with
    applicable international law, including the body of international law
    that governs the resort to the use of force (the jus ad bellum) and the
    law governing the conduct of hostilities (the law of armed conflict,
    international humanitarian law, or jus in bello).
        With respect to your second question, the Geneva Conventions of
    1949 essentially refer to two categories of conflict: ``cases of
    declared war or any other armed conflict which may arise between two or
    more of the High Contracting Parties'' (sometimes referred to as
    international armed conflicts) and conflicts ``not of an international
    character.'' The question of whether an armed conflict exists in any
    particular situation is highly fact-dependent, and the applicable
    standards under international law will vary depending on the category
    of conflict. If confirmed, when assessing whether any particular
    situation constitutes an armed conflict, I would take into account the
    jurisprudence of U.S. courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, as well
    as the legal positions articulated by the United States in the past. I
    would also want to consider, as appropriate to the circumstances, the
    practice and statements of other States, international tribunals, and
    qualified commentators on international law.
        Finally, if confirmed, I would also expect to consult with my
    colleagues in the Office of the Legal Adviser as well as with my
    counterparts in other U.S. Government departments and agencies,
    including the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, on these
    issues, including whenever the United States is faced with the need to
    consider the use of force, whether through the use of armed drones or
    otherwise.

        Question 8.  Should the U.S. accept the conclusion of the U.N.
    Human Rights Committee that the International Covenant on Civil and
    Political Rights applies extra-territorially? If not, what
    international law applies to U.S. officials and forces operating abroad
    outside of armed conflict situations? More specifically, what
    international law applies to U.S. drone strikes conducted outside of
    armed conflict situations?

        Answer. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
    (ICCPR) contains express language setting forth the territorial scope
    of its application. Article 2(1) of the ICCPR states that each State
    Party undertakes obligations with respect to ``individuals within its
    territory and subject to its jurisdiction.'' I understand that the
    United States' position is that the ICCPR applies only to individuals
    who are both within the territory of a State Party and within that
    State Party's jurisdiction. The United States has stated that this
    position is based on the text of the treaty, an application of
    longstanding international legal principles of treaty interpretation,
    and the treaty's negotiating history.
        I understand that the Human Rights Committee has expressed a
    contrary view that a State Party's ICCPR obligations should apply not
    only to individuals who are within its territory, but also to
    individuals located outside its territory who are subject to its
    jurisdiction under certain circumstances. I also understand that the
    observations, recommendations and general comments adopted by the Human
    Rights Committee are not binding on the States Parties and do not
    represent authoritative interpretation of State Party obligations.
        As your question suggests, I recognize that there are divergent
    views among the U.N. Human Rights Committee, human rights
    organizations, and among governments, on international law questions
    related to ongoing counter-terrorism operations against groups like Al
    Qa'eda and ISIS, and that a key point of potential divergence is on the
    question of whether the United States or one of its Coalition Partners
    is or is not operating in the context of an ongoing armed conflict when
    it takes a particular military action. If confirmed, I will consult my
    colleagues at the Department of State and my counterparts in other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies to ensure that I provide the best
    possible legal advice to the Department and to the U.S. Government
    concerning the international obligations of the United States
    applicable to U.S. officials and forces involved in counter-terrorism
    operations abroad, including by ensuring that the United States
    determines whether a particular action falls inside or outside of armed
    conflict situations.

        Question 9.  Do you support U.S. ratification of Protocols I and II
    to the Geneva Conventions of 1949? If not, why not?

        Answer. I am aware that President Reagan submitted Additional
    Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which would establish
    additional treaty obligations in relation to armed conflicts not of an
    international character, to the Senate for advice and consent to
    ratification in 1987, and that President Obama, following an
    interagency review, urged the Senate to act on that Protocol in 2011. I
    am also aware that the United States has historically had significant
    concerns with several aspects of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva
    Conventions of 1949, which establishes additional treaty obligations in
    relation armed conflicts of an international nature. For these reasons,
    President Reagan informed the Senate in 1987 of his decision not to
    submit that Protocol to the Senate, and no subsequent President has
    sought the Senate's advice and consent to the Protocol.
        I have not yet had the opportunity to form a considered legal view
    with respect to these matters, and if confirmed I would consult my
    colleagues at the Department of State and my counterparts in other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies, including the Department of
    Defense, before providing advice to policymakers. Given the strong
    support that Additional Protocol II has received from Presidents in
    both parties for the past thirty years, and given the predominance of
    current non-international conflicts of the sort that are the subject of
    Additional Protocol II, if confirmed I would make it a priority to
    review the current administration's views on the ratification of
    Additional Protocol II with any necessary reservations, understandings
    and declarations. If confirmed, I would look forward to engaging with
    my counterparts in other U.S. Government departments and agencies and
    with interested Members of this committee and staff on this topic.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1.  In Sokolow v. PLO, the Second Circuit surprisingly
    held that it was unconstitutional to apply the Anti-Terrorism Act in
    the exact fact pattern that the statute was designed to address:
    American citizens murdered by terrorists-in this case, Palestinian
    terrorists-acting overseas. Sokolow plaintiffs include Florida
    constituents Mr. Oz Joseph Guetta and his mother, Ms. Varda Guetta, and
    other American victims of Palestinian terrorism. In June 2017, the U.S.
    Supreme Court asked for the administration's views on this case. It is
    clearly a vital U.S. national security interest to combat international
    terrorism in all its forms. If confirmed, do you commit to supporting
    the Anti-Terrorism Act statute as written by Congress? If confirmed, do
    you commit to following up with me both to explain what the State
    Department's view is on Sokolow v. PLO, and to ensure that the State
    Department expeditiously provides its view on the matter to the
    Solicitor General?

        Answer. I sympathize deeply with the injuries suffered by the
    Guetta family, and other families participating in this case, and
    condemn the acts of terrorism that caused their injuries. I share your
    concern and commitment to combating international terrorism and
    protecting American citizens abroad. I also recognize the important
    purpose of the Antiterrorism Act in providing a federal forum for U.S.
    victims of international terrorism.
        If confirmed, I would be committed to providing the best possible
    legal advice to the Secretary and our policymakers, including with
    respect to defending the integrity of the Antiterrorism Act and
    applying that statute as written by Congress and in light of relevant
    judicial decisions. I understand that on June 26, the Supreme Court
    asked for the views of the U.S. Government on the petition for
    certiorari in Sokolow v. Palestine Liberation Organization, No. 16-1071
    (S. Ct.), which seeks review of the decision by the U.S. Court of
    Appeals for the Second Circuit holding that the District Court lacked
    personal jurisdiction over the defendants. The Office of the Solicitor
    General at the Department of Justice has the lead in developing, with
    inputs from other interested agencies, U.S. Government views on the
    petition. Upon filing, this will become the view of record for the U.S.
    Government. If confirmed, I will ensure that the State Department
    continues to provide its views on this case and all other cases
    implicating State Department equities to the Solicitor General as
    expeditiously as possible, and remains in close and effective
    coordination with the Department of Justice on such matters. If
    confirmed, I would also welcome the opportunity to follow up with your
    office on this matter, consistent with my professional responsibilities
    when providing legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 2.  The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is an important tool
    to combat corruption abroad. It holds American businesses accountable
    for aiding the most oppressive regimes in the world from plundering
    their people's wealth. Ms. Newstead, you've advised clients on
    complying with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Is the FCPA
    effective? Are there areas where it can be improved? What could
    Congress do to tighten it?

        Answer. As your question reflects, the Foreign Corrupt Practices
    Act (FCPA) is a powerful tool for combatting corruption abroad, and its
    vigorous enforcement over several decades has substantially contributed
    to reducing corrupt activities and increasing domestic anti-corruption
    enforcement by other countries. As Congress recognized when it passed
    the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), corruption imposes enormous
    costs both at home and abroad, leading to market inefficiencies and
    instability and an unfair playing field for honest businesses. Even
    more fundamentally, corrupt activities alienate citizens from their
    political leaders and institutions, and undermine political stability
    and economic development.. By enacting a strong foreign bribery
    statute, Congress sought to help U.S. companies resist corrupt demands
    and to hold them accountable when they failed to do so, while also
    addressing the destructive foreign policy ramifications of
    transnational bribery.
        Enforcement of the FCPA has been effective by many objective
    measures, including the deterrent effect of the sheer number of
    resolutions reached by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Securities
    and Exchange Commission (SEC) with companies subject to FCPA
    enforcement, and the significant fines paid by many of those companies.
    Perhaps more important, the statute has been effective in encouraging
    U.S. and global businesses to adopt vigorous compliance regimes and
    internal controls designed to deter and prevent corrupt activities.
        Although the responsibility for enforcing the FCPA rests with the
    DOJ and SEC, I understand that the Department of State plays an
    important complementary role in working to address corruption abroad
    and to level the playing field for U.S. businesses. In particular, the
    Department of State has focused on the implementation of international
    commitments relating to anti-corruption, including through its
    leadership role during the negotiation of the Organization for Economic
    Cooperation and Development (OECD) Anti-Bribery Convention, which
    effectively ``internationalized'' the FCPA by requiring all parties to
    pass their own similar transnational bribery statutes; and by
    participating in the Working Group on Bribery, which is responsible for
    monitoring the implementation and enforcement of the Convention by its
    parties.
        The FCPA is an important and effective tool for combating
    corruption abroad, but it can be particularly effective as one piece of
    an ever-increasing global network of transnational bribery statutes
    enforced with an emphasis on international cooperation, as recently
    demonstrated by the landmark global settlements reached with Odebrecht
    and VimpelCom. Congress can therefore help support the effective
    enforcement of the FCPA by supporting the Department of State's global
    anti-corruption and good governance promotion efforts, but we
    ultimately defer to DOJ as the U.S. Government's lead enforcement
    agency regarding the need for any legislative reforms to the FCPA.

        Question 3.  In March 2010, the Government of Macau revoked the air
    operating certificate of an American-owned airline-Viva Macau-on
    baseless grounds, which essentially destroyed the value of the company.
    There is strong evidence that the revocation was motivated by the
    desire of Chinese state-owned enterprises to remove competition from
    the market. For the last seven years, the State Department, Commerce
    Department and to a lesser extent USTR have been requested to take
    action. For the last four years, the Viva Macau expropriation case has
    been in the hands of the Legal Advisor. Are you familiar with the case?
    If so, do you believe it was inappropriate or illegal for China to
    expropriate an American-owned company? If confirmed, do you commit to
    examining the case?

        Answer. In my current position as a nominee, I have not had the
    opportunity to familiarize myself with the details of this particular
    matter. But, it is my understanding that the Department's review of the
    Viva Macau espousal request has been completed and that the investors'
    representative is being informed of the Department's decision. I also
    understand that a telephone briefing has been offered to Senate staff
    concerning the case?. If confirmed, I commit that I will examine this
    matter closely, and will ensure that all requests for espousal before
    my office are considered carefully.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Todd Young

        Question 1.  Ms. Newstead, are you aware of the following facts?:

       The Saudi-led coalition deliberately and precisely bombed the
            cranes at the port of Hodeidah that were used to offload
            humanitarian supplies.
       The Saudi-led coalition bombed a World Food Programme warehouse in
            Hodeidah.
       Despite the establishment of the U.N. Verification and Inspection
            Mechanism for Yemen (UNVIM) created to obviate the need for
            Saudi-led coalition inspections, the Saudi-led coalition
            continues to delay shipments going into Hodeidah for days. The
            United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) can provide
            monthly data confirming this fact.
       In January, when the World Food Programme tried to deliver the four
            USAID-funded cranes to Hodeidah to offload humanitarian
            supplies to replace the capacity destroyed by the Saudi-led
            coalition, the Saudi's would not permit the replacement cranes
            to be delivered, literally forcing the vessel carrying the
            cranes to turn around.
       The Saudi-led coalition has diverted, on several occasions, vessels
            to ports they or their allies' control, more concerned about
            who control the port than which Yemenis most need the aid.
       On June 27, the World Food Programme asked the Saudis again for
            permission to deliver the four cranes. The Saudis continue to
            be unresponsive on the cranes.
       When asked why they won't permit the delivery of the cranes, Saudi
            officials consistently cite the fact that the Houthis control
            the port as a leading excuse.

        Answer. I have reviewed the factual statements set forth above.
    Although as a nominee, I have not had the opportunity to consult with
    experts on the facts of this situation within the Department, I
    appreciate your raising these specific concerns and have read reports
    that reflect concerns about the grave humanitarian situation in Yemen.
    I agree that this situation warrants a strong response by the United
    States, including a focus on concrete actions which can be taken to
    alleviate the suffering.
        I understand that the Department is committed to helping alleviate
    these conditions and to reaching a political resolution between the
    parties. Secretary Tillerson stated on October 22 during his joint
    press conference with Saudi FM al-Jubeir in Riyadh that he had
    discussed the Yemen conflict with Saudi counterparts during his
    meetings in Riyadh. I understand the Department continues to actively
    work on this issue, and will also be providing its official views on
    the factual and legal issues raised by your question in a letter to be
    conveyed separately alongside these QFR responses. I also understand
    that the Department also stands ready to brief you further on the
    issues you raise in this question.
        If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that we are
    considering all available tools to support policies to help improve the
    situation in Yemen. I commit to consulting with the Department's
    experts to ensure that I and my legal team can, based on a complete
    understanding of the available facts, provide legal advice to
    policymakers concerning courses of action to alleviate the humanitarian
    situation in Yemen, including on the question of whether activities by
    the Saudi-led Coalition are inconsistent with any provision of
    applicable domestic or international law. As I mentioned during the
    hearing, I would also welcome the opportunity to engage with interested
    Members of this committee and staff to discuss these issues, mindful of
    my professional responsibilities regarding legal advice to the
    Secretary of State.

        Question 2.  On October 19, the Acting Director of USAID's Office
    of Food For Peace, Mr. Matthew Nims, testified that the Saudi-led
    coalition is using food as a weapon of war in Yemen. Please review the
    transcript of my exchange with Mr. Nims on October 19 and provide your
    response.

        Answer. I have reviewed the transcript of your exchange with Mr.
    Matthew Nims. Although I have not had an opportunity to consult with
    the experts at the State Department about these issues, I share your
    concerns about the grave humanitarian situation in Yemen, and I
    appreciate how important the port of Hudaydah is to mitigating that
    situation. I understand the Department is committed to helping
    alleviate the humanitarian situation in Yemen as well. If confirmed, I
    will work with my colleagues to ensure that we are considering all
    available tools to support policies to help improve this situation.
        If confirmed, I commit to consulting with experts in the Department
    of State and other departments and agencies in order to ensure that I
    and my legal team can, based on a complete understanding of the
    available facts, provide legal advice to policymakers concerning
    courses of action to alleviate the situation in Yemen, including on the
    question of whether activities by the Saudi-led Coalition are
    inconsistent with any provision of applicable domestic or international
    law. I believe that it is critically important to promote compliance
    with the law of armed conflict by members of the Saudi-led coalition
    and by all of our partners, and if confirmed I will be a strong
    advocate for this view within the Department and with colleagues in
    other agencies.

        Question 3.  Section 620-i of the Foreign Assistance Act (22 U.S.
    Code Sec. 2378-1(a)) states the following: ``No assistance shall be
    furnished under this chapter or the Arms Export Control Act [22 U.S.C.
    2751 et seq.] to any country when it is made known to the President
    that the Government of such country prohibits or otherwise restricts,
    directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States
    humanitarian assistance.'' If the facts above are correct, would it be
    your professional, personal, and legal judgment that Saudi Arabia has
    ``prohibit[ed] or otherwise restrict[ed], directly or indirectly, the
    transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance''?
    Please provide a detailed justification for your answer.

        Answer. As noted in my answer to the previous questions, I am very
    concerned about the grave humanitarian situation in Yemen. I share your
    concern that this situation warrants a strong response by the United
    States, including a focus on concrete actions which can be taken to
    alleviate the suffering.
        As your question indicates, the ultimate determination whether this
    provision of the Foreign Assistance Act has been triggered is a highly
    fact-specific inquiry. As a nominee I have not had the opportunity to
    consider the full range of classified and unclassified information
    available to the Department on this issue, or to consider how the
    Department has previously interpreted and applied Section 620I. Based
    only on the facts listed above, which include descriptions of actions
    which have to date prevented delivery of the four replacement cranes to
    Hudaydah, and the plain language of the provision, it is my judgment
    that there is a substantial question whether the responsible parties
    have ``prohibited'' or ``restricted'' the delivery of United States
    humanitarian assistance under the statute. If confirmed as Legal
    Adviser, I would want to consider additional information before
    reaching a final legal view and providing advice to policymakers on
    this issue. Relevant considerations could include, among other things,
    whether legitimate concerns exist regarding the control of the Hudaydah
    port by the Houthis and related security risks, or risks that delivery
    of aid through the port would be compromised. It would also be relevant
    in my view to consider the broader circumstances involving the
    provision of U.S. foreign assistance to Yemen, such as whether the act
    of preventing delivery of the cranes has effectively prevented the
    delivery of all U.S. foreign assistance to address the crisis, or
    whether other means of delivering such aid are operating; and the role
    of the Saudi Government in such efforts.
        Finally, I would wish to consider the reasoning of any prior
    interpretations by the Office of the Legal Adviser on the application
    of Section 620I, to ensure that any conclusions reached by the Office
    on the application of the statute in this circumstance is consistent
    with the interpretations that the Office has provided to the provision
    over time. This is particularly relevant here because, based on my
    limited research to date, there do not appear to be prior judicial
    decisions providing guidance on the interpretation or application of
    Section 6201.
        If confirmed, I would make it a priority to study this issue in
    greater depth. I would consult with relevant U.S. Government and non-
    governmental experts in order to provide legal guidance to State
    Department decision-makers on the legal standard under section 620I of
    the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA) as they continue, in this
    context, to assess the application of that standard to the facts before
    them.
        As I mentioned during the hearing, I would also welcome the
    opportunity to engage with interested Members of this committee and
    staff to discuss these issues, mindful of my professional
    responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 4.  If Saudi Arabia has restricted directly or indirectly
    the transport or delivery of U.S. assistance, do you believe this
    statute would require-absent a Presidential determination that an
    exception is the national security interest of the United States-that
    no U.S. assistance shall be furnished under this chapter or the Arms
    Export Control Act [22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.] to Saudi Arabia?

        Answer. Section 620I prohibits provision of assistance under the
    FAA or the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to a country when it is made
    known to the President (or the Secretary, under delegated authority)
    that the Government of such country prohibits or otherwise restricts,
    directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance. If Saudi Arabia has directly or indirectly restricted the
    transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance, absent a
    determination under the statute, then U.S. assistance under the Foreign
    Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control Act would be restricted under
    this provision. As you have noted, the provision includes a waiver
    authority by which assistance may be provided to the country under such
    circumstances if there is a determination that to do so is in the
    national interest, and that determination is notified to the
    appropriate Congressional committees.

        Question 5.  If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring within 30 days
    that your office provides a determination to the Secretary of State
    whether Saudi Arabia has prohibited or otherwise restricted, directly
    or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian
    assistance to Yemen?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to working with the staff of
    the Office of the Legal Adviser and consulting with relevant experts
    across the Department and the U.S. Government, in order to provide
    views to the Secretary of State or other decision makers within the
    Department on that question within 30 days.

        Question 6.  If confirmed, do you commit to doing all that you can
    within 45 days to encourage the Department of State to provide its
    determination to the President and the Senate Committee on Foreign
    Relations--consistent with 22 U.S. Code Sec. 2378-1--whether Saudi
    Arabia has prohibited or otherwise restricted, directly or indirectly,
    the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance in
    Yemen?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to working with the staff of
    the Office of the Legal Adviser and decision makers within the
    Department to encourage the Department to convey its official views on
    this question to the committee within 45 days.

        Question 7.  If Saudi Arabia has not allowed or facilitated the
    rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief for civilians
    through the port of Hodeidah due to the fact that they or their allies
    do not control the port, do you believe that would be a violation of,
    or be inconsistent with, Rule 55 of Customary International
    Humanitarian Law?

        Answer. It is critically important in my view to promote compliance
    with the law of armed conflict by members of the Saudi-led coalition
    and by all of our partners. If confirmed, I will be a strong proponent
    of this view within the Department and with colleagues in other
    departments and agencies, as well as an advocate for the rule of law
    and respect for international law.
        The starting point for my analysis in response to this question
    would be to consider the status of the Rule 55 of the International
    Committee of the Red Cross's (ICRC) Study on Customary International
    Law as a source of authority under international law. Although, as a
    nominee, I have not had the opportunity to consult with the Department
    on this important legal issue, I am aware that the Department of State,
    through its former Legal Adviser, John Bellinger, and the Department of
    Defense, through its prior General Counsel, William J. Haynes, have in
    the past raised concerns about the substance and underlying methodology
    of this study, which were initially set forth in a 2006 letter to the
    ICRC on this topic.
        If confirmed, I would make it a priority to engage with my
    colleagues in the Office of the Legal Adviser on these important
    issues. As I mentioned during the hearing I would also welcome the
    opportunity to engage with interested Members of this committee and
    staff to discuss these issues, mindful of my professional
    responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 8.  Article 14 of the Additional Protocol Two of the
    Geneva Conventions says the following: ``Starvation of civilians as a
    method of combat is prohibited. It is therefore prohibited to attack,
    destroy, remove or render useless, for that purpose, objects
    indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as
    foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops,
    livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation
    works.'' If Saudi Arabia has attacked, destroyed, removed, or rendered
    useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian
    population, including objects to help prevent starvation, would that
    represent a violation of Article 14 by Saudi Arabia?

        Answer. As mentioned in my answer to your previous question, I
    believe that it is critically important to promote compliance with the
    law of armed conflict by members of the Saudi-led coalition and by all
    of our partners, and if confirmed I will be a strong proponent of this
    view within the Department and with colleagues in other departments and
    agencies, as well as an advocate for the rule of law and respect for
    international law.
        If confirmed, I commit to working with experts in the Department of
    State and other Departments in order to assess relevant facts and law
    and provide legal guidance to U.S. Government officials on issues
    related to the ongoing conflict in Yemen, including the possible
    application of Article 14 of Additional Protocol II to the Saudi-led
    coalition's actions. In the situation posed by your question, I would
    generally agree that if Saudi Arabia or any other state which is a
    party to Articles 14 of Additional Protocol II has taken actions in an
    armed conflict to which its Additional Protocol II obligations apply,
    to ``destroy, remove or render useless for that purpose [i.e., for the
    purpose of starvation of civilians] objects indispensable to the
    survival of the civilian population,'' that state would be in violation
    of its obligations under that provision. In order to reach a legal
    conclusion whether any violation of these principles has occurred in
    relation to the situation in Yemen, I would, if confirmed, undertake a
    thorough legal analysis with benefit of the full information available
    to the Department and the opportunity to consult with my colleagues in
    the Department on these issues. If confirmed, I would also welcome the
    opportunity to engage with you and interested Members of this committee
    and staff to discuss these issues, mindful of my professional
    responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 9.  In a September 26, 2017, hearing, I asked Ms. Kaidanow
    whether she was willing to foreclose the possibility that Saudi Arabia
    has committed human rights violations in Yemen. She responded, ``No, in
    fact, I think the Saudis themselves have--have indicated that in the
    past, that they have done some things that they find problematic, and
    that they are trying to address some of those issues.'' If Saudi Arabia
    has engaged ``in a consistent pattern of gross violations of
    internationally recognized human rights'', what prohibitions would be
    applied with respect to U.S. assistance to Saudi Arabia under 22 U.S.C.
    2304?

        Answer. I understand that Section 502B of the FAA (22 U.S.C. 2304)
    restricts security assistance, as defined in subsection (d)(2) for
    purposes of that provision, to any country the Government of which
    engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally
    recognized human rights. If Saudi Arabia or any other country has
    engaged in conduct within the terms of that statute, security
    assistance to that country would be restricted by the statute.
        As I mentioned during my hearing last week, the Office of the Legal
    Adviser plays a unique role supporting the Department's mission to
    promote our values, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and
    democracy around the world. In my view it is critically important to
    promote compliance with the law of armed conflict by members of the
    Saudi-led coalition and by all of our partners, and if confirmed I will
    be a strong proponent of this view within the Department and with
    colleagues in other departments and agencies, as well as an advocate
    for the rule of law and respect for international law.
        If confirmed, as I mentioned during the hearing I would also
    welcome the opportunity to engage with you and interested members of
    this committee and staff to discuss these issues, mindful of my
    professional responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary
    of State.

        Question 10.  If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring within 30
    days that your office provides a determination to the Secretary of
    State whether Saudi Arabia has engaged ``in a consistent pattern of
    gross violations of internationally recognized human rights'' and
    whether the provisions under 22 U.S.C. 2304 have been triggered?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to working with the staff of
    the Office of the Legal Adviser and consulting with relevant experts
    across the Department and the U.S. Government in order to provide views
    to the Secretary of State or other decision makers within the
    Department on these questions within 30 days.
        As I mentioned during my hearing last week, the Office of the Legal
    Adviser plays a unique role supporting the Department's mission to
    promote our values, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and
    democracy around the world. In my view it is critically important to
    promote compliance with the law of armed conflict by members of the
    Saudi-led coalition and by all of our partners, and if confirmed I will
    be a strong proponent of this view within the Department and with
    colleagues in other departments and agencies, as well as an advocate
    for the rule of law and respect for international law.

        Question 11.  If confirmed, do you commit to doing all that you can
    within 45 days to encourage the Department of State to provide this 22
    U.S.C. 2304 determination with respect to Saudi Arabia's actions in
    Yemen to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to working with the staff of
    the Office of the Legal Adviser and decision makers within the
    Department to encourage the Department to convey its official views on
    this question to the committee within 45 days.
        As I mentioned during my hearing last week, the Office of the Legal
    Adviser plays a unique role supporting the Department's mission to
    promote our values, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and
    democracy around the world. In my view it is critically important to
    promote compliance with the law of armed conflict by members of the
    Saudi-led coalition and by all of our partners, and if confirmed I will
    be a strong proponent of this view within the Department and with
    colleagues in other departments and agencies, as well as an advocate
    for the rule of law and respect for international law.

        Question 12.  If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring your office
    within 45 days examines whether Saudi Arabia has committed potential
    violations in Yemen of any end-use agreements concerning the use of
    U.S. origin military equipment provided to Saudi Arabia pursuant to the
    Arms Export Control Act?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to working with the staff of
    the Office of the Legal Adviser and experts in the Department of State
    and other Departments to examine both the law and facts relevant to
    end-use agreements concerning use of U.S. origin military equipment
    provided to Saudi Arabia pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act in
    relation to the situation in Yemen within 45 days.

        Question 13.  If violations are found, do you commit to doing all
    you can to encourage the Department of State to ensure the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee is notified promptly in writing regarding
    those violations?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working with experts in the
    Department of State and other Departments in order to provide legal
    advice on issues related to compliance with end-use agreements
    concerning use of U.S. origin military equipment provided to Saudi
    Arabia pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act and to do all I can to
    encourage the Department to provide appropriate information to the
    committee, including in accordance with provisions regarding reporting
    to Congress under section 3 of the Arms Export Control Act.

        Question 14.  How do you define the term ``assistance'' in 22
    U.S.C. 2378-1 and does the definition for ``security assistance'' as
    defined in 22 U.S.C. 2304 apply to ``assistance'' in Section 2378-1?

        Answer. I understand that the term ``assistance'' is not defined in
    section 620I of the FAA (22 U.S.C. 2378-1), although, as I mentioned at
    my hearing, that term is susceptible to a broad reading. I have not had
    the benefit of consultations with the Department to understand how this
    term has been interpreted and applied over time. In contrast, by its
    terms, section 502B(d) defines ``security assistance'' only for
    purposes of section 502B.
        If confirmed, I would make it a priority to study this issue
    further in order to provide legal guidance to State Department
    decision-makers on these issues. As I mentioned during my hearing, I
    would also welcome the opportunity to engage with interested members of
    this committee and staff to discuss these issues, mindful of my
    professional responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary
    of State.

        Question 15.  If confirmed, do you commit to maintaining an open
    and regular line of communication with me and my office and doing all
    you can to ensure the Department of State provides timely and
    responsive answers to my office on questions related to your
    responsibilities? If there is a good faith delay in responding, do you
    commit to keeping my office updated?

        Answer. If confirmed, I can assure you that, working with my
    colleagues in the Office of the Legal Adviser and other colleagues at
    the Department of State, I would strive to ensure that the Department
    provides timely and responsive answers to questions raised by you or
    your staff related to my responsibilities, mindful of my professional
    responsibilities regarding legal advice to the Secretary of State. I
    also commit to working with my colleagues at the Department to ensure
    that your office is kept updated on the status of any outstanding
    questions from you or your staff. I thank you for your attention to
    matters of enormous importance to the Department and to the U.S.
    Government as a whole, and I will welcome the opportunity to consult on
    these matters with you if I am confirmed.
    Follow-up Questions Submitted to Ms. Newstead by Senator Young
        Question 1.  In your responses to my questions for the record, you
    wrote the following:

            Based only on the facts listed above, which include
            descriptions of actions which have to date prevented delivery
            of the four replacement cranes to Hudaydah, and the plain
            language of the provision, it is my judgment that there is a
            substantial question whether the responsible parties have
            ``prohibited'' or ``restricted'' the delivery of United States
            humanitarian assistance under the statute. If confirmed as
            Legal Adviser, I would want to consider additional information
            before reaching a final legal view and providing advice to
            policymakers on this issue. Relevant considerations could
            include, among other things, whether legitimate concerns exist
            regarding the control of the Hudaydah port by the Houthis and
            related security risks, or risks that delivery of aid through
            the port would be compromised.

        This response raises several questions. If confirmed, regarding
    your comment on ``related security risks'', I encourage you to examine
    the logic of an argument that says the Houthis would destroy cranes in
    a port they control and that are being used to facilitate the delivery
    of food and medicine for people in areas they control. I believe the
    only material security risk to the cranes would be another attack on
    the port by the Saudi-led coalition.
        You write that ``risks that delivery of aid through the port would
    be compromised'' would be a relevant consideration. Are you aware of
    the following testimony by Mr. Matthew Nims, the acting director of the
    Office of Food for Peace at the United States Agency for International
    Development on July 18? He said the following (emphasis added):

            First off, the U.S. Government and USAID and particular in my
            office, you know, takes any allegations of the diversion of
            humanitarian activities very seriously. And this is paramount
            in all of our operations. You know, this humanitarian need as
            we--this humanitarian need is really been held off by our
            continued operations that are been crucial through the ports as
            well as our partners. In this situation we have taken this very
            seriously, we have investigated this through our partners,
            we've investigated this to a degree on our own and we have had
            no evidence of any large scale humanitarian diversions
            occurring at the port at all. We are able to say this because
            of the integrity of our partners and because of the methods
            that they use as well as our own methods of third-party
            monitoring and other systems that we employ to ensure that this
            food gets to where it's supposed to go.

        If confirmed, I encourage your office to not take assertions by the
    Saudis and others regarding the diversion of humanitarian aid at the
    port of Hodeidah at face value and instead check with the experts at
    USAID and the World Food Programme.

        Answer. I appreciate your additional perspectives on this question
    and, if confirmed, I commit, with the benefit of these perspectives, to
    engaging closely with my colleagues at the Department and at USAID on
    this important issue. I also believe it is important to take account of
    the information and perspectives of non-governmental organizations
    including the World Food Programme, and would do so if confirmed.
    Finally, I commit to reviewing this issue in depth, if confirmed, and
    meeting with you within 30 days of my taking up the position of Legal
    Adviser to share my assessments, consistent with my professional
    obligations to the Department.

        Question 2.  You also wrote the following (emphasis added):

            It would also be relevant in my view to consider the broader
            circumstances involving the provision of U.S. foreign
            assistance to Yemen, such as whether the act of preventing
            delivery of the cranes has effectively prevented the delivery
            of all U.S. foreign assistance to address the crisis, or
            whether other means of delivering such aid are operating; and
            the role of the Saudi Government in such efforts.

        Why is the standard ``effectively prevented the delivery of all
    U.S. foreign assistance?'' You wrote, ``If Saudi Arabia has directly or
    indirectly restricted the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance, absent a determination under the statute, then U.S.
    assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control
    Act would be restricted under this provision.'' Yet, you then establish
    a standard of preventing the delivery of ``all U.S. foreign
    assistance?'' How do you explain this discrepancy?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to address your concern. As
    indicated in my response to a previous question, and as you note above,
    the statutory standard is whether the transport or delivery of U.S.
    humanitarian assistance has been directly or indirectly prohibited or
    restricted by any government. The statutory language does not include a
    requirement that ``all'' foreign assistance be directly or indirectly
    restricted. In the portion of my answer you identify above, I was
    addressing one of many possible factual circumstances which, if true,
    could be relevant to analyzing whether the statutory standard has been
    met. However, I did not intend to suggest that the statute could only
    be triggered if there was a determination that ``all'' humanitarian
    assistance has been prevented. In my view, the statute itself, in
    setting the standard for triggering the restriction, does not include a
    requirement that ``all'' humanitarian assistance be directly or
    indirectly restricted.
        As indicated in my response to a prior question, an assessment
    whether the assistance restriction under section 620I of the Foreign
    Assistance Act has been triggered is a highly fact-specific inquiry. If
    confirmed, I would make it a priority to study this issue in greater
    depth. I commit to reviewing this issue fully, if confirmed, and
    meeting with you within 30 days of my taking up the position of Legal
    Adviser to share my assessments, consistent with my professional
    obligations to the Department.

        Question 3.  Consistent with your initial responses and your
    reading of the statute, do you re-affirm that even an indirect Saudi
    restriction of the transport or delivery of U.S. assistance would be
    enough to trigger 22 U.S. Code Sec. 2378-1? Do you agree that the other
    factors you raised regarding Saudi actions will not change this initial
    determination and the applicability of 22 U.S. Code Sec. 2378-1, but
    might inform a subsequent Presidential national security interest
    exception?

        Answer. Yes, I re-affirm, consistent with my initial responses,
    that section 620I prohibits provision of assistance under the FAA or
    the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to a country when it is made known
    to the President (or the Secretary, under delegated authority) that the
    Government of such country prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly
    or indirectly, the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance. It is my view that if Saudi Arabia has directly or
    indirectly restricted the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance, then U.S. assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act or
    the Arms Export Control Act would be restricted under this provision. I
    also understand that the provision includes a waiver authority by which
    assistance may be provided to the country under such circumstances if
    there is a determination that to do so is in the national interest, and
    that determination is notified to the relevant Congressional
    committees. I commit to reviewing this issue fully, if confirmed, and
    meeting with you within 30 days of my taking up the position of Legal
    Adviser to share my assessments, consistent with my professional
    obligations to the Department.

        Question 4.  If the July 18, 2017, testimony by witnesses from
    USAID and the World Food Programme is accurate, would you agree that
    the Saudi-led coalition has at least indirectly restricted the
    transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance in Yemen?

        Answer. As indicated in my responses to previous questions, an
    assessment of whether the assistance restriction under section 620I of
    the Foreign Assistance Act has been triggered is a highly fact-specific
    inquiry. In my view, certain statements made in that hearing would, if
    accurate, raise a substantial question whether the responsible parties
    have indirectly restricted the transport or delivery of United States
    humanitarian assistance under the statute. As a nominee, I have not had
    the opportunity to consider the full range of classified and
    unclassified information available to the Department on this issue, or
    to consider how the Department has previously interpreted and applied
    Section 620I. If confirmed, I would make it a priority to study this
    issue in greater depth, and would certainly consider the testimony of
    the witnesses at the July 18, 2017 hearing as part of that analysis. I
    commit to reviewing this issue fully, if confirmed, and meeting with
    you within 30 days of my taking up the position of Legal Adviser to
    share my assessments, consistent with my professional obligations to
    the Department.
    Additional Follow-Up Question Submitted to Ms. Newstead by Senator
            Young

        Question 1.  Thank you for your responses to my follow-up questions
    for the record that I received on November 7, 2017. I am grateful for
    your answers. Overall, I believe your answers to my follow-up questions
    are substantive and responsive. However, there is one sentence in your
    response that is concerning and that I hope to clarify.
        In response to my questions, you wrote the following (emphasis
    added):

            Thank you for the opportunity to address your concern. As
            indicated in my response to a previous question, and as you
            note above, the statutory standard is whether the transport or
            delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance has been directly or
            indirectly prohibited or restricted by any government. The
            statutory language does not include a requirement that ``all''
            foreign assistance be directly or indirectly restricted. In the
            portion of my answer you identify above, I was addressing one
            of many possible factual circumstances which, if true, could be
            relevant to analyzing whether the statutory standard has been
            met. However, I did not intend to suggest that the statute
            could only be triggered if there was a determination that
            ``all'' humanitarian assistance has been prevented. In my view,
            the statute itself, in setting the standard for triggering the
            restriction, does not include a requirement that ``all''
            humanitarian assistance be directly or indirectly restricted.

        I am also grateful for this response to my subsequent question:

            Yes, I re-affirm, consistent with my initial responses, that
            section 620I prohibits provision of assistance under the FAA or
            the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to a country when it is made
            known to the President (or the Secretary, under delegated
            authority) that the Government of such country prohibits or
            otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or
            delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance. It is my view that if
            Saudi Arabia has directly or indirectly restricted the
            transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance, then
            U.S. assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms
            Export Control Act would be restricted under this provision.

        With the exception of the one emphasized sentence above, I view
    those answers as responsive and reflective of an accurate understanding
    of what 22 U.S. Code Sec. 2378-1(a) requires. However, your inclusion
    of that sentence underscores the concern I have raised and strikes me
    as inconsistent with the rest of your response. Based on your
    interpretation of the law, you say that even an indirect restriction of
    the transport or delivery by Saudi Arabia of U.S. humanitarian
    assistance would restrict the provision of U.S. assistance to Saudi
    Arabia under the Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control Act.
    Yet, you say that if Saudi Arabia were not restricting ``all''
    assistance that ``could be relevant to analyzing whether the statutory
    standard has been met.'' That is not consistent with a plain reading of
    the law, and I am not clear how that statement can be reconciled with
    the remainder of your responses-unless you are referring only to
    paragraph (b). Again, I recognize that such a consideration might
    inform a national security exception under paragraph (b), but it is not
    relevant to paragraph (a).
        Pursuant to 22 U.S. Code Sec. 2378-1(a), do you agree that a direct
    or indirect restriction of the transport or delivery of U.S.
    humanitarian assistance would trigger paragraph (a) regardless of a
    number of other considerations, including whether ``all'' humanitarian
    assistance were being restricted or not?
        Do you agree that a variety of other considerations could inform a
    national security interest exception under paragraph (b) but are not
    relevant to paragraph (a)?

        Answer. I appreciate the opportunity to address your further
    questions on this issue. Let me first re-affirm, consistent with my
    prior responses, that by its terms, section 620I prohibits provision of
    assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control
    Act to a country when it is made known to the President (or the
    Secretary, under delegated authority) that the Government of such
    country prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the
    transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance. As noted in my
    prior responses, it is my view that if Saudi Arabia or any other
    country directly or indirectly prohibits or otherwise restricts the
    transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance, then U.S.
    assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control
    Act would be restricted under this provision.
        With respect to your first question, I do agree that the direct or
    indirect prohibition or other restriction of the transport or delivery
    of U.S. humanitarian assistance is the relevant question under
    subsection (a) of the statute; and that the statute does not require
    that ``all'' humanitarian assistance has been restricted before the
    prohibition in subsection (a) can be triggered. Evidence that the
    transport or delivery of any amount of U.S. humanitarian assistance had
    been blocked by a foreign government would be highly relevant in
    determining whether a direct or indirect prohibition or other
    restriction has occurred under subsection (a) of the statute. If
    confirmed, I would wish to consider any such evidence, along with any
    other relevant facts, and prior interpretations of the Department, in
    providing advice on the application of the statute. With respect to
    your second question, I also agree that a variety of considerations
    could inform the national security interest exception under subsection
    (b) that would not be relevant to determining whether a direct or
    indirect prohibition or other restriction exists that would trigger
    subsection (a).
        As noted in my response to your prior questions, an assessment of
    whether the assistance restriction under section 620I has been
    triggered is a highly fact-specific inquiry. If confirmed, it would be
    essential for me to have a full understanding of the relevant facts,
    including with respect to any classified or unclassified information
    available to the Department on this issue which I have not had the
    opportunity to consider as a nominee, before reaching a final view on
    these statutory questions. I commit to you that, if confirmed, I will
    review these issues in depth, to engage closely with my colleagues at
    the Department and USAID on these issues, and to meet with you and your
    staff to share my assessments and consider your views further,
    consistent with my professional obligations to the Department.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Christopher Murphy

        Question 1.  Congressional authorization of new military actions:
    If confirmed, you will be required to provide advice and
    recommendations to the President and Secretary of State regarding the
    legal basis for potential military action. Do you believe there are
    situations (other than an imminent threat against the United States) in
    which the President may use military force against a new adversary,
    including a sovereign foreign government, without Congressional
    authorization? In what circumstances do you believe the President is
    required to seek Congressional authorization to use military force?

        Answer. There is no legal question that is more consequential, or
    more serious, than the question of when and under what circumstances
    the President would be authorized to use military force. If confirmed,
    I would expect to consult with my colleagues in the Office of the Legal
    Adviser as well as with my counterparts in other departments and
    agencies, including the Department of Justice's Office of Legal
    Counsel, whenever the United States is faced with the need to consider
    the use of force.
        In general terms, I understand that the Office of Legal Counsel has
    opined that the President has authority pursuant to Article II of the
    Constitution as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive to take military
    action that in nature, scope, and duration does not amount to war and
    that furthers sufficiently important national interests. Whether a
    particular use of military force would fall within the President's
    Article II authority, however, would require a fact-specific assessment
    at the time the use of military force is contemplated. That said, I
    have great respect for the critical role played by Congress in
    authorizing the use of military force. While I recognize that there are
    times when the President may need to resort to force when necessary to
    confront an attack or the imminent threat of an attack, I believe that
    the interests of the nation are best served when the President and the
    Congress act together to provide a clear and unambiguous legal
    authorization to support the men and women of our military as they
    defend our national security interests.
        In addition to considering domestic legal issues, if confirmed I
    would also give careful consideration to whether any proposed use of
    military force would be consistent with applicable international law,
    including the body of international law that governs the resort to the
    use of force (the jus ad bellum) and the law governing the conduct of
    hostilities (the law of armed conflict or jus in bello).
        If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work closely with
    interested Members of this committee and staff on these important legal
    issues, consistent with my professional responsibilities when providing
    legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 2.  North Korea: The administration has not so subtly
    hinted that a major conflict with North Korea may be coming--
    potentially a nuclear conflict. The administration has neither sought
    authorization from Congress, nor provided the American public with a
    legal basis for engaging in a potentially catastrophic nuclear conflict
    with North Korea. Based on the current facts, do you believe the
    President has the legal authority to initiate the use of military force
    against North Korea? In your opinion, would the President need
    congressional authorization to initiate armed conflict against North
    Korea?

        Answer. There is no legal question that is more consequential, or
    more serious, than the question of when and under what circumstances
    the President would be authorized to use military force. If confirmed,
    I would expect to consult with my colleagues in the Office of the Legal
    Adviser as well as with my counterparts in other U.S. Government
    departments and agencies, including the Department of Justice's Office
    of Legal Counsel, on both the domestic and international law issues
    raised by your question.
        In terms of domestic law, I generally understand that the Office of
    Legal Counsel has opined that the President's power to employ military
    force abroad in the absence of specific congressional approval derives
    from his constitutional responsibility as Commander in Chief and Chief
    Executive for foreign and military affairs. In particular, the
    President has authority pursuant to Article II of the Constitution to
    take military action that in nature, scope, and duration does not
    amount to war and that furthers sufficiently important national
    interests. A determination whether any particular use of military
    force, whether with respect to North Korea or otherwise, would fall
    within the President's Article II authority would require a fact-
    specific assessment at the time the use of military force is
    contemplated. In the absence of an immediate military attack, this
    assessment would necessarily include whether the United States is under
    the threat of an imminent armed attack and what measures would be
    necessary and appropriate to address that threat. That said, I have
    great respect for the critical role played by Congress in authorizing
    the use of military force. While I recognize that there are times when
    the President may need to resort to force when necessary to confront an
    attack or the imminent threat of an attack, I believe that the
    interests of the nation are best served when the President and the
    Congress act together to provide a clear and unambiguous legal
    authorization to support the men and women of our military as they
    defend our national security interests.
        In addition to considering domestic legal issues, if confirmed I
    would also want to give careful consideration to whether any proposed
    use of military force would be consistent with applicable international
    law, including the body of international law that governs the resort to
    the use of force (the jus ad bellum) and the law governing the conduct
    of hostilities (the law of armed conflict or jus in bello).
        If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work closely with
    interested Members of this committee and staff on these important legal
    issues, consistent with my professional responsibilities when providing
    legal advice to the Secretary of State.

        Question 3.  Legal justification for Syria strikes: On April 6,
    2017, the administration launched military strikes against the Syrian
    regime. Since then, it has provided no legal rationale to justify the
    use of force under domestic or international law. Do you believe the
    strikes against the Syrian regime were legally justified? What is your
    understanding of the legal basis for these strikes under domestic law?
    Do you believe these strikes were legal under international law?

        Answer. I understand that the President provided a report to
    Congress regarding this use of force in a letter dated April 8, 2017,
    consistent with the War Powers Resolution. In that letter, the
    President explained the strikes were taken to degrade the Syrian
    military's ability to conduct further chemical weapons attacks and to
    dissuade the Syrian regime from using or proliferating chemical
    weapons, thereby promoting the stability of the region and averting a
    worsening of the region's current humanitarian catastrophe. The letter
    also explained that the President acted in the vital national security
    and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to his
    constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations and as Commander
    in Chief and Chief Executive.
        Although, I do not at this time have access to all the information
    necessary to make any additional assessment of the domestic and
    international legal basis for the actions beyond what has been
    identified by the administration to date, if confirmed, I would make it
    a priority to study this issue further and to consult with my new
    colleagues at the Department of State and my counterparts in other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies on this matter. If confirmed, I
    would welcome the opportunity to work closely with interested Members
    of this committee and staff on these important legal issues, consistent
    with my professional responsibilities when providing legal advice to
    the Secretary of State.

        Question 4.  Documents related to the Syria strikes: A public
    interest group, the Democracy Project, has filed a lawsuit against the
    administration to obtain the legal justification for the
    administration's strikes against the Syrian regime. As part of those
    proceedings, the federal District Court for the District of Columbia
    required the Government, (the Departments of Justice, State, and
    Defense), to expedite the plaintiff's Freedom of Information Act
    Requests, concluding: ``if production is unduly delayed, both
    [plaintiff] and the public at large will be `precluded ... from
    obtaining in a timely fashion information vital to the current and
    ongoing debate surrounding the legality of' a high-profile government
    action-namely, military strikes against the Syrian Government. Being
    closed off from such a debate is itself harm in an open democracy.'' Do
    you agree there is a legitimate public interest in disclosing the legal
    rationale for using military force? If confirmed, will you commit to
    providing this committee with a detailed and timely explanation of the
    legal justification for the use of military force--including the memo
    prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel for the purpose of advising the
    Attorney General regarding the legal bases for the April 6 strike
    against the Al Shayrat airfield in Syria?

        Answer. I do agree that the public has a legitimate interest in
    understanding the legal rationale for the use by the United States of
    military force, and that providing such explanations to the extent
    possible is an important aspect of supporting legitimate public
    discussion of the issue. I also recognize that sometimes aspects of
    that rationale may not be able to be publicly disclosed for national
    security or other legitimate reasons.
        With respect to the legal issues concerning the particular use of
    force in question, if confirmed I would make it a priority to study
    this issue further and to consult with my new colleagues at the
    Department of State and my counterparts in other U.S. Government
    departments and agencies on this matter. If confirmed, I would welcome
    the opportunity to work closely with interested Members of this
    committee and staff on these important legal issues, consistent with my
    professional responsibilities when providing legal advice to the
    Secretary of State, and mindful of the particular interests of the
    Department of Justice concerning the nature of legal advice provided by
    a component of that Department to the Attorney General.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
              Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Tim Kaine

        Question 1.  On April 6th, President Trump ordered an airstrike on
    the Shayrat military airbase in Syria. Following the airstrike,
    Congressman Schiff and I sent a letter to the President asking for the
    administration's legal justification for the strike (attached). To
    date, I still have not received a response with the administration's
    legal justification. Can you please provide me with the legal
    justification under domestic and international law for the 59 Tomahawk
    missiles launched on April 6th against targets at the Shayrat airfield
    in Syria? If unable to answer at this time, will you commit to
    providing me either a written or in person response within 30 days of
    being confirmed?

        Answer. I understand that the President provided a report to
    Congress regarding this use of force in a letter dated April 8, 2017,
    consistent with the War Powers Resolution. In that letter, the
    President explained the strikes were taken to degrade the Syrian
    military's ability to conduct further chemical weapons attacks and to
    dissuade the Syrian regime from using or proliferating chemical
    weapons, thereby promoting the stability of the region and averting a
    worsening of the region's current humanitarian catastrophe. The letter
    also explained that the President acted in the vital national security
    and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to his
    constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations and as Commander
    in Chief and Chief Executive.
        Although, I do not at this time have access to all the information
    necessary to make any additional assessment of the domestic and
    international legal basis for the actions beyond what has been
    identified by the administration to date, if confirmed, I would make it
    a priority to study this issue further and to consult with my new
    colleagues at the Department of State and my counterparts in other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies on this matter. If confirmed, I
    would welcome the opportunity to work closely with interested Members
    of this committee and staff on these important legal issues, consistent
    with my professional responsibilities when providing legal advice to
    the Secretary of State.

        Question 2.  Thank you for your reply referencing the President's
    April 8th War Powers notification to Congress. I similarly referenced
    the President's notification in my letter to the administration that
    was attached to my original question to you. This letter highlights my
    concern is that the April 8th War Powers notification does not provide
    Congress with the information it needs to exercise it constitutional
    responsibilities nor does it provide a detailed legal analysis or
    justification for the U.S. strike on Shayrat military airbase in Syria
    under domestic and international law.
        I understand that as a nominee you may not currently have access to
    all the information necessary to provide an assessment of the domestic
    and intentional legal basis for the action that the administration
    undertook, which is why I asked if you would provide me a detailed or
    written response within 30 days of being confirmed. In your previous
    response, you did not commit to doing so. For clarity, will you provide
    me a detailed or written response within 30 days of being confirmed
    with the legal analysis and justification for the U.S. strike on
    Shayrat military airbase in Syria under domestic and international law?
    A yes or no response is requested.

        Answer. Thank you for your follow-up question on this issue, and
    for your consideration in noting that as a nominee I do not currently
    have access to all the information necessary to provide a detailed
    response to your question. If I am confirmed, I would make it a
    priority to consult with my colleagues at the Department of State and
    my counterparts in other U.S. Government departments and agencies on
    this matter and I will commit to engaging with you in detail within 30
    days. Additionally, as I mentioned during my hearing and in my response
    to your earlier QFR, I would also welcome the opportunity to engage
    with interested Members of this committee and staff as closely as I
    could to discuss such legal issues, mindful of my professional
    responsibilities when I provide legal advice to the Secretary of State.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Jennifer Newstead by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1.  I believe the President's decision not to certify
    Iran's compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),
    without providing any factual or material evidence to warrant a non-
    certification is extremely reckless. The signal that this move sends to
    countries like North Korea or other bad actors is the same signal that
    withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement sent. Withdrawing from
    these agreements because the President doesn't like them undermines our
    diplomatic efforts across the globe and sends a message that the United
    States does not uphold its end of the bargain. Undermining these
    agreements could do untold damage to the National Security of the
    United States. Is Iran in technical compliance with the negotiated
    terms of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)? If not, please
    identify specifically which provisions of the agreement it is
    violating.

        Answer. With regard to your question about Iran's technical
    compliance with the terms of the JCPOA, I understand that the Secretary
    recently noted that ``IAEA reports continue to indicate and confirm
    that Iran is in technical compliance of the agreement.'' I am also
    aware that the administration has expressed its continued concern that
    Iran has tried to push the limits in the JCPOA and, in the past, has
    exceeded some limits, such as those related to heavy water. I also
    understand that the administration has recently concluded, pursuant to
    the requirements of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015
    (INARA), that the sanctions relief Iran received as part of the JCPOA
    is not ``proportionate'' to the specific, limited-duration measures
    Iran took with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program, and
    therefore was unable to provide a required certification to Congress
    under INARA on that basis.
        If confirmed, I intend to examine this issue closely with my
    colleagues in the Office of the Legal Adviser and across other U.S.
    Government departments and agencies, so that I can provide the
    Secretary with the best possible legal advice on these matters.

        Question 2.  Can you explain the legal rationale for the
    President's recent decision not to certify Iran as complying with the
    terms of the Iran nuclear agreement?

        Answer. It is my understanding that the Iran Nuclear Agreement
    Review Act of 2015 (INARA) requires the President to determine every 90
    days whether he is able to certify to Congress that certain statutory
    criteria related to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) have
    been met. One of those criteria is that suspension of sanctions with
    respect to Iran under the agreement is ``appropriate and proportionate
    to the specific and verifiable measures'' that Iran has taken with
    respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program. I understand that
    the administration recently determined that it was unable to certify
    compliance with this criteria, because it concluded that the suspension
    of sanctions pursuant to the JCPOA is not ``proportionate'' to the
    specific, limited-duration measures that Iran has taken to date with
    respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program. If confirmed, I
    intend to examine this issue closely with my colleagues in the Office
    of the Legal Adviser and across other U.S. Government departments and
    agencies, so that I can provide the Secretary with the best possible
    legal advice on these matters.

        Question 3.  In your opinion, does the JCPOA provide effective
    obligations and verification procedures on Iran and safeguards against
    possible breaches of such obligations? If not, what changes to the
    JCPOA would provide such assurances?

        Answer. I understand that the Secretary of State has made clear
    that he believes the JCPOA has flaws, and that the administration
    intends to work closely with Congress to address those concerns, as
    well as on a broader approach to address malign actions by Iran outside
    the scope of the JCPOA The Secretary has also said that while the U.S.
    Government works to fix the JCPOA, it intends to hold Iran strictly
    accountable to its existing commitments. I am aware that Department has
    said that, in that regard, it is essential for the IAEA to continue to
    monitor and verify Iran's activities to the full extent of its
    authorities. If confirmed, I would provide my best legal advice to the
    Secretary and the technical experts in the State Department as they
    work on ways to address those flaws, including by working with Congress
    on new legislation.

        Question 4.  What effect could presidential decertification under
    U.S. law have on U.S. compliance with obligations owed to Iran and the
    other five parties to the JCPOA, especially if no party other than the
    United States has found Iranian violations?

        Answer. I understand that the administration's recent determination
    that a certification to Congress required under the Iran Nuclear
    Agreement Review Act of 2015 (INARA) cannot be made does not mean that
    the United States is ending its participation in the JCPOA. It is my
    understanding that the President and Secretary of State have made clear
    that the United States is continuing to adhere to its commitments under
    the JCPOA, and will work with Congress to hold Iran strictly
    accountable to its commitments. I also understand that the
    administration is not encouraging Congress to pass legislation to
    reinstate statutory sanctions at this time, which would make it
    impossible for the United States to continue implementing the full
    range of its sanctions relief commitments under the deal. If confirmed,
    I would provide my best legal advice to the Secretary and the technical
    experts in the State Department on these issues.

        Question 5.  Please explain what role your office plays in ensuring
    that the United States continues to meet its obligations under
    international agreements even after U.S. foreign policy and national
    interests are no longer aligned with such agreements.

        Answer. The role of the Legal Adviser is to provide rigorous and
    objective legal advice to the Secretary of State, other Department
    officials, and policymakers across the Federal Government as they
    formulate and implement the foreign policy of the United States.
    Providing advice on the obligations of the United States under
    international agreements is a critical part of that mission. As I noted
    during my hearing, the Office of the Legal Adviser also plays a unique
    role supporting the Department's mission to promote our values, the
    rule of law, and respect for human rights and democracy around the
    world. Consistent with this role, the Legal Adviser is specifically
    responsible for advising on the interpretation and application of
    treaties and other international agreements to which the United States
    is a party, including the legal obligations of the United States under
    such agreements, and assisting Department officials in identifying
    means of advancing U.S. interests in a manner consistent with U.S.
    domestic and international legal obligations. If confirmed, I will
    continue the work of the Legal Adviser's Office to promote respect for
    international law and the rule of law more generally, and to ensure
    that our pursuit of U.S. foreign policy and national security
    objectives are informed by a complete understanding of the obligations
    of the United States under international agreements.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Manisha Singh by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. During my tenure at the Foreign Relations Committee, one of
    the most important pieces of legislation I managed was the 2004 renewal
    of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which passed and was
    signed into law. AGOA provides unilateral trade preferences for
    eligible sub-Saharan African countries, with eligibility standards
    focused on democracy, human rights and the rule of law in addition to
    market-based economies. This legislation continues to provide a
    successful means of encouraging AGOA countries to take ownership of
    their governance, democracy and human rights. Reports evaluating AGOA
    have shown improvements in human rights and governance, and eligibility
    provides a strong incentive for AGOA countries to maintain and improve
    their records. I feel that country ownership is one of the most
    effective means of sustainable democracy and human rights.
        My prior State Department service includes serving as the Deputy
    Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of International Organization Affairs
    overseeing the IO human rights portfolio. In this position, I attended
    meetings of U.N. human rights bodies as the U.S. representative. I
    worked on matters such as USG supported resolutions that condemned rape
    as a weapon of war and demanded the release of political prisoners. My
    contribution was one of maintaining and amplifying the United States as
    a country that promotes and values human rights.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will foster a culture of leadership that
    supports professional development of staff, encourages participation in
    leadership development programs, and ensures that there are
    opportunities to apply for career-enhancing positions in the Bureau of
    Economic and Business Affairs. I will encourage employees to
    participate in the Department's Employee Affinity Groups, such as The
    Council for Career Enhancement and Professionalization, Executive Women
    at State, Blacks in Government (Carl T. Rowan Chapter), Hispanic
    Employees Council of Foreign Affairs Agencies, and the South Asian-
    American Employee Association. Employee Affinity Groups promote
    internal networking and career development. They are also helpful in
    recruitment, retention, skill development, and training.

        Question 3.  What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs are
    fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will make sure that EB's supervisors
    appreciate the importance of ensuring a diverse slate of candidates
    when filling vacancies. I will highlight the importance of supervisors
    providing mentoring and career development counseling that helps
    employees develop the skills necessary for advancement. Identifying
    those with the potential to assume senior leadership positions five to
    10 years before they are ready to assume these positions is also
    important so that supervisors can help them begin preparing for these
    roles. There is a wealth of diverse talent within the Bureau of
    Economic and Business Affairs and if I am confirmed I will ensure a
    deliberate process to cultivate this talent.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. Neither I nor any members of my immediate family have any
    financial interests in any country abroad.

        Question 7.  The State Department has an important voice in
    formulating U.S. international economic policy, but is the lead agency
    in only a few policy areas. Many officials have advocated greater
    inclusion of international economic issues into decisions on U.S.
    foreign policy. What is your view on this approach? Will the State
    Department continue to prioritize the ``economic statecraft'' agenda of
    the previous administration, which aimed to elevate economic diplomacy
    as a central component of U.S. foreign policy?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson has talked about how important the
    Department's promotion of economic prosperity is for the American
    people, and for our national security. If confirmed as Assistant
    Secretary of the Bureau for Economic and Business Affairs (EB), I will
    work to open markets for U.S. businesses around the world and carry out
    the mission statement of the Bureau: ``Economic Diplomacy for
    America.''
        EB strengthens U.S. national security by promoting fair and open
    foreign markets, advocating for U.S. businesses, and developing
    policies that support prosperity, stability, and security. EB promotes
    U.S. businesses, exports, and jobs worldwide and provides economic
    forecasting and analysis that benefits U.S. policymakers. EB is also
    responsible for developing and implementing foreign policy-related
    sanctions adopted to counter threats to national security posed by
    particular activities and countries. Embassies and economic officers
    worldwide ensure economics plays its proper role in foreign policy. If
    confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that economic policy plays an
    important role the mission of the Department.

        Question 8.  What is the role of the State Department in
    formulating and negotiating U.S. positions at the G-8 and G-20 fora?

        Answer. The Department of State is a key participant in policy
    formulation for both the G-7 and G-20 and works closely with the NSC
    and Treasury in summit preparation and negotiation strategy
    formulation. The Department's Under Secretary for Economic Growth,
    Energy, and the Environment (E) has traditionally been the U.S.
    negotiator in Foreign Affairs Sous-Sherpa meetings for the G-7 with EB
    coordinating State's input into interagency discussions.
        EB advocates for U.S. businesses and American workers by developing
    policies that support prosperity, stability, and security. These same
    economic priorities are the foundation for our multilateral
    negotiations at the G-7 and G-20.

        Question 9.  Some functions of the Bureau with regard to trade
    promotion and business advocacy seem to overlap with those of the
    Department of Commerce and the U.S. Commercial Service. How would you
    distinguish the difference between activities of the Bureau and other
    agencies involved in export promotion and support of U.S. interests
    abroad?

        Answer. Along with colleagues across the State Department, EB
    coordinates and leads the U.S. Government's representation in foreign
    capitals and at a multitude of international fora to ensure a level
    playing field for U.S. economic interests. EB ensures that the U.S.
    business community's perspective is included and reflected in the
    broader foreign policy decision-making process. U.S. business and
    industry groups seek EB's and the Department's help with market
    intelligence to better understand commercial opportunities abroad. In
    addition, U.S. companies value EB's advocacy not only to promote
    exports of goods and services, but also to safeguard trillions of
    dollars of investments in global value chains.
        The Foreign Commercial Service has offices in approximately 75
    countries, while the State Department, primarily through EB, manages
    the commercial activities in the remaining diplomatic missions.
    Together, State and Commerce complement and amplify U.S. Government
    export promotion efforts overseas.

        Question 10.  Several major countries, including China, India,
    Indonesia, and Russia were designated on a ``Priority Watch List'' by
    USTR in its latest Special 301 report, which flags serious problems in
    IP protection and enforcement. On August 18, 2017, USTR also announced
    a Section 301 investigation into China's protection of U.S.
    intellectual property rights and forced technology transfer policies.
    How does the Bureau work to improve the enforcement of IPR in emerging
    markets like China?

        Answer. EB advances U.S. economic interests by promoting
    intellectual property rights (IPR) around the world in support of 45
    million U.S. jobs, more than 50 percent of U.S. exports, and almost 40
    percent of U.S. GDP. EB works with U.S. private-sector stakeholders,
    U.S, Ambassadors, and the interagency to identify IPR challenges,
    formulate strategies that advance U.S. interests, and engage
    internationally. The bureau also manages the State Department's
    contributions to the Special 301 Report to Congress, an annual review
    of global IP protection and enforcement. EB works with U.S. missions in
    developing and emerging markets to improve weaknesses in IP enforcement
    regimes by developing action plans, supporting public awareness
    campaigns, and raising IP concerns with host governments and civil
    society, including in China, India, and other large markets. The bureau
    is also an active participant in the ongoing Section 301 China
    investigation to ensure the Department's contributions are incorporated
    in deliberations and in the final report.

        Question 11.  In early 2017, the United States withdrew from the
    Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the comprehensive mega-regional trade
    deal between the United States, Japan, and ten other countries in the
    Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile, several TPP members and other countries
    in the region, including China, are pursuing their own bilateral deals
    and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), an
    agreement that is not expected to be as high standard as the TPP. In
    the absence of the TPP, what should be the strategy to advance U.S.
    strategic and economic interests in the region?

        Answer. By withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP),
    the President sent a clear signal that the United States would take a
    new approach to trade issues, and paved the way for potential bilateral
    talks with the remaining TPP countries.
        The United States remains actively and vitally engaged in the Asia-
    Pacific region. President Trump will be travelling to the region in
    November, including to the APEC Leaders Meetings, to advance a range of
    economic and national security priorities with our partners.

        Question 12.  The administration plans to prioritize bilateral
    trade negotiations over regional or multilateral deals. What does a
    shift in U.S. trade policy from mega-regional agreements such as the
    TPP and T-TIP mean for the U.S. ability to shape global rules? What do
    you believe should be the balance between U.S. regional and
    multilateral trade efforts?

        Answer. The administration's goal is to negotiate trade agreements
    that benefit all Americans. Vigorous enforcement of existing trade
    agreements--both bilateral FTAs and multilateral agreements under the
    WTO--is also critical to maintaining support for free and fair trade.
    If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the Office of the
    U.S. Trade Representative and other agencies to advance U.S. economic
    interests. I will seek to pursue any opportunity that maximizes
    benefits for U.S. companies and the American people.

        Question 13.  What are the Bureau's responsibilities with regard to
    combating terrorism finance? What successes have been achieved in
    building international cooperation in this regard?

        Answer. EB works closely with the Department of Treasury to oversee
    a broad range of anti-money laundering and counter terrorism finance
    activities designed to degrade the funding of terrorist groups around
    the globe including ISIS. EB co-leads with Treasury a multilateral
    Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS Counter-ISIS Finance Working Group that
    brings together 39 countries to identify and counter ISIS' efforts to
    generate revenue and cut it off from the financial system. EB also
    coordinates State Department review of and provides foreign policy
    guidance for proposed Treasury designations of individuals and entities
    providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism under Executive
    Order (E.O.) 13224.
        EB also leads, and funds, the Department's engagement with foreign
    governments on Anti-Money Laundering/Counter Terrorist Financing (AML/
    CFT) issues through the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and FATF-
    style regional bodies which promote implementation of international
    standards and best practices on countering terror financing. The
    efforts to counter terrorist finances have helped degrade ISIS's
    capacities.

        Question 14.  The United States is signatory to the OECD Anti-
    Bribery Convention and the United Nations Convention Against
    Corruption, which focus on preventing and criminalizing corruption and
    providing cooperation among signatory countries to recover stolen
    assets. What does the United States do to help countries implement such
    conventions? Have these efforts been successful?

        Answer. The Anti-Bribery Convention has helped build a coalition
    against foreign bribery, allowing U.S. businesses to better compete in
    international markets. The United States promotes the commitments of
    the Convention through the OECD's Working Group on Bribery (WGB), where
    we have shared best practices such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt
    Practices Act, the prohibition of the tax deductibility of bribes, and
    corporate liability to combat corrupt practices. U.S. implementation of
    the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act forms the basis of the Convention.
    Due to active U.S. engagement and leadership, the WGB has become an
    effective tool for pressuring other major economies to strengthen and
    enforce their foreign bribery laws. The WGB is especially successful in
    the anti-corruption area. International organizations call its tough
    peer review and relentless follow-up requirements the ``gold standard''
    of anti-corruption monitoring.
        The State Department leads the interagency in using the United
    Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) as leverage to encourage
    countries to fulfill their international anticorruption commitments.
    This is done in multilateral forums and bilaterally, using foreign
    assistance funds in some cases. The funding supports capacity building
    for anticorruption enforcement and development and implementation of
    anticorruption policies. Bilateral programs reinforce the Convention
    through programs and assistance focused on both preventative efforts
    and enforcement. On asset recovery, EB promotes the UNCAC as the global
    legal framework. In this context, EB supports capacity building and
    case coordination efforts through regional and bilateral programs.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
         Submitted to Michael T. Evanoff by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) is the law
    enforcement arm of the Department of State, and as such is charged with
    investigating illegal passports or visas. Visa and passport fraud is
    often intertwined with other illegal activities, such as human
    smuggling, sex trafficking, terrorism, and money laundering.
        In the early 1990s, while serving as a new Assistant Regional
    Security Officer (ARSO) in the Philippines, I was part of a successful
    DSS/Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) joint operation that
    broke a human sex trafficking ring which was using illegal visas. At
    the time, underage Philippine women were being lured to California and
    then further into the United States, where they were forced into
    becoming sex workers. Utilizing our overseas expertise in the
    Philippines, as well as our Philippine police contacts, we helped
    arrest the Philippine and American ring leaders. The operation ended a
    multimillion-dollar operation and freed the women who had been trapped.
        If confirmed, I will be strongly committed to maintaining and
    enhancing DSS's partnership with police agencies around the world to
    thwart and apprehend criminals and cartels that abuse human rights via
    transnational crimes.
        In terms of promoting democracy, as Director of Security for NATO,
    from 2007 to 2011, I played a lead role in uncovering a previously
    undetected Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) operation. I
    recommended the expulsion of two Russian NATO Mission Intelligence
    Officers. President Obama approved my recommendation, which led to the
    first and only expulsion of Russians from a NATO Partnership for Peace
    mission.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors in the
            Bureau of Diplomatic Security are fostering an environment
            that's diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. Diversity among the senior ranks of Diplomatic Security
    (DS) has ebbed and flowed over time, and will be one of the factors
    considered when making assignments to leadership positions. Though
    perhaps not in the numbers we would hope, the leadership of DS has been
    made up of a diverse group of men and women from within our ranks that
    consistently perform admirably and often move on to prestigious
    positions within the Government or in private industry. Over time, the
    hiring practices of DS and the Department as a whole have grown to
    actively seek out a more diverse workforce. With an eye to the future,
    a Recruitment Unit, comprised of active duty DS Foreign Service
    members, has been established to spearhead outreach and recruitment to
    diversity groups. My goal is to recruit a more diverse Foreign Service
    cadre, and if confirmed, I will work to ensure that this goal is
    reflected in our future senior leadership.
        If confirmed, in keeping with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis
    on diversity, I will ensure all DS supervisors at all of our missions
    have access to and avail themselves of opportunities to receive regular
    formal training and regular guidance on EEO principles, diversity, and
    inclusion to sensitize them to these important issues and maximize
    diverse talents in our workforce.

        Question 3.  Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 4.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 5.  Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in any country abroad?

        Answer. No, we do not.

        Question 6.  Will the DS A/S have independent access to the
    Secretary of State at any time to discuss security-issues that he deems
    require the Secretary's immediate attention?

        Answer. According to Section 103 of the Department of State
    Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017--``The Assistant Secretary for
    Diplomatic Security shall report directly to the Secretary, without
    being required to obtain the approval or concurrence of any other
    official of the Department, as threats and circumstances require.''
        If confirmed, I am confident that I will have independent access to
    the Secretary of State when required.

        Question 7.  What steps has Diplomatic Security taken to ensure
    that its positions are filled with persons at the appropriate level of
    experience?

        Answer. The Department of State assigns a grade level to each
    overseas position. As the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS)
    contemplates assigning agents to Regional Security Officer (RSO) and
    other positions, it ensures to the maximum extent possible that
    individuals at certain grade levels are assigned to positions with
    corresponding grades. Prior to the assignment of any DS employee to a
    new position, a panel of senior officers reviews his or her
    qualifications to ensure that the employee is the best possible match
    for the position.

        Question 8.  What is State doing to further close the gaps in
    Diplomatic Security's Language Designated Positions?

        Answer. As a 26-year veteran of the Department of State, I have
    seen firsthand the value of having certain foreign language skills
    while assigned overseas. While I have been absent from the Department
    since 2011, it is my understanding that the Department has recently
    created curricula in various target languages--such as Arabic, for
    example--designed specifically for Diplomatic Security (DS) personnel
    assigned to High Threat, High Risk posts overseas.

        Question 9.  Please discuss any impacts you believe that the Bureau
    of Overseas Building Operations' transition from the Standard Embassy
    Design to Design Excellence has had on the security of U.S. embassies.
    In your view, has the construction of embassies using the Design
    Excellence approach unnecessarily delayed the move of staff from
    facilities that do not meet current security standards to new, secure
    facilities? Please explain your reasoning.

        Answer. Whether the Department utilizes Standard Embassy Design or
    Excellence in Diplomatic Facilities, every diplomatic facility
    constructed meets the Department's security requirements and those
    codified in law.
        Embassies differ in the size and operational requirements, as well
    as their security needs. Each new embassy should be designed to meet
    these operational requirements. If confirmed I will work closely with
    Overseas Building Operations and ensure that the Department implements
    a strategy that delivers safe, secure functional facilities as quickly
    and cost effectively as possible.

        Question 10.  What steps has State taken to mitigate the risks to
    costs and schedules associated with the Excellence approach to building
    new embassies?

        Answer. I am not yet aware of the specific management steps the
    Department may be undertaking concerning cost and schedule of new
    embassy projects. I do believe that, embassies differ in the size and
    operational requirements, as well as their security needs. Each new
    embassy should be designed to meet these operational requirements.
    Should I be confirmed as the next Assistant Secretary of Diplomatic
    Security, I will work with Overseas Building Operations to execute
    projects in the most cost effective, expedient, and risk adverse
    manner.

        Question 11. To what extent do State's facilities have or require
    waivers and exceptions to security standards? What steps has State
    taken to address weaknesses in its waivers and exceptions program?

        Answer. According to the Department's Foreign Affairs Manual, the
    Secretary of State may waive statutory collocation and setback
    requirements should it be determined that it is in the national
    interest of the United States.
        Also, I understand that new facilities must meet all Overseas
    Security Policy Board security standards whether constructed or
    acquired by purchase or lease. Every attempt must be made to acquire
    sites or new facilities that meet, or can be upgraded to meet, physical
    security standard. If compliance with one or more standards is not
    possible for a specific building, an exception to this standard may be
    applied.
        The Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) is tasked with ensuring the
    security of American diplomatic missions and personnel. Should I be
    confirmed as the next Assistant Secretary of Diplomatic Security, I
    will work tirelessly every day to ensure all those serving overseas
    under Chief of Mission authority live and work in facilities that are
    built to the highest standards. In situations where a waiver or
    exception is needed, I'll ensure DS puts in place the necessary
    mitigation measures to ensure the Department's personal are safe.

        Question 12. How extensively does State rely on temporary
    facilities that have been in place for extended periods of time? What
    progress has State made in creating additional guidance relating to
    temporary facilities?AnswerThe Department of State has one set of
    standards in place for its facilities in to ensure proper physical
    security protection for its personnel. Personnel cannot or should not
    occupy facilities until they are completed and there is a certification
    that the standards have been met or that an appropriate waiver or
    exception is in place. Where waivers or exceptions are issued,
    appropriate mitigation strategies also need to be in place.

        Question 13.  To what extent has State improved its compliance with
    security standards at overseas residences? Have the standards
    implemented in July 2014 affected the number of waivers and exceptions
    requested?

        Answer. The Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) continually reviews
    and re-evaluates the physical security posture of our missions. There
    have been multiple changes to security requirements in response to
    incidents and DS identifying the changing tactics of our adversaries
    and newly identified vulnerabilities. Changes to DS's policies are
    initiated by the bureau in collaboration with OBO and vetted through
    the Overseas Security Policy Board, and are then reflected in the 12
    FAH-5 and 12 FAH-6. If confirmed, I will work to ensure our security
    standards are continually updated in order to mitigate against evolving
    threats faced by our residents overseas.
        Given my absence from the Department since 2011, I cannot currently
    comment on the July 2014 standards. However, if confirmed, I look
    forward to engaging further with the committee on this issue.

        Question 14.  In your view, do recent incidents affecting U.S.
    diplomatic personnel at their residences in Cuba demonstrate increased
    risk that would-be attackers may target personnel at locations they
    perceive as less secure, including residences? If confirmed, what
    further steps, if any, would you recommend DS take to ensure diplomatic
    residences and other potential ``soft targets'' are secure? Would such
    steps include implementing GAO recommendations to DS to improve risk
    management processes in this area?

        Answer. I understand the Department has reduced its diplomatic
    presence in Cuba to ensure the safety of its personnel in response to
    these health attacks. I also understand, based on public information,
    that the Department is currently unable to identify the source of the
    attacks, and believes that U.S. citizens may also be at risk if they
    travel to Cuba.
        In general, the danger from terrorists and criminals operating
    outside of our facilities is best countered by well-informed
    individuals who conscientiously follow established personal security
    practices. I understand the Department makes every effort to facilitate
    employees' knowledge, including contractors, of best security practices
    through training, constant communication, and various off-compound
    security measures. If confirmed, I intend to thoroughly examine all
    current security practices pertaining to diplomatic residences and
    other potential ``soft targets,'' and evaluate what additional security
    measures may be required.

        Question 15.  What steps has State taken to ensure that posts
    conduct residential physical security surveys and request security
    exceptions, when needed, in a timely manner?

        Answer. According to the Foreign Affairs Manuel (FAM), the Bureau
    of Diplomatic Security (DS) is responsible for providing a secure
    environment for the residences of U.S. citizen direct-hire employees
    and their eligible family members sent abroad to conduct official
    business for the U.S. Government at Foreign Service posts. The regional
    security officer (RSO) or post security officer under the direction of
    the chief of mission, deputy chief of mission, or principal officer,
    has primary responsibility for inspection and validation of the
    suitability of housing from a security point of view.
        Before a specific house or apartment is leased, a security survey
    must be conducted. The survey is used to determine whether the dwelling
    meets, or can be modified to meet Department security standards. The
    security survey should be a major factor in the decision lease or
    reject a proposed property. Surveys are required to be updated every
    five years if property is retained in the housing inventory.
        The residential physical security survey is an important tool for
    the RSO that must be used in order to ensure Department personnel are
    housed in safe and secure facilities. Should I be confirmed as the next
    Assistant Secretary of Diplomatic Security, I will work to ensure DS's
    RSOs complete these surveys on time.

        Question 16.  To what extent has State adapted its Soft Targets
    Security Upgrade Program in light of recent public terrorist attacks?

        Answer. The Department's Soft Target security upgrade program began
    in 2003 to provide funding to qualified overseas schools and eligible
    chartered employee association facilities for physical security
    upgrades to mitigate terrorism and violent crime. The Overseas Building
    Operations (OBO), in coordination with the Bureau of Diplomatic
    Security (DS), evaluates and approves requested upgrades for funding.
    Typical upgrades include closed circuit TV systems, public address
    systems, perimeter wall upgrades, DS-approved shatter-resistant window
    film, and security lighting. I understand that the program does not
    fund upgrades to non-real property items, such as school buses, nor
    does it provide funding for staff or guards.
        The Department also works to proactively share information through
    its personnel at post, the Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC)
    and Consular Affairs' Directorate of Overseas Citizen's Services.
    Specifically, the Department disseminates classified threat reporting
    and assessments to diplomatic posts that allow RSOs and Emergency
    Action Committee members to make informed decisions about threat
    mitigation, to include providing information to private American
    interests. OSAC's Global Support Unit obtains and provides unclassified
    warnings to private U.S. citizen and business interests, corporations,
    NGOs, and faith based groups when they are identified as targets in
    classified threat reporting. Finally, the Department's American Citizen
    Services Division drafts and disseminates unclassified language for
    travel warnings, alerts, and emergency messages for use by private U.S.
    citizens traveling and residing abroad. Language in these products
    regularly highlights concerns regarding terrorist plots against soft
    targets.
        Should I be confirmed as the next Assistant Secretary of Diplomatic
    Security, I look forward to working with OBO to leverage the Soft
    Target Security Upgrade program to counter potential soft target
    attacks in the future.

        Question 17.  What efforts is State taking to ensure that U.S.
    personnel are in compliance with all applicable security training
    requirements, including mandatory HTSOS and FACT training?

        Answer. It is paramount that Department personnel receive the
    necessary security training prior to arriving at post. The Foreign
    Affairs Counter Threat course prepares U.S. Government personnel
    working at U.S. embassies and consulates for situations they may face
    globally and in potentially volatile regions. I understand the
    Department will make this course mandatory for all chief of mission
    personal serving overseas by January 2019. I am fully supportive of
    this requirement and, if confirmed, I will work to ensure that every
    official American receives this training prior to arriving at post.

        Question 18.  Does State have the capacity to train the number of
    U.S. personnel required to take Diplomatic Security-provided FACT
    training?

        Answer. Yes, I believe that the Department currently has the
    capacity to train the personnel required to take this training. I look
    forward to the completion of construction of the Foreign Affairs
    Security Training Center at Fort Pickett, Virginia, which should
    address the rapidly growing student population and future projected
    training needs.

        Question 19.  What steps is State taking to reinforce information
    covered in new arrival briefings with U.S. personnel and their
    families?

        Answer. The Regional Security Officer sends out regular security
    notices that remind post members of security programs and procedures
    and ensures that employees are informed of changes in a post's security
    environment in a timely manner. Posts also conduct regular drills to
    reinforce emergency planning information provided during new arrival
    briefings.

        Question 20.  How much progress has State made ensuring that (1)
    overseas posts annually update their EAPs and (2) Diplomatic Security
    comprehensively reviews key EAP sections?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that Emergency Action Plans
    (EAPs) continue to be created and tracked in the Crisis and Emergency
    Planning Application. I will ensure Diplomatic Security's Emergency
    Planning branch consistently monitors which posts are overdue on their
    EAPs and actively works with the posts and the Department's regional
    bureaus to ensure comprehensive annual updates to EAPs are finalized in
    a timely manner.

        Question 21.  What efforts is Diplomatic Security making to ensure
    that posts complete and report completion of required crisis and
    evacuation drills within required time frames?

        Answer. Regional Security Officers (RSOs) overseas must record the
    completion of their drills in a SharePoint site that can be reviewed by
    their DS desk officers in Washington. The desk officers review drill
    compliance on a regular basis and work with the RSOs at post to ensure
    their posts are compliant with their drill requirements and appropriate
    emergency action officers lead drills and they receive full post
    participation.

        Question 22.  What steps is State taking to ensure that overseas
    posts complete required lessons learned reports following evacuations
    and submit those reports to State headquarters for analysis?

        Answer. It is my understanding that in 2013, the Bureau of
    Diplomatic Security (DS) created the Operations Planning Unit. The Unit
    is responsible for creating comprehensive, innovative solutions to
    complex Bureau-level operational planning requirements. An element of
    this unit is the Operations Research and Analysis office, which
    provides global operations research and analysis support to DS while
    advising the bureau on the conduct and development of After Action
    Reviews--a version of a lessons learned document. If confirmed, I
    commit to ensuring that DS develops and promulgates immediate lessons
    learned from attacks overseas and trend analysis in support of major
    events planning, Department of Defense (DoD) engagements, and
    Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports.

        Question 23.  To what extent is DOD postured with adequate forces
    and equipment to ensure support to U.S. missions in crisis situations?

        Answer. The partnership between the Department of State and the
    Department of Defense (DOD) to ensure mission security has always been
    strong. It is my understanding that the relationship has grown
    significantly stronger in recent years. If confirmed, I will actively
    work with my DOD colleagues to ensure that mission security continues
    to stay a top priority.

        Question 24.  What is the progress of increasing MSG detachments at
    identified diplomatic facilities? What challenges exist to providing
    the personnel or support needed for these additional units?

        Answer. Since 1948, Marine Security Guards (MSGs) have been a vital
    part of the protection of personnel, equipment, and classified
    information overseas. It is my understanding that the Department and
    the Marine Corps have made significant progress in increasing the size
    and number of MSG detachments. In my experience, the usual limiting
    factor to increasing a detachment's size is leasing or building housing
    that meets the detachment's space requirements and the Department's
    security standards for a Marine residence.

        Question 25.  What steps have been taken to ensure that recent
    State and DOD policy and procedure updates are institutionalized and
    readily available in future emergencies?

        Answer. Having been absent from the Department since 2011, I am not
    currently in a position to effectively characterize various steps taken
    to ensure the most recent Department of State and DOD policy and
    procedure updates are institutionalized and readily available in future
    emergencies. If confirmed, however, I will ensure that all policy and
    procedures agreed upon by the Department and DOD are understood and
    briefed regularly to all DS personnel.

        Question 26.  Given State's numerous facilities worldwide and
    extensive use of contractors, what unique information security
    challenges, if any, does it face? How does it manage its global
    cybersecurity program?

        Answer. The Department strives to maintain acceptably high employee
    to contractor ratios, at all of its facilities worldwide. In terms of
    managing the global cybersecurity program, every overseas mission and
    domestic bureau has a trained Information Systems Security Officer on
    duty, as well as Foreign Service Regional Cybersecurity Officers
    assigned overseas for additional subject matter expertise. All embassy
    systems are connected back to the United States, where cybersecurity
    analysts monitor the department's networks 24/7 for adversarial
    activity.

        Question 27.  Given the rapidly changing nature of technology, how
    does State assess and address threats to its systems and users from
    changing cyber threats?

        Answer. The Department has a broad array of tools at its disposal
    to effectively assess and address constantly evolving cyber threats. It
    is my understanding that within DS, a new Directorate for Cyber and
    Technology Security (CTS) has been created and its structure builds
    upon the proven DS global ``defense-in-depth'' cybersecurity program by
    unifying the Department's cyber threat intelligence, incident response,
    and cyber forensics teams to ensure that all matters related to illegal
    and/or malicious cyber activity are reviewed in a fully coordinated
    manner. This system expedites reporting to law enforcement and
    intelligence consumers, delivers expert technical support for
    counterintelligence and data loss investigations, and ensures swift
    response on all cybersecurity events.
        If confirmed, I will ensure that DS continues to maintain and
    enhance its core cyber and technology programs.

        Question 28.  How will the new Directorate for Cyber and Technology
    Security improve State's capability to address cybersecurity issues?

        Answer. Having been absent from the Department since 2011, I am not
    currently in a position to effectively characterize this new
    Directorate. However, if confirmed, I commit to keeping with the recent
    Office of Management and Budget management reform directives and
    ensuring that the Directorate for Cyber and Technology Security enables
    the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) to more fully leverage its
    advanced technology and operational security expertise and ensure that
    DS is poised to address cutting-edge security challenges such as
    insider threats while continuing to maintain a state-of-the-art
    cybersecurity program to detect, react, and respond to cyber-based
    threats targeting the Department's networks and information.

        Question 29.  To what extent, if any, does assigning CISO
    responsibilities to multiple bureaus increase State's risk for
    duplication, overlap, or fragmentation of information security
    responsibilities?

        Answer. The Department is uniquely structured with a professional
    security and law enforcement organization that has developed a mature,
    robust cybersecurity program over the past three decades. While I have
    been absent from the Department since 2011, my understanding is that
    this DS cyber team provides advanced threat analysis, network
    monitoring, cyber investigation support, penetration testing,
    vulnerability analysis, and cyber risk assessment, all skills which
    complement the IT security and system hygiene duties performed by the
    CISO team. Respective roles and responsibilities are carefully
    delineated, unambiguous, and periodically reviewed and reaffirmed by
    the CIO and the Diplomatic Security Assistant Secretary. If confirmed,
    I am committed to strengthening the Department's cyber security efforts
    by continuing these periodic reviews in coordination with the CIO.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
             Submitted to Michael T. Evanoff by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question 1.  As you well know, State Department employees work
    tirelessly around the globe to keep America safe and secure. State
    Department employees don't get enough credit for the expeditionary
    diplomatic work they do, often operating in extremely difficult and
    dangerous conditions to advance America's interests. However, if our
    diplomats cannot leave the compound, they cannot do the important work
    necessary to advance American foreign policy.

       How do you balance the security of State Department employees with
            allowing them the access beyond embassy walls that they need to
            successfully accomplish America's mission?

        Answer. Operating overseas presents unique security challenges. In
    the face of ever-evolving threats, I believe the Department strives to
    provide the most secure environment possible for the conduct of
    America's foreign policy and though there is never a complete guarantee
    of safety, I believe that the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) makes
    every effort to ensure all Department of State personnel, including
    contractors, are aware of potential risks and trained accordingly.
        If confirmed, I will ensure that the Diplomatic Security Service
    continues to makes prudent risk management decisions that allow for
    effective diplomacy while still proving for the safety and security of
    those we are entrusted to protect.

        Question 2.  As you well know, State Department employees work
    tirelessly around the globe to keep America safe and secure. State
    Department employees don't get enough credit for the expeditionary
    diplomatic work they do, often operating in extremely difficult and
    dangerous conditions to advance America's interests. However, if our
    diplomats cannot leave the compound, they cannot do the important work
    necessary to advance American foreign policy.

       Do you believe that ``expeditionary diplomacy'' is the new normal?
            If so, how can you facilitate it through increasing access for
            State Department employees beyond the walls of our embassies?

        Answer. It is paramount that the Department be able to engage
    diplomatically on a broad range of issues and fronts. Doing this work
    requires a diplomatic presence in some of the most difficult and
    dangerous environments in the world, including active conflict zones.
    While we must acknowledge the inherent risk of carrying out diplomacy
    in certain areas, it is important to leverage capabilities provided by
    the interagency that allows the Department to operate safely in such
    zones.
        If confirmed, I am committed to working within the interagency to
    ensure that the foreign affairs community has a safe and secure
    platform to carry out the engagement required to advance our national
    security interests. While risk can never be completely eliminated from
    our diplomatic duties, regardless of the threat level, we must always
    work to mitigate it.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Rob Portman,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Portman [presiding], Gardner, Isakson,
    Shaheen, Coons, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, and Booker.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROB PORTMAN,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

        Senator Portman. This hearing is called to order.
        We thank the nominees for being here, and before we turn to
    opening statements, I want to take just a moment to introduce
    these nominees, the witnesses who will be asked to fill really
    important roles at the State Department.
        First, Steven Goldstein, the President's nominee to be
    Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public
    Affairs. Steven comes to us from the private sector where he
    served as Senior Vice President of BP Global Solutions. He has
    been there since 2012. In addition to developing marketing
    communications, data science, and social media initiatives at a
    number of large companies, including Alliance Bernstein, Dow
    Jones & Company, Mr. Goldstein also served at the Department of
    the Interior and was a staffer in the House of Representatives.
        Sean Lawler is the President's nominee to serve as Chief of
    Protocol. Mr. Lawler currently serves as Director for Visits,
    Planning, and Diplomatic Affairs at the National Security
    Council and prior to that had a distinguished career at the
    Department of Defense, including a tour as head of the Office
    of Visits and Protocol at U.S. Cyber Command.
        Lisa Johnson is a career Foreign Service officer and the
    President's nominee to serve as Ambassador to the Peoples
    Republic Namibia. Currently charge at the U.S. Embassy in
    Nassau, Bahamas, Ms. Johnson has served at U.S. diplomatic
    posts around the world including two in Africa, as well as in
    important national security positions in Washington including
    the National Security Council.
        Rebecca Gonzales, also a career Foreign Service officer,
    has been nominated to serve as Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    Lesotho. She too is a career Foreign Service officer with a
    distinguished background, currently Chief of Staff at the
    Bureau of Administration at the State Department, and has also
    held a number of other senior roles that have developed her
    expertise on African issues.
        Last but not least is James Randolph Evans, and I am going
    to ask my colleague from Georgia, who is always articulate and
    much better at the phone than I am.
        Senator Isakson. What an entrance that is.
        Senator Portman. Yes. He is getting a phone call from the
    Secretary of State telling him what he should say in this
    introduction apparently.
        Senator Isakson, the introduction is yours.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

        Senator Isakson. Chairman Portman and Ranking Member Coons,
    thank you very much. It is an honor to be here.
        You know, I was asked one time when I was introduced as the
    senior Senator from Georgia what exactly does a senior Senator
    do. I said, well, when somebody important from your State comes
    to town and they are nominated for a position, you get to
    introduce them. So that is what a senior Senator does.
        I have a real privilege today to introduce a Georgian who
    is a longtime friend of mine, a distinguished attorney from my
    State, a man who married way over his head in more ways than
    one, and is somebody I am proud today to recommend as President
    Trump's nominee to be Ambassador to Luxembourg.
        Randy Evans is a senior partner in the firm of Dentons in
    their financial services and institutions practice. Dentons is
    the largest law firm in the world. There is no better
    qualification that you could ask for for somebody to go to a
    place like Luxembourg, which is the second largest domicile
    next to the United States of America, financial instruments and
    institutions. So it is an important country for our country in
    a lot of ways. And Randy is exactly the type of person you want
    to have in that country representing the United States of
    America.
        I could tell you where he graduated from college. I could
    tell you all kinds of things about him, but I will tell you
    three things.
        One, his wife Linda is a beautiful, talented person who is
    a dear friend of mine and has been for years. One of the true
    joys I have in public service is going to events that I have to
    go to because I get to go to and be around Randy, around Linda.
    They are a great couple.
        Secondly, he has been a big help to me personally. In fact,
    he played the Democratic nominee for Governor, Zell Miller,
    when I ran for Governor of Georgia in 1990 and Zell Miller beat
    me, but he played Zell in the mock debates that we did. I was a
    real estate salesman, not a lawyer. So I was not used to taking
    the argumentative approach to debate. I was used to trying to
    always sell. But Randy taught me the tougher edge as well and
    made me a better man in that campaign and probably was
    ultimately responsible for me winning a few debates later on
    after I got my hat handed to me during that one. But I learned
    a lot from Randy and he taught me an awful lot.
        But he is also a Georgia Bulldog, and I just have to say,
    Senator Booker, that on the day after the Georgia Bull Dogs
    were named the number one football team in the country, it is
    important to be introducing a graduate from the University of
    Georgia, Randy Evans. [Laughter.]
        Senator Isakson. So for many reasons, our football team,
    his talent, his gift to Georgia, his wonderful wife, and the
    service he gives to our State and our country, I am proud to
    introduce President Trump's nominee for the ambassadorship to
    Luxembourg, Randy Evans, distinguished attorney from the State
    of Georgia. Randy, welcome.
        Senator Portman. I thank my colleague from Georgia, as I
    predicted, an articulate and very personal introduction. So,
    again, welcome to you, Mr. Evans.
        I would like to turn to my colleague, Senator Coons, for
    any opening remarks, after which we are going to hear briefly
    from our witnesses and have a chance to get into a dialogue.
    Senator Coons?

                STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE

        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to my
    dear, good friend, Senator Isakson, as well my colleague,
    Senator Booker.
        Thank you to all of you and to your families for your
    willingness to step forward and serve our Nation. Some of you
    have been doing so for a career. Some of you have been doing it
    in other ways in your home States or communities.
        I was first the chair of the Africa Subcommittee when I
    came 7 years ago, and so I am particularly interested in those
    who will serve or who may have the opportunity to serve in
    Namibia and in Lesotho. But all of you are stepping forward
    whether in Europe or in a critical position or in public
    diplomacy. And I just wanted to open by saying our diplomats
    around the world face challenging environments, face
    opportunities to move our values forward, and I am grateful for
    the chance to join Senator Portman here today and hearing your
    testimony and greeting and welcoming your families and thanking
    you for your willingness to serve.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        And to our witnesses, you have all submitted written copies
    of your statements. Those will be included in the record. So I
    ask you to try to keep your remarks to a couple of minutes, and
    then again we will have a chance to have a little dialogue back
    and forth about some of the issues in some of the roles that
    you will be playing if you are confirmed.
        I would like to start with Mr. Goldstein, then Mr. Lawler,
    then Ms. Johnson, then Ms. Gonzales, then Mr. Evans. I am told
    that is the appropriate protocol. So Lawler will appreciate
    that. So with that, Mr. Goldstein.

     STATEMENT OF IRWIN STEVEN GOLDSTEIN, OF NEW YORK, TO BE UNDER
                SECRETARY OF STATE FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

        Mr. Goldstein. Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons,
    members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today.
        I am deeply grateful to President Trump and to Secretary
    Tillerson for placing their confidence in me. I have spent the
    bulk of my career helping senior leaders in government and the
    private sector tell their stories. Now, to have the opportunity
    to help America tell its story to the world is the honor of a
    lifetime.
        I am proud to say my spouse, Bill Popeleski, is here with
    me today, and I could not do this without his love and support.
        Every day we see stories of Americans who endeavor to make
    the world a better place. Countless individuals across the
    globe benefit from our generosity and compassion. Yet, those
    who seek to undermine America do so by spreading misinformation
    about our people and our objectives. To tell the real story of
    America, we must speak with one voice to people where they
    listen. We must ensure that the State Department is harnessing
    the power of new technologies as they develop. We must also do
    everything we can to combat the radical ideologies that
    threaten Americans at home and abroad. I feel this deeply
    because I have seen firsthand the heartbreak that occurs when a
    malign force takes root and diplomacy fails to stop it.
        In January 2002, when I led communications for Dow Jones,
    ``Wall Street Journal'' reporter, Daniel Pearl, was kidnapped
    in Pakistan. For weeks, we worked around the clock to bring
    Danny home. It fell to me to tell his parents how their son
    died. Danny's death was a stark example of the personal tragedy
    that lies in the wake of every terrorist act.
        The Department's Global Engagement Center is working to win
    the war of ideas that underpin terrorism. That must include
    addressing the ecosystem of thought that justifies killing
    civilians for political ends, as well as engaging the
    technology companies to identify and intervene against those
    who are likely to commit violence.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues
    around the world to enhance America's reputation and advance
    America's interests. Bringing diverse ideas and people together
    in common purpose has been a hallmark of America for nearly 230
    years, and our example can inspire hope in others.
        Thank you again for inviting me to speak with you today.
        [Mr. Goldstein's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Irwin Steven Goldstein

        Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons, members of the committee,
    thank you for inviting me here today.
        I am deeply grateful to President Trump and to Secretary Tillerson
    for placing their confidence in me. I've spent the bulk of my career
    helping senior leaders in government and in the private sector tell
    their stories. Now, to have the opportunity to help America tell its
    story to the world is the honor of a lifetime.
        My spouse, Bill Popeleski, is here with me today and I could not do
    this without his love and support. I am also grateful to my father,
    Bernard Goldstein, who set an example of civic engagement through his
    involvement in our hometown of Nashville; and my late mother, Sandra,
    who I'm sure is smiling down today.
        I would also like to thank the men and women who have previously
    served as the State Department's Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy
    and Public Affairs. I hope to build on their successes to enhance the
    mission-critical work of the State Department's global public diplomacy
    team.
        One of the benefits of a career in communications is the
    opportunity to speak with people from all walks of life. Every day on
    the news, we see stories of people who, in their own way, give back to
    their country and endeavor to make the world a better place. Those who
    seek to undermine America do so by spreading misinformation about our
    people and our objectives. We can fight these efforts by inspiring the
    world with our shared humanity and our great compassion.
        Vast numbers of children are orphaned by disease and war. Their
    caregivers may feel a bond with Americans like Jody Thompson, a police
    officer in Poteau, Oklahoma, who adopted a malnourished boy named John,
    whom he rescued from an abusive home.
        Where children with disabilities are treated as second-class
    citizens, their parents can find strength and hope in Americans like
    Sonja Robinson and Mikey Brannigan. A few years ago, Sonja, a well-
    respected coach, moved across the country to train Mikey, who has
    autism. Mikey, with Sonja's support, recently won two golds and a
    silver at the Para World Championships.
        Sonja and Jody exemplify how we live out our ideals at home, and
    it's these same ideals that motivate us to be a source of hope around
    the world.
        We need to tell this story.
        We need to show how America is leading the fight against AIDS and
    malaria, in places where these diseases take their deadliest toll.
        We need to show how America is bringing educational opportunity to
    girls and boys in nations where schooling is still seen as a privilege
    and not a right. From textbooks to scholarships to coding academies,
    America is empowering the world through education.
        We need to show how America is often the first nation to provide
    aid when disaster strikes. Through government agencies such as USAID,
    through our robust private sector, and in our own capacity as
    individuals, Americans ease suffering and help rebuild lives in every
    corner of the globe every day.
        To tell these stories, we must ensure that the State Department is
    using every tool available, and can harness the power of new
    technologies as they develop. Consistent with the President's budget
    and the Secretary's priorities, we should aspire to have a digital and
    technology profile that rivals the best companies in Silicon Valley.
    And in an era when people everywhere have access to vast information
    sources, we must speak to people where they listen.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Department's very
    talented career officials to ensure that we are speaking with one
    clear, consistent, and compelling voice. Where we see evidence of
    success, I want to build on it and scale it to other parts of our
    mission. With the right structures in place, we can respond more
    rapidly and with greater clarity to events anywhere they unfold.
        I also want to ensure that we're doing everything we can to combat
    the radical ideologies that threaten Americans at home and abroad. I
    feel this deeply, because I have seen firsthand the heartbreak that
    occurs when a malign force takes root and diplomacy fails to stop it.
        In January 2002, when I led communications for Dow Jones, Wall
    Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped while on assignment
    in Pakistan. For weeks, we worked round-the-clock to bring Danny home.
    It fell to me to tell his parents how their son died. Danny's death was
    a stark example of the personal tragedy that lies in the wake of every
    terrorist act.
        As our diplomats and servicemembers lead the battle against
    extremism on the political and military fronts, the State Department's
    public affairs team must engage on the information front.
        The Global Engagement Center is working aggressively to win the war
    of ideas that underpin terrorism. That must include addressing the
    entire eco-system of thought that justifies and supports killing
    civilians for political ends, as well as intervening against those
    people who are likely to commit violence. We need to continue working
    with our inter-agency colleagues and the tech companies that produce
    the platforms where terrorists recruit and cultivate followers. We must
    also remain flexible and agile as trends change and as our enemies
    adapt.
        The State Department has a broad remit. And in all of our efforts,
    I look forward to continued engagement with this committee and with
    your colleagues in the House of Representatives. The way we conduct our
    affairs is itself a demonstration of the power of our ideals. Bringing
    diverse ideas and people together in common purpose has been a hallmark
    of America for nearly 230 years. It is an example that can inspire hope
    in others.
        Thank you again for inviting me to speak with you today.

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Goldstein.
        Mr. Lawler?

       STATEMENT OF SEAN P. LAWLER, OF MARYLAND, TO BE CHIEF OF
    PROTOCOL, AND TO HAVE THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR DURING HIS TENURE
                               OF SERVICE

        Mr. Lawler. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank
    you very much for the opportunity to speak with you today. I am
    humbled beyond words to appear before this distinguished body
    as President Trump's nominee for Chief of Protocol of the
    United States. I have deep gratitude to the President, the
    First Lady, Secretary Tillerson for their trust and confidence
    in nominating me for this position.
        Knowing any accomplishments I have are shared, I would like
    to acknowledge my wife Grace who is with me here today, and my
    son Conor, who was not available to be here. He is off at
    school. But I owe everything to both of them for their support
    and inspiration.
        I was born and raised on the southwest side of Chicago.
    Shortly to my first enlistment, I lost both of my parents. The
    Navy quickly became my family, and throughout my 21 years of
    service, I married, started my own family, and worked as hard
    as I could to succeed.
        My military service resulted in many life lessons but none
    more than service before self. Throughout my career, I was
    fortunate enough to work under phenomenal leaders and mentors
    who taught me, corrected me, and groomed me for continued
    growth. Following retirement, I spent several years as the
    Chief of Protocol at U.S. Cyber Command before assuming my
    current position on the National Security Council working
    closely with the State Department colleagues and coordinating
    foreign engagements for the President.
        The Chief of Protocol advises, assists, and supports the
    President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State on
    official matters of national and international protocol, as
    well as serving at the President's representative to visiting
    foreign leaders and bilateral chiefs of mission in the United
    States. If confirmed, I look forward to contributing in a
    unique and meaningful way to advancing the principles of
    diplomacy and enhancing our relations with the diplomatic
    community by working with a team of exceptional professionals
    at the State Department and White House, whom I have had the
    pleasure of getting to work with since January. I have
    witnessed firsthand the selfless dedication and patriotism that
    is uncommon outside military service.
        The Office of the Chief of Protocol is an integral and
    successful diplomacy and furthering the foreign policy goals of
    the administration.
        I believe my experience for nearly 3 decades in government
    makes me a well qualified candidate for this position, and if
    confirmed, I look forward to serving our great Nation alongside
    the outstanding professionals at the White House and the
    Department of State to continue to build on the framework and
    foundation for fostering diplomacy.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for
    the opportunity to appear for your consideration.
        [Mr. Lawler's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Sean P. Lawler

        Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you so very much for
    the opportunity to speak with you today. I am humbled beyond words to
    appear before this distinguished body as President Trump's nominee for
    Chief of Protocol of the United States. I have a deep gratitude to the
    President, the First Lady, and Secretary Tillerson for their trust and
    confidence in nominating me for this position. Knowing any
    accomplishments I have are shared, I would like to acknowledge my wife
    Grace, who is here with me, and my son Conor, who was not able to join.
    I owe everything to their support and inspiration.
        Born and raised on the Southwest Side of Chicago, I enlisted in the
    Navy directly out of High School, and shortly into my first enlistment,
    I lost both my parents. My mother to breast cancer and my father a few
    short months later to a broken heart. The Navy quickly became my
    family. Throughout my 21 years of service, I married, started my own
    family, and worked as hard as I could to succeed--not only to better
    provide for my family, but with a desire to have a greater role in
    serving my country. My wife is an immigrant of Ireland, now a
    naturalized citizen, and my son is attending college and growing up
    entirely too fast, and I sit here as a proud and humble example of what
    is magnificent about this country of ours.
        My military service resulted in many life lessons, but none more
    than service before self. Throughout my career, I was fortunate enough
    to work under phenomenal leaders and mentors who taught me, corrected
    me, and groomed me for continued growth,--and I did my best to train
    and lead our next generation of volunteer patriots and impart the same
    lessons. I learned valuable management and leadership skills as I
    climbed through the ranks. In my particular career field, I spent many
    years on the personal staffs of Flag & General Officers and senior
    members of our government. Among my responsibilities throughout several
    tours of duty were to manage administrative and personal details so
    they may devote a larger portion of their time to other important
    matters. Those duties included matters of protocol, etiquette and
    tradition in coordinating myriad events and ceremonies both ashore,
    underway and overseas. Following retirement, I spent five years as the
    Chief of Protocol in a dynamic and exciting sub-unified combatant
    command and then in my current position on the National Security
    Council where I currently work closely with my State Department
    colleagues in coordinating the foreign engagements for the President.
        The Chief of Protocol advises, assists, and supports the President
    of the United States, the Vice President, and the Secretary of State on
    official matters of national and international protocol, as well as
    serving as the President's representative to visiting foreign leaders
    and bilateral chiefs of missions in the United States. If confirmed, I
    look forward to contributing in a unique and meaningful way to
    advancing the principals of diplomacy and enhancing our relations with
    the diplomatic community by working with a team of exceptional
    professionals at the State Department and White House whom I have had
    the pleasure of getting to work with since January. I have witnessed
    firsthand the selfless dedication and patriotism that is uncommon
    outside military service.
        The many divisions of the Office of the Chief of Protocol are
    integral in successful diplomacy and furthering the foreign policy
    goals of the administration. The Protocol staff works regularly to
    build bridges of cooperation and goodwill domestically and across the
    globe. Blair House, which is an historical a treasure, provides a
    world-class venue in accommodating Presidential foreign guests and
    events hosted by Cabinet-level officials. Ceremonials is responsible
    for supporting events hosted by the President and Vice President,
    planning and executing arrangements for official functions hosted by
    the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and the Chief of Protocol and
    organizing the participation of the diplomatic corps in official
    events. Diplomatic Affairs is responsible for the agrement process of
    new bilateral chiefs of mission, including presentation of credentials,
    coordination with the diplomatic corps and guidance, consultation and
    mediation of matters involving senior mission representatives and
    workers employed by foreign mission personnel. Diplomatic Partnerships
    provides outreach to the foreign diplomatic corps serving in Washington
    to promote greater insight and understanding of the United States and
    its economy, people and culture, its flagship program is Experience
    America. Gifts is responsible for the selection and purchase of all
    gifts given by the President, Vice President, Secretary, and their
    respective spouses to foreign leaders and processing all gifts from
    foreign governments given to the President, Vice President, Secretary,
    and other U.S. Government officials. Visits is responsible for planning
    and executing detailed programs for visiting chiefs of state, heads of
    government and other high-ranking officials hosted by the President,
    Vice President, and Secretary of State and supports overseas travel of
    the President and Vice President and their respective spouses and is
    also responsible for planning and execution of foreign travel by U.S.
    presidential delegations as directed by the White House. And finally I
    would like to acknowledge the management team which administers human
    and financial resources and general services operations for the Office
    of the Chief of Protocol to accomplish all its vital and demanding
    work.
        I believe my experience for nearly three decades in government
    service makes me a well-qualified candidate for this position, and if
    confirmed, I look forward to what I expect to be the highlight of my
    career-serving our great nation alongside the outstanding professionals
    at the White House and Department of State and liaising with the
    outstanding diplomatic corps here in Washington, D.C. to continue to
    build on the framework and foundation for fostering diplomacy.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to appear and for your consideration in continuing to serve
    my country.

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Lawler.
        Ms. Johnson?

    STATEMENT OF LISA A. JOHNSON, OF WASHINGTON, A CAREER MEMBER OF
         THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
              STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA

        Ms. Johnson. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Coons, and
    members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you as
    President Trump's nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of
    Namibia. I would like to express my gratitude to the President
    and Secretary Tillerson for the confidence they have placed in
    me. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the
    committee and with the Congress to advance our Nation's
    interests in Namibia.
        Please permit me to acknowledge my parents who are watching
    online from Florida today and my brother Mike. They have
    supported me proudly as I have represented the United States
    overseas during the past 25 years. Some close friends are
    present here today to offer their support.
        If confirmed, it would be a privilege for me to return to a
    familiar region. I began my Foreign Service career in Angola
    and South Africa, and also spent time in Namibia where I once
    drafted the Embassy's human rights report.
        Since independence, Namibia has stood out for its strong
    democratic traditions, success in combating HIV/AIDS, and
    modeled wildlife conservation efforts.
        I would like to highlight for you three priorities that, if
    confirmed, I would work to advance as U.S. Ambassador.
        First, both the United States and Namibia seek to
    strengthen bilateral trade and investment. Namibia's natural
    resources, stable economy, and strong governance make it an
    attractive prospect for U.S. business. If confirmed, one of my
    primary goals would be to promote American business and help
    our trade relationship reach its full potential.
        Second, through the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS
    Relief, or PEPFAR, the United States partners closely with
    Namibia to provide HIV/AIDS testing, education, and treatment.
    With our continued help, Namibia is on track to meet U.N. AIDS
    targets and achieve epidemic control. Importantly, the Namibian
    Government shoulders two-thirds of the costs, serving as an
    example as we seek to shift the burden away from U.S.
    assistance.
        Finally, if confirmed, my foremost priority will be
    ensuring the safety and security of American citizens, be they
    residing, conducting business, vacationing, or serving in the
    Peace Corps in Namibia.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you
    again and look forward to answering your questions.
        [Ms. Johnson's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Lisa A. Johnson

        Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons, and members of the
    committee, I am honored to appear before you today as President Trump's
    nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of Namibia. I would like to
    express my gratitude to the President and to Secretary Tillerson for
    the confidence they have placed in me. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working closely with the committee and others in Congress to advance
    our nation's interests in Namibia.
        Please permit me to acknowledge my parents, watching online from
    Florida today, and my brother Mike, in Washington State. They have
    supported me proudly as I have represented the United States overseas
    during the past 25 years. A few close friends and colleagues also are
    present today to offer their support.
        It is a privilege for me to return to a region that is familiar to
    me. I began my Foreign Service career in Angola and South Africa, and
    also spent time in Namibia, where I once drafted the Embassy's Human
    Rights Report.
        Since independence in 1990, Namibia has stood out for its strong
    democratic traditions, its success in combatting HIV/AIDS, and its
    model wildlife conservation efforts. Namibia has a democratically
    elected president and parliament, an independent judiciary, and a free
    and open media. Though small in population, with just under 2.5 million
    people, Namibia offers promising trade and investment potential. The
    growing U.S. partnership with Namibia increases security and prosperity
    for both countries and serves as an example throughout the continent.
        I would like to share with you three priorities that, if confirmed,
    I would work to advance as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Namibia.
        First, both the United States and Namibia seek to strengthen
    bilateral trade and build stronger and deeper economic bonds. Trade
    delegations to and from Namibia indicate growing opportunities for U.S.
    companies. Namibia's natural resources, combined with its stable
    economy and strong governance, make it an attractive prospect for U.S.
    business. If confirmed, one of my primary goals would be to promote
    American business opportunities and help our trade relationship reach
    its full potential.
        Second, Namibia has struggled with one of the world's highest HIV/
    AIDS prevalence rates. Our partnership to combat the disease has
    brought us closer than ever to bringing it under control. Through the
    President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, the United
    States has partnered with Namibia to provide testing, education, care,
    support, and treatment to hundreds of thousands of people. Namibia is
    on track to meet UNAIDS targets to achieve epidemic control by 2020.
    Importantly, the Namibian Government is assuming funding and management
    responsibility for the fight against HIV/AIDS, shouldering two thirds
    of the financial burden. Namibia stands as a regional example as we
    seek to shift the burden away from U.S. assistance to host governments.
        Finally, if confirmed, my foremost priority will be ensuring the
    safety and security of American citizens in Namibia, be they living
    there, conducting business, travelling on vacation, or serving in the
    Peace Corps.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you again for
    this opportunity and look forward to answering your questions.

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Ms. Johnson.
        Ms. Gonzales?

    STATEMENT OF REBECCA ELIZA GONZALES, OF TEXAS, A CAREER MEMBER
    OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
     BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
              STATES OF AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM OF LESOTHO

        Ms. Gonzales. Good morning. Chairman Portman, Ranking
    Member Coons, and members of the committee, I am honored to be
    considered for the position of United States Ambassador to the
    Kingdom of Lesotho. I am grateful for the confidence President
    Trump and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me by this
    nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this
    committee and Congress in advancing U.S. interests and
    supporting Lesotho in its efforts to strengthen democratic
    institutions and the rule of law, reverse its HIV/AIDS
    epidemic, and achieve sustainable, broad-based economic growth.
        I would like to take a moment to thank my parents. My
    father, Colonel Jose Rene Gonzales, served in the Air Force for
    26 years and was buried in 2013 with full military honors at
    Arlington National Cemetery. My mother, Estella Gonzales, who
    is here with me today, has been a D.C. public school teacher
    for 30 years and is still teaching, and I must say yesterday
    was her birthday. So Happy Birthday, Mom.
        My son, Imagine Alexander, started his studies at the
    University of California, so he was not able to join me today,
    but I am proud of him and he is in my heart.
        And I would also like to thank my brother and sister-in-
    law, Jerome and Amanda Gonzales, who are here. And I appreciate
    the support of my friends and colleagues who are here as well
    today.
        And I would also like to also say thank you to Ambassador
    Harrington, our Ambassador to Lesotho, and the country team who
    I believe is watching us as we speak here.
        If confirmed, I will focus on further strengthening the
    relationship between our two countries. My priority will be to
    protect and advance U.S. interests, including ensuring the
    safety of Americans and advancing U.S. commercial interests in
    Lesotho.
        I welcome the new government in Lesotho's efforts to lay
    the groundwork for a strong culture of accountability, rule of
    law, and much needed political reforms.
        Lesotho is an AGOA success story. However, it will need to
    show continual progress on eligibility criteria. And if
    confirmed, I will advocate and lend my support to these
    efforts.
        One of Lesotho's biggest challenges is that 25 percent of
    the adults have HIV/AIDS. This is the second highest prevalence
    in the world. If confirmed, I will promote continued efficient
    use of our health assistance dollars and ensuring our
    partnership and efforts continue to make a real difference. We
    are saving lives in Lesotho.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you again
    for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I welcome
    any questions you may have.
        [Ms. Gonzales's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Rebecca Gonzales

        Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons, and members of the
    committee:
        I am honored to be considered for the position of United States
    Ambassador to the Kingdom of Lesotho. I am grateful for the confidence
    President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have shown in me by this
    nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
    and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests and supporting Lesotho in
    its efforts to strengthen democratic institutions and the rule of law,
    reverse its HIV/AIDS epidemic, and achieve sustainable, broad-based
    economic growth.
        I would like to take a moment to recognize and thank my father,
    Jose Rene and my mother. Estella B Gonzales. My father, Colonel Jose
    Rene Gonzales, served in the United States Air Force for 26 years and
    was buried in 2013 with full military honors at Arlington National
    Cemetery. My mother, Estella, has been a D.C. public school teacher for
    30 years, and, indeed, I am fortunate to have her with me today. I
    would also like to recognize my son, Imagine Alexander, who just
    started his studies at the University of California and is unable to be
    here today. I would also like to thank my brother and sister-in-law
    Jerome and Amanda Gonzales. I appreciate the support of my friends and
    colleagues who are here with us today.
        As a military family member I lived abroad, and this gave me a
    great appreciation for other cultures and a desire to serve my country
    by joining the Foreign Service. I have had the privilege of serving my
    country for 25 years as a Foreign Service Officer, serving in Africa,
    the Middle East and Latin America. It is this experience and a
    recognition that there is still much to learn that has prepared me, if
    confirmed, for the important task of advancing U.S. relations with
    Lesotho.
        It will be an honor to continue to serve. If confirmed, I will
    focus on further strengthening the relationship between our two
    countries. My priority will be to protect and advance U.S. interests.
    This includes doing everything in my power to ensure the safety of
    Americans in Lesotho--those who will fall under Chief of Mission
    authority, the approximately 90 Peace Corps Volunteers serving in
    Lesotho, along with the approximately 600 Americans who are resident in
    Lesotho and those who visit the country every year.
        It also includes advancing U.S. commercial interests. There are
    opportunities for U.S. companies to invest in Lesotho and to promote
    U.S. exports into Lesotho. Although Lesotho straddles the line between
    a lower-income and lower-middle income country, it is a largely
    untapped market for U.S. companies. U.S. commercial engagement can also
    be a powerful source of economic opportunity within Lesotho.
        On the political front, we know that the steps needed in Lesotho to
    address the underlying causes of instability and challenges to the rule
    of law are difficult. Lesotho's neighbors, through the Southern African
    Development Community (SADC), have been actively engaged to help
    Lesotho move beyond its recent political difficulties. The
    recommendations made by a recent SADC Commission of Inquiry, if fully
    implemented, would lay the groundwork for a strong culture of
    accountability and rule of law, and much-needed political reforms. I
    welcome the new government's commitment to implement those
    recommendations and, if confirmed, I will advocate and lend my support
    to these regional efforts.
        One of Lesotho's biggest challenges is that 25 percent of the
    adults in the country are living with HIV/AIDS. This is the second-
    highest prevalence in the world. While the pandemic has devastated
    Lesotho's social and economic fabric, our partnership with the
    Government of Lesotho on health is a strong one, that is having a
    substantial positive impact. If confirmed, I will promote continued
    efficient and accountable use of our health assistance dollars in
    ensuring our partnership and efforts continue to make a real
    difference.
        Lesotho has benefitted greatly from the African Growth and
    Opportunity Act, or AGOA, which has spurred a vibrant textile and
    apparel industry in Lesotho. The textile industry is the nation's
    largest private-sector employer, with about 40,000 employees, mostly
    women. And, impressively, Lesotho is the second-largest supplier of
    textiles to the United States in sub-Saharan Africa. However, Lesotho
    will need to show continual progress on AGOA eligibility criteria,
    including those relating to rule of law and governance, to maintain its
    eligibility for AGOA trade preferences. If confirmed, I will encourage
    Lesotho's progress on the path of economic and political reform. Reform
    will foster economic growth, empower entrepreneurs, and attract foreign
    investment. I will continue to press for concrete actions that address
    concerns about impunity and the rule of law.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you again for the
    opportunity to appear before you today. I welcome any questions you may
    have.

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Ms. Gonzales.
        Mr. Evans?

    STATEMENT OF JAMES RANDOLPH EVANS, OF GEORGIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
                         AMERICA TO LUXEMBOURG

        Mr. Evans. Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons, and
    distinguished members of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee, including a special thank you to our own home senior
    Senator, Johnny Isakson, a friend of mine of 30 years. Little
    did I know that we would come together at a place like this on
    a day when the Georgia Bulldogs were once again ranked number
    one in the country. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Evans. I want to thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before you to speak with you and to answer any questions
    you might have. It is, indeed, an honor and a privilege to be
    here in our Nation's capital with you.
        In addition, I thank President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for the opportunity serve our country, if I am
    confirmed, as the next Ambassador to the Grand Duchy of
    Luxembourg. It is an amazing place with people who understand
    and appreciate freedom and democracy with many connections to
    us Americans.
        My wife Linda, who could not be with us today, without whom
    I would not be here, knows well those connections. Her uncle,
    1st Lieutenant Richard P. LaFrance, fought to free Luxembourg
    in World War II in the Battle of the Bulge and was later
    blinded in Germany just a month before V-E Day.
        As you know, Luxembourg is a relatively small country, if
    measured by size or population, but it is a unique mixture of
    citizens who are proud of their heritage but embrace their
    connections to so many other countries and peoples from around
    the world. But what Luxembourg lacks in size, it makes up for
    in reach. Anyone experienced in international affairs knows
    that Luxembourg's influence as a thought leader extends
    throughout the world, especially in finance and technology and
    most recently in space.
        The world is full of challenges, and Luxembourg will,
    undoubtedly, be at the center of solving many of those
    challenges as a leader in the European Union, a loyal member of
    NATO, and a reliable friend to the United States of America.
        Open dialogue and communication, anchored in our shared
    values, will enable us to build even stronger bonds sufficient
    to address every challenge. This includes tackling hard
    questions, including the myriad of issues flowing from the
    United Kingdom's decision in Brexit.
        In short, there is much to do. I am eager to get started. I
    hope you will allow me to put my skill sets to work for our
    country to the very best of my abilities as the next Ambassador
    to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Thank you.
        [Mr. Evans's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Randy Evans

        Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Coons, and distinguished members
    of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you, to speak with
    you, and to answer any questions you might have. It is indeed an honor
    and a privilege to be here in our nation's Capital with you. I would
    also like to express my thanks to President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for their confidence in me.
        Last year, my mother passed away unexpectedly. It was one of those
    moments that forces you to stop and think about where you are and where
    you are going. Prior to that moment, I believed I had reach the
    pinnacle of my career. All that time, I had also served in a myriad of
    positions of public service from the bottom to the top while thinking I
    had done my part. Yet, at that moment, I knew then that it was time for
    me to do more. I did not know how or where, but I did know why.
        Any doubt was erased when I received this handwritten note in the
    mail from my father. It said: ``Randy, I thank you for your love. I
    appreciate the financial gift but more than the financial, I cherish
    our moments together more. Your mother and I spent a lot of time in
    prayer for you and your safety. God has blessed you with a beautiful
    gift. Use it wisely. God said through Paul in Romans, God through his
    gift is calling.''
        Calling? The only question then was how and where could I best
    answer that calling?
        Against this backdrop, I am greatly thankful to President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for the opportunity to answer my calling and to
    serve our country, if I am confirmed, as the next Ambassador to the
    Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. It is a beautiful place with people who
    understand and appreciate freedom and democracy and who have an
    unbelievable resiliency to overcome whatever history may throw at them.
        As you know, Luxembourg is a relatively small country if measured
    by size or population. It is a unique mixture of citizens who are proud
    of their heritage but embrace their connections to so many other
    countries and peoples from around the world. In that way, they are much
    like us Americans or, in fairness, we are much like them--it really
    doesn't make a difference. The fact is we are both very much alike.
        And, what Luxembourg lacks in size, it makes up for in punch.
    Anyone experienced in international affairs knows that Luxembourg is so
    much bigger than the number of its square miles or its citizens.
        Luxembourg's influence and its leadership and its impact extends
    well beyond Europe to the entire world. It is a thought leader and
    economic engine capable of and doing great things--especially in
    technology and space.
        It is also a country with the closest of ties to the United States,
    having been liberated twice from totalitarian occupation and standing
    steadfast with us as we together have liberated others from such
    unacceptable situations.
        My wife--Linda, without whom I would not be here today, knows well
    those connections. Her uncle, First Lieutenant Richard P. LaFrance
    fought to free Luxembourg in World War II in the Battle of the Bulge
    and was later blinded in Germany a month before V-E Day.
        And, next year will be the 100th anniversary of the end of World
    War I, and I know there will be many commemorations of the sacrifices
    made during the Great War. If confirmed, I hope to be part of them
    proudly representing the United State of America--not to tout our
    victories but instead to signal our continued commitment toward a
    future free from tyrannies and full of hope.
        The world is full of challenges and Luxembourg will undoubtedly be
    at the center of solving many of those challenges as a leader in the
    European Union, a loyal member of NATO, and a friend of the United
    States. Certainly, there will be things we will want to move closer
    together on like contributions to NATO; addressing the growing refugee
    problem and the instabilities that follow; and, leveling the playing
    field for American companies doing business around the world.
        Open dialogue and communication, beginning with our shared values,
    will enable us to build even stronger bonds sufficient to weather any
    distractions.
        From my perspective, as Singapore is the doorway to Asia,
    Luxembourg is rapidly becoming, if it has not already become, the
    doorway to the European Union. We must take advantage of such a unique
    ally with such great influence to work toward solving rather than
    debating the problems confronting the 21st century world.
        This includes tackling the hard questions such as those arising out
    of climate change, or containing the threat of global terrorism, or
    stabilizing the flow of capital to avoid financial crises. And, of
    course, there are myriad of issues flowing from the United Kingdom's
    decision in the Brexit vote to leave the European Union.
        In short, there is much to do. I am eager to get started. I hope
    you will let me put my skillsets to work for our country to the very
    best of my abilities.
        Thank you.

        Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Evans. With Ohio State
    being ranked number three in the country now, if the playoffs
    were tomorrow, we would be playing you. So I am trying to think
    of what I should ask Johnny to provide me as an appropriate
    bet. I will think about that while I am hearing the questions
    from my colleagues.
        I am going to wait and ask my questions. We have a good
    turnout here today, and a few have already had to leave and
    come. Everybody is busy. So I am going to turn to Senator Coons
    and then I will be coming back and asking questions of the
    nominees. Again, I appreciate your willingness to serve and
    your good testimony this morning. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Portman. I will defer to
    my colleague, Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you. I guess I could defer, but
    instead I will just go boldly forward. [Laughter.]
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator
    Coons, and thanks to all of you. Congratulations to each of you
    for your nominations and especially to those who are career. I
    just say being on this committee and having the chance to visit
    abroad has been amazing, and the staffs of our embassies abroad
    do such good work. I recognize what Mr. Lawler said. We have
    gotten pretty good. We can always be better at thanking our
    military for service, but we are not as good in thanking the
    U.S. civilians who are abroad, often in places that they get
    assigned to that were not their first choice, sometimes in
    places where they cannot bring family. We do not do as good of
    a job in thanking them as we should.
        I will tell you one of the things that I will mention to
    those of you who will be ambassadors abroad is when I visit, I
    usually try to take first and second tour FSOs out for coffee
    without their ambassador to ask them, you know, you have
    achieved something really important because it is hard to get a
    job as a Foreign Service officer with the State Department.
    What will be the difference between staying and making a career
    out of it and leaving? And then they offer fascinating
    observations. I will tell you this. They never dis their boss,
    but they talk about things like paperwork and bureaucracy and
    things like that that are challenges. So especially if you are
    taking the post of ambassador for the first time, paying
    attention to the first and second tour FSO folks and their
    experiences is something that I think is good.
        Let me just ask a couple of questions to you, Mr.
    Goldstein, about public diplomacy. I think the budget for
    international exchange is sort of small as a percentage of the
    big budget challenges we deal with, but I tend to think things
    like international exchanges or training foreign militaries on
    the defense side--I am on Armed Services too--which is also a
    small part of the DOD budget--these things really produce
    value.
        There is a proposal to cut this part of the portfolio of
    the State Department pretty significantly in the President's
    proposed budget submission. You did not draft up that budget. I
    am not going to ask you to comment on it. But tell me about
    your view of the value of these international exchanges that
    are within the portfolio of your nomination.
        Mr. Goldstein. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        Every person with whom I have spoken in this process has
    impressed upon me how important the exchange and cultural
    programs are. I share that view.
        My goal, if confirmed, is to enhance the programs by
    continuing the education that participants receive, which I
    think is vitally important. It is not enough just to
    participate in the program. We need to follow up with
    individuals throughout their career as they move forward.
        We also need to create agility so that we can ensure that
    we quickly develop country programs when needed, and we should
    enhance the programs that are doing well.
        In addition, Senator, I want to look closely at the
    American Spaces program. Many are being moved to the Embassy
    for security reasons, and I want to do a study to determine
    whether that is impacting the number of people that are
    actually attending these particular programs. If so, we might
    need to work with the private sector to provide access to the
    right audience in the most appropriate location.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
        Ms. Johnson, I think Namibia is doing many things very,
    very well. One of the areas where I think as I look at their
    history there are some challenges to do better is in the area
    of human trafficking. They are a tier 2 nation right now in the
    TIP. What are some of the kinds of things that you think you
    might be able to do in your capacity as Ambassador to work with
    them and help them get even better at dealing with trafficking
    issues?
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much for that question,
    Senator.
        In the Bahamas where I am serving currently, Bahamas was
    tier 2 3 years ago. We helped take them to tier 1. They are the
    first tier 1 country in the Caribbean. The way we did that--it
    was a partnership through a very strong commitment on the part
    of the government, political will, and close and continued
    engagement with the United States. So taking that track record
    and looking at what some of the issues are in Namibia, I
    believe that, if confirmed, I could help them make progress. I
    think the political will is there.
        Some of the issues, some of the areas where they need to
    strengthen, more resources for victims shelters. They need to
    complete comprehensive legislation and pass it and implement
    it, as well as their national action plan. Raising awareness
    throughout the country, not just in the capital but in the
    rural areas where you have child labor, for example, and
    trafficking. I think those are the principal areas. They also
    did not have any convictions last year. So we need to
    strengthen the justice system component. But I think in all of
    those areas, they are areas where we can make progress with
    continued engagement and commitment.
        Senator Kaine. Great.
        Mr. Chair, if I could ask one more question of Mr. Lawler.
        We have instances over time. Right now, we are dealing with
    a tough one with Russia, also Cuba. During the Obama
    administration, we dealt with one with India where challenges
    lead to the recalling of personnel, and then there is a little
    bit of a retaliation. If you recall ours, we will recall yours.
    Talk a little bit about the diplomatic skills that you already
    have that you would bring to the table. Sometimes these are
    unavoidable. If a country does something that is wrong, there
    is going to be a consequence. Sometimes we almost I think
    stumble into them a little bit by accident. Talk a little bit
    about how you would approach your position and try to minimize
    misunderstandings of this kind.
        Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Senator.
        The Office of the Chief of Protocol is responsible for
    dealing directly with the chiefs of mission, the deputy chiefs
    of mission for the embassies in Washington. We are the liaison
    for the diplomatic missions. If there are any problems brought
    to our attention, we deal with those. Obviously, we follow the
    Vienna Convention ensuring that our diplomats abroad are given
    the same rights as theirs. So we do not discount any rule
    breakers or anything like that, but we will deal with those as
    they come up. And if we have any issues, we will go back and
    obviously ensure that we either ask--if there are problems, we
    will go back to the host nation and ask for immunity to be
    withdrawn. If not, we will ask for the diplomat to depart the
    country.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Portman. Senator Isakson?
        Senator Isakson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Thanks to all of you and congratulations on your
    appointment.
        I want to focus on our two ambassador nominees for Africa
    for just a second, if I can.
        Senator Coons and I were both on the Africa Subcommittee
    together and traveled quite frequently to Africa over a couple
    of years. First of all, the biggest product in Georgia is
    chickens, and the biggest product in Delaware is chickens. We
    brought down the lock on the door in South Africa, and now
    there are 19,000 metric tons of Georgia and Delaware chicken
    going into South Africa every year. And that was in large
    measure because of what we did on AGOA, the African Growth and
    Opportunity Act.
        Are you all familiar with that? And do you have any ideas
    of what you want to do in terms of promoting engagement with
    that? We will start with Ms. Gonzales.
        Ms. Gonzales. Thank you for that question, Senator.
        Lesotho has been an AGOA success story. Under this program,
    there have been 40,000 people who have been employed, most of
    them women. I have read this has had a ripple effect on 100,000
    family members, as well as downstream businesses.
        I think that Lesotho needs to continue its efforts to
    address rule of law and bring about good governance so that it
    will continue to be eligible under AGOA. And there are
    opportunities for diversification. In addition to that, there
    are opportunities for U.S. businesses in renewable energy,
    agriculture, water.
        As you know, Lesotho is surrounded by South Africa. There
    are 600 U.S. companies operating there who could possibly
    expand businesses into Lesotho.
        And so, if confirmed, I would work hard to identify
    business opportunities for U.S. companies, to ensure that they
    are treated fairly, and to make sure that the playing field is
    level, Senator.
        Senator Isakson. Ms. Johnson?
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Senator.
        AGOA for Namibia--eligibility is not an issue, but use of
    the program is. Namibia has not taken full advantage of the
    benefits under AGOA. In large part, I would say it is a factor
    of the type of economy you have in Namibia. It is a very small
    market. AGOA is a trade not aid program, and it is really
    private sector-driven. So companies are going to make business
    decisions, and they have to weigh things like the high cost of
    transportation, of electricity in deciding what type of
    business makes sense in Namibia.
        There has been a lot of success in other countries, as my
    colleague said, in the textile industry. What makes more sense
    probably for Namibia is agribusiness. And in fact, just last
    year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture certified beef
    products from Namibia as the first African beef products to be
    eligible for export to the United States. So those would be
    eligible for AGOA benefits.
        So, if confirmed, I will look to promote greater use of the
    AGOA program.
        Senator Isakson. I appreciate both of your knowledge of
    that issue. That is an important program for the United States
    and important for Africa too. I have said in many a hearing
    that Africa is the continent of the 21st century for the United
    States of America. There are more mouths to feed, more
    opportunity, more votes in the U.N. in Africa than anywhere
    else in the world right now. And the better our friendships
    are, the better economic ties we have, the better off we are
    going to be.
        Ms. Johnson, I want to commend you on the next-to-the-last
    paragraph of your printed remarks where you said, finally, ``If
    confirmed, my foremost priority will be ensuring the safety and
    security of American citizens in Namibia, be they living there,
    conducting business there, traveling there, or serving in the
    Peace Corps.'' And for Senator Coons and I, ``the serving in
    the Peace Corps'' part is very important because we went
    together to Benin because of the loss of a Peace Corps
    volunteer, Kate Puzey, who had been murdered there. And the
    Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act is now part of
    the law in the United States because of that trip that we made
    and because of what we tried to do to improve security for
    Peace Corps volunteers overseas. And Africa is the home base
    for the Peace Corps in terms of numbers. There are a tremendous
    amount of Americans there volunteering their time and helping
    our country a lot.
        So I appreciate your voluntary commitment to that in your
    statement, and I hope both of you will support the Peace Corps
    whenever they come and visit. And Senator Coons and I will try
    and come to visit you as soon as we can.
        Good luck to both of you--to all five of you. I am sorry. I
    did not want to leave you out, Randy.
        Senator Portman. Senator Coons?
        Senator Coons. Well, I would like to follow up on the
    questioning by my colleague, Senator Isakson, if I might.
        First, just an issue that was raised by Senator Kaine to
    Mr. Goldstein. On international exchanges, I too am concerned
    that there is a proposed 50 percent cut in a number of these
    programs. And one that we have seen have a significant positive
    impact across the continent of Africa is the Young African
    Leaders Initiative, so-called YALI, or the Mandela Fellows. It
    brought, in the last year a thousand young Africans to the
    United States. And I have hosted a fellow in my office now
    several years as an intern, and they spread across our country
    and go to 20 different colleges and universities for a terrific
    6-week program of training and engagement with the United
    States and then gather back here in Washington and return home.
        And on a visit to Liberia at the height of the Ebola
    crisis, I had a chance to meet our former YALI fellows convened
    by the ambassador and hear what they were doing in the face of
    this challenge and to be inspired by how many of them had
    engaged themselves in volunteer activity either launching
    nonprofits or serving as volunteers in the Liberian response to
    Ebola.
        Is this a program you are at all familiar with, Mr.
    Goldstein? And do you have any sense of its value or impact?
        Mr. Goldstein. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        It is a program that I am familiar with, and I hope, if I
    am lucky enough to be confirmed for this role, to have the
    opportunity to meet many of the people that you just described.
    I will commit to looking very closely at this to see what we
    can do to possibly enhance this program.
        Senator Coons. Ms. Gonzales, Ms. Johnson, is this something
    you have had any exposure to, have heard of, any sense of what
    the potential is of the YALI program in the countries to which
    you may well be soon serving as Ambassador?
        Ms. Gonzales. Thank you, Senator. I am familiar with YALI.
    I think it is an enormously successful program. There are over
    3,000 Young African Leaders in Lesotho who participate in the
    network, over a hundred alumni. I think that the value that
    they bring by coming here and learning about us and then going
    back and taking what they have seen and implementing it in
    Lesotho is phenomenal. And I think that they are excited. They
    are great partners. They serve as local voices and conduits
    amplifying our programs and our values and priorities. And if I
    were confirmed, I would certainly continue to engage and
    support YALI.
        And in addition to that, we have an American corner at the
    university in Lesotho, and my understanding is that it is
    enormously popular and people are very excited about our public
    diplomacy programs.
        Senator Coons. Ms. Johnson?
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Senator.
        I am a big supporter of YALI. In Namibia, we have 59 alumni
    from the Mandela Fellows program, and what I understand from
    the Embassy is they are a real force multiplier for us. They
    are very accomplished in their respective fields, be it public
    sector management, nongovernmental, civil society, or
    entrepreneurship. And when they take what they have learned
    here and bring it back to Namibia, they are going to be the
    movers and shakers going forward. And it is really very
    important for the United States to partner with them and
    advance our shared interests. And we really rely on that alumni
    network quite strongly. I am very excited about engaging them.
        Senator Coons. I will ask two quick follow-up questions
    about your respective nations. Then I will have additional
    questions in the next round, if I might.
        I have been to Namibia. A number of us went there last
    February I believe. A very impressive country, making great
    progress in HIV/AIDS, terrific partner in wildlife trafficking.
    They could stand to make progress on their human trafficking
    standard.
        I was concerned by some reports about relations between
    their military and North Korea. Can you speak to that a little
    bit and help me understand how we might make progress? Because
    I think it is emblematic of the challenge we face in a dozen
    countries around the world in making progress and restraining
    the reach of North Korea's military.
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Senator. I am happy to talk about
    that.
        North Korea is a global menace, and all states have a
    responsibility to abide by U.N. Security Council resolutions
    and help cut off funding to the North Korean regime.
        I would say that Namibia is doing its part. Namibia does
    have a longstanding relationship with North Korea. It dates
    back to the liberation struggle prior to 1990. But countries at
    this stage are really force to choose. You can either have a
    relationship with North Korea or you can abide by the U.N.
    Security Council resolutions. And Namibia has made its choice.
    Namibia came into being under a U.N. mandate. They have great
    respect for the U.N. and U.N. Security Council.
        So what you have seen is not military cooperation with
    Namibia, but rather construction activities that have been
    carried out by state-owned firms, including building the
    ministry of defense, defense ministry buildings on other bases,
    as well as statues.
        Namibia has taken some very important steps in the last 2
    years. In 2015, they expelled the remaining North Korean
    diplomats from Windhoek. In June of 2016, they stated that they
    would end their commercial relationship with North Korea, and
    since that time, they have been implementing that commitment
    and have affirmed that they have ended contracts with North
    Korea and, most recently, that the last North Korean workers
    have departed Namibia. So I think Namibia has taken great
    strides to distance itself from North Korea and abide by the
    U.N. Security Council resolutions, and if confirmed, I would
    keep that issue very front burner on the agenda and encourage
    Namibia to continue to be very transparent with the U.N.
    Security Council on the matter.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Ms. Johnson.
        I will have additional questions.
        Senator Portman. Let me just interject quickly here with
    regard to Korea because I was concerned about that as well.
    North Korea works in a number of different ways, and one is
    through some of their companies. The Korea Mining Development
    Trading Corporation is one. And my understanding is that there
    continues to be some relationship there perhaps through a front
    group in Namibia.
        And so I understand you are saying, Ms. Johnson, there has
    been progress made and commitments made, but I would hope that
    you would focus on this issue and perhaps have Namibia be one
    of those countries that becomes a model already for Korean
    workers, it sounds like, North Korean workers having been sent
    home because those remittances are part of how North Korea
    continues to be able to survive economically and repress its
    own people and develop its nuclear weapons and missile
    technology program. So I would just hope that that specific
    issue--as I understand it, that continues to be a problem that
    will be a focus of yours.
        Ms. Johnson. Yes, Senator. It definitely will be a focus. I
    think we also have to look at banks and ensure that financial
    flows are no longer going to North Korea. But it is my
    understanding that even front companies that have been
    designated by the UN--that relationships in Namibia have ended
    with those companies.
        Senator Portman. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations to all of you on your nominations, and I
    look forward to working with you once confirmed in the interest
    of the country.
        I want to begin with you, Mr. Goldstein, and thank you for
    taking time to meet with me yesterday. One of the things that
    we discussed is the whole disinformation issue that is facing
    this country. The Italian Government recently announced a
    program with private sector partners to help build digital
    resilience among students to help them better identify
    disinformation. Can you talk about whether you think a similar
    kind of initiative would help in the United States to address
    this problem?
        Mr. Goldstein. Thank you, Senator, for that question. And I
    did enjoy meeting with you yesterday.
        I do believe such a program would help in the United
    States, but I believe we have to do more. There is no question
    that this disinformation campaign has been of concern to many.
    We need to work with the technology companies, which I believe
    currently is at an inflexion point, to determine how we can
    interdict and figure out how to stop this from occurring.
        We also have to recognize, Senator, that social media
    accounts are just as important as financial accounts, and we
    have to take that seriously. We need to figure out how to
    disrupt and choke off the communications flows. But in addition
    to that, we need to work, as the State Department is doing,
    with Radio Free Europe, with Radio Liberty, with Current Time,
    with the Middle East network, and others to get our message out
    there. It is not just a defensive posture that we should take.
    We also need to be offensive as you noted they are doing in
    Italy in that particular program.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that and
    totally agree that we do need to be not just defensive but look
    at outreach that we can do to address this problem.
        As you know, one of the aspects of the Global Engagement
    Center, which is part of your portfolio, is a fund to bolster
    outside nongovernmental groups. Will you pledge that after your
    confirmation, if you are confirmed, that you will work with
    Congress to make sure that that fund is adequately resourced
    and that the funds go toward organizations and initiatives that
    can help build that kind of resilience that we are talking
    about?
        Mr. Goldstein. Absolutely, Senator.
        While I grew up in Nashville, Tennessee, yesterday's
    terrorist attack in New York occurred very close to where I
    live. So I have seen firsthand, and I had a friend who actually
    watched that occur yesterday.
        We have got to put extreme importance on the Global
    Engagement Center. We need to choke off the communications flow
    that extremists use to build their networks, and we also need
    to figure out a way to stop the recruitment of people whose
    primary goal is to do harm to our citizens and the citizens of
    our allies.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. And I know I
    speak for the whole committee in saying that we certainly offer
    our condolences to you and to everyone in New York on what they
    have suffered.
        I am not going to ask you a question because I know you
    have addressed this, but I just wanted to weigh in, given our
    discussion yesterday, that I share the concerns that everybody
    has expressed about the importance of our educational and
    cultural exchanges. And I hope you will continue a robust
    program and that you will look at ways in which you can make
    sure the resources are there to support those programs. I
    certainly do not support the administration's proposal to get
    rid of many of those because I think they are so important as
    we look at other areas in which we can build relationships
    ongoing. You talked about Africa as one of those, and I
    certainly think that is an indication of how important those
    exchange programs are.
        I want to ask both you and Mr. Lawler this question because
    we know that reorganization is going on within the State
    Department, and we have heard testimony before this committee
    about the reorganization. But so far, there has been very
    little information shared about exactly what is being done
    within the State Department and what the outcome of that might
    be.
        So would you both agree that Senate-confirmed State
    Department officials should work closely with this committee on
    plans to reorganize the Department? Mr. Lawler?
        Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Senator.
        Yes, that is quite important, and yes, I would agree to
    that.
        Senator Shaheen. Mr. Goldstein?
        Mr. Goldstein. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. And do you pledge to work with this
    committee and be responsive to any requests that we have
    pertaining to matters relevant to your areas of responsibility,
    if you are confirmed? Mr. Lawler?
        Mr. Lawler. Yes, ma'am.
        Senator Shaheen. Mr. Goldstein?
        Mr. Goldstein. Yes, Senator. I look forward to meeting with
    you as frequently as you would like.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you both very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Portman. Thank you.
        I would like to follow up, if I could, on Senator Shaheen's
    questions with regard to disinformation. In your written
    remarks, Mr. Goldstein, you talk a little about the Global
    Engagement Center and focus on the important role it has in
    fighting back against Islamic extremism and providing a
    counter-narrative.
        In the wake of what happened in New York yesterday, that
    tragedy once again, we realize that people are being
    radicalized even in this country, often online and often
    through a concerted effort to reach those most vulnerable to
    that information. So we need to redouble our efforts, and I
    appreciate your commitment to that.
        And you mentioned again in your testimony the
    radicalization from Islamic extremism is one part of the Global
    Engagement Center, but actually there is another part of it
    now. As you may be aware, Senator Murphy, who was here earlier,
    and I drafted legislation that essentially rewrote the Global
    Engagement Center's authorities and mandated it to include
    state-sponsored propaganda in addition to the counter-extremist
    messaging. So the issue of disinformation propaganda that we
    are facing not just from Russia but also other countries,
    China, Iran, and others, countries that make an aggressive use
    of propaganda and disinformation comes at the expense of us and
    often our allies. And I do believe they are trying to
    destabilize democratic countries not just ours but around the
    world.
        I think this is one we are going to really need your help.
    From the cyber attacks we have seen, to the social media bots,
    to the Internet troll farms we now know more about, to state-
    sponsored media outlets, including here in Washington, D.C.,
    they create sophisticated information campaigns essentially to
    sort of weaponize the modern information environment. And by
    the way, this did not start with the 2016 election, and it will
    not end there unless we are more aggressive in responding to
    it.
        So I would ask today that you comment on that. As Under
    Secretary of State of Public Diplomacy, Public Affairs, you are
    going to play a key role in this. First, do you agree that
    countering this foreign disinformation and propaganda is a
    national security priority?
        Mr. Goldstein. Yes, sir, I do agree.
        Senator Portman. Second, do you share Secretary Tillerson's
    public comments that support the Global Engagement Center and
    its mission to be able to counter this disinformation both from
    extremist groups like ISIS but also nation states, as required
    in the DOD authorization act last year?
        Mr. Goldstein. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Portman. One of the issues we have had with the GEC
    is to get funding in there and to get the right people there.
    You mentioned Radio Free Europe earlier, and it is an important
    operation. So are others, but frankly for me, the focus should
    be more on the online communications, social media, and having
    the expertise to do that requires some funds both to attract
    the right people and to have the right technology.
        I was pleased to see that Secretary Tillerson approved the
    GEC strategic plan, and he released some funds to execute it.
    They also submitted a request to DOD for $40 million that we
    had provided for here in Congress to support the Global
    Engagement Center's efforts. We are still waiting, as I
    understand, for the final transfer of those funds, which are
    critical to GEC.
        I would appreciate your commitment today, if you are
    willing to make it, that you will be persistent in pursuing
    that funding from DOD to State to be able to ensure that the
    Global Engagement Center has the resources it needs.
        Mr. Goldstein. Yes, sir, Senator. I will be persistent in
    pursuing that funding.
        I do believe we have to be very aggressive in our response.
    I also think we must speak to people where they listen. The
    world is getting younger. 50 percent of people in Africa are
    under 25 years old, from what I have recently been told. In
    Asia, the average age is somewhere under 30. I saw a story
    recently that said even in the United States that there are
    more people 26 than any other age.
        In addition, ISIS has very persuasive videos online that
    are directed to people who are disgruntled. We have got to make
    this a priority, and you have my commitment and the commitment
    of the people within the State Department that we will do so.
        Senator Portman. Will you commit today to sharing
    information and working closely with members of this committee
    to ensure that you do have the tools and resources to be able
    to carry out this critical mission we have talked about?
        Mr. Goldstein. Yes, sir, I will.
        Senator Portman. I think that is a really important part of
    your job, and I appreciate your taking it seriously and
    reporting back to us on whether you think it is moving forward
    both with regard to the funding and resources and also the
    personnel.
        With that, I will turn to my colleague, Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Portman.
        Let me turn to Mr. Evans and Mr. Lawler, if I might.
        Mr. Evans, I am from the State of Delaware. We also have a
    strong financial services community. As we were discussing here
    before, one of our challenges globally in pursuing terrorism
    and those who might be our opponents such as North Korea is
    bank transparency and better understanding what is moving in
    terms of capital flows around the world.
        If confirmed as the Ambassador to Luxembourg, what would
    you be doing to help make sure that we and our law enforcement
    and intelligence communities have as strong and appropriate a
    relationship as possible with Luxembourg's fairly vigorous
    financial services sector?
        Mr. Evans. Senator Coons, thank you for that question. It
    is a critically important question because Prime Minister
    Bettel started the process of increasing the transparency in
    the banking process in Luxembourg, and I would work with him
    and with anyone who would work with us to try to continue that
    momentum toward more and more transparency. As you no doubt
    know, having watched many of your other hearings, sanctions
    have no teeth if we cannot locate the money, if we cannot find
    the accounts. And so our ability to do that will depend greatly
    on the ability to get countries like Luxembourg to continue to
    improve their transparency in terms of banking transactions.
        Senator Coons. I think our folks in OFAC in the Department
    of the Treasury do an excellent job, but we need our allies, in
    particular some of our European allies, to be more engaged and
    more forthcoming.
        A colleague raised with me a concern that I am going to ask
    you about. You served on the Georgia State Election Board from
    2003 to 2011, and in 2006, the State passed a voter ID law that
    required a photo ID. And as I understand it, two courts, both
    State and federal, enjoined that law finding it
    unconstitutional. But the State Election Board sent out
    information to voters implying that they were required to have
    a photo ID, and then further steps were taken to provide
    remedial information to voters. And it seems to me from the
    timeline, you were probably centrally involved in this.
        Help me understand your role in this, how this played out.
    It is a concern I know for a number of my colleagues.
        Mr. Evans. Well, first of all, thank you for letting me
    have the opportunity to address it. I would rather address it
    up front.
        And when the issue first came up, I went back to try to
    reconstruct what happened 11 years ago. Candidly there were a
    lot of things going on at that particular time. So here is what
    I know.
        In 2006, the Georgia legislature passed and then-Governor
    Sonny Perdue, now Secretary Perdue, signed into law a second
    attempt at a voter identification law. Now, that law was upheld
    by all of the appellate courts and is still in effect today.
        Once the United States Department of Justice cleared
    Georgia's new photo ID law, the State began to issue free
    identification cards to anyone that wanted or needed one. In
    addition, to address concerns raised in these various judicial
    proceedings, the State initiated an education effort regarding
    how to get a free ID card.
        In early September 2006, the State Election Board
    unanimously voted with bipartisan support, including the
    designee of the Democratic Party of Georgia and the Democratic
    Secretary of State, to approve a mailing explaining how to get
    a free photo ID to approximately 300,000 Georgians who had been
    identified as potentially not having an ID.
        While those letters were in the mailing process, opponents
    went to court and challenged the photo ID law and sought and
    obtained an injunction. Although many of the letters had
    already gone out, some of the letters were received after the
    court's ruling.
        The State then sent a second letter making clear that photo
    IDs would not be required to vote in the election.
        As for my part, immediately upon learning of the
    injunction, I asked for a board meeting, and although I knew
    the State was going to appeal, I insisted that the photo ID not
    be applied to that election because if they sought a stay of
    the injunction and it was granted, you would be flip-flopping
    back and forth within 60 days of the election, and I felt very
    strongly that would create too much confusion. When you look
    back, you will see a number of press reports about whether or
    not I was, quote/unquote, going soft. But the fact of the
    matter was at that moment, the appropriate course of action was
    to let the State appeal but not apply it in that election cycle
    until all of the dust had settled in the various judicial
    proceedings.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Evans. In the background I
    got on this, there is a complex series of filings, court
    proceedings, injunctions, letters, injunctions, letters, and it
    is unclear to me exactly how this all played out. But photo ID
    voting practices are of sort of pressing concern to many of us,
    particularly if part of the role of an ambassador is to
    represent the proper functioning of democracy.
        I also just want to add to the previous conversation with
    Mr. Goldstein. In a visit to Eastern Europe I think a year ago
    in August to Estonia, to Ukraine, and to the Czech Republic
    where Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty are headquartered, it
    was strongly impressed on me just how important these programs
    are, just how important the programming and the outreach and
    the education is. And I urge you to work on that, and I think
    Senator Portman made an important point about the combination
    of traditional media like radio and digital media are
    continuing to make sure that we are doing the best we can in
    being fairly cutting-edge.
        Ms. Gonzales, if I might just quickly. Lesotho has
    benefited more from AGOA than almost any African country. Yet,
    they have got some significant unresolved human rights
    challenges and governance and security sector challenges. How
    do you see weighing those two going forward, and do you think
    there should be consequences for Lesotho in terms of their AGOA
    eligibility if they do not continue to make progress in human
    rights and in security sector reforms?
        Ms. Gonzales. Thank you for that question, Senator Coons.
        I think the United States--we have been very engaged with
    the Government of Lesotho concerning continued AGOA
    eligibility. As you noted, human rights is a problem in
    Lesotho. There is impunity, and there have been problematic
    soldiers. And so the security sector needs reform. Specifically
    there needs to be absolute civilian control of the military.
        I think the United States has been very effective in
    engaging the Government of Lesotho with respect to continued
    AGOA eligibility, as well as consideration of a second MCC
    compact. We had our first MCC compact from 2008 to 2013.
    Lesotho was being considered for planning for a second MCC
    compact, and then that was put on hold. And we have made it
    very clear that for Lesotho to be eligible for a second MCC
    compact, it needs to have security sector, constitutional, and
    parliamentary reforms. And in addition to that, it needs to
    show that it will be able to sustain its first MCC compact. So
    I think that we have been very effective in leveraging our
    programs and pushing for democratic institutions and rule of
    law, and if I were confirmed, I would continue that message.
    Thank you.
        Senator Coons. I believe in the power of MCC and, in
    particular, the desire of many countries to have a shot at a
    second compact. I have seen it work to motivate countries to
    make changes. So I look forward to hearing about your progress
    in that regard.
        If I might, with the indulgence of the chair. Mr. Lawler,
    just help me understand what your admirable long service for
    the U.S. Navy and National Security Council will do to provide
    you with the skills and preparation necessary for a role that
    may at times be delicate and difficult and involves a lot of
    juggling and managing sometimes a very wide and disparate
    community here.
        Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Senator, for the question. It is
    very important.
        Over my career of almost 30 years now, I have been working
    within the government, support to senior members of the
    military and our government. Most importantly, just working
    backwards during this administration since January, working
    with the President's schedule with foreign leaders--I am sorry.
    I am losing my train of thought.
        Senator Coons. I am tempted to ask questions about the
    upcoming Asia trip, but I am not. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Lawler. You know, it is hard to articulate going back
    really almost 30 years of qualifications. Protocol has been my
    job, kind of my bread and butter. 5 years prior to this joining
    the administration on the National Security Council in January,
    I did protocol at the U.S. Cyber Command, foreign engagements
    once or twice a week. I have lots of experience. I have lived
    abroad for 6 years, traveled the world, very few places I have
    not been.
        And one of the things with protocol is obviously to do no
    harm. Going into this, one of my goals right off the bat is to
    just ensure that--put a good face and set the stage for
    diplomacy for the President.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Lawler.
        Let me thank, if I might, Grace and Conor who I know is not
    here, but anyway, thank you.
        And to Ms. Johnson, to your parents and brother.
        To Mr. Evans, to Linda who I know is not with you but is
    supporting you.
        To Estella, Happy Birthday, and thank you for 30 years of
    teaching and to your late father for his dedication and service
    to our Nation.
        And, Mr. Goldstein, wonderful to have Bill with us, to have
    your husband present and the support of your family.
        Thank you to all five of our nominees today. I really
    appreciate your testimony.
        Senator Portman. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. I wanted to pick up, Mr. Evans, on the
    comments that Senator Coons made about voting because I was in
    Armenia in 2003 as part of an observer mission to their
    parliamentary elections. And I noticed some improprieties in
    the voting, and when I raised that with the moderator at the
    polling place, what his response to me was, well, you have no
    reason to raise this with us because you could not get your
    voting right in Florida in the 2000 presidential election.
        So I think it is very important that we model good
    democratic procedures in our voting, that we denounce voter
    suppression efforts, and that we show the rest of the world a
    good model for voting. So I would just echo his comments about
    how important that is.
        I do want to ask you about your views on both NATO and the
    EU because having been in Europe a number of times since the
    new administration began, there is great consternation in parts
    of Europe about what our views continue to be on the
    transatlantic relationship, on the importance of NATO, on the
    EU, and how important it is to that transatlantic relationship.
        So can you tell me what your views are on the EU and NATO?
        Mr. Evans. Let me take them, if I can, one at a time.
        I do not think NATO has ever been more important in the
    history of the NATO to be candid. I think Russia poses a
    greater threat today than it has at any time probably since the
    Cuban missile crisis. Its techniques and methods are much more
    aggressive, much more cyber-oriented, much more technologically
    oriented, but it means that it is all the more important the
    NATO nations all come together and have a united defense
    because if there is a crack, that is where they penetrate. And
    so as far as NATO goes and, as you know, Luxembourg is a valued
    member of NATO.
        Now, in fairness, we have to work a little bit on their
    contribution. They do not meet the Wales commitment of 2
    percent. They are down at .48 or .46 percent with a commitment
    to go to .6 percent by 2024. But I have made a pretty decent
    living out of getting more money out of people than they wanted
    to give. So I am hoping that I can put those skill sets to work
    to get not only Luxembourg but other countries up to their
    commitment and the Wales commitment.
        As far as the European Union, I think it is right now in a
    state of transformation as far as what we can tell. Our firm
    has 25 offices in 17 European nations. We come together once a
    year, and we can get firsthand reports on what is happening in
    the EU. Obviously, Brexit was a major blow or impact to the EU.
    There are other countries that have some movement about whether
    or not the EU is sustainable long-term. But I think as a valued
    trading partner, it is enormously beneficial to the United
    States. It is much easier to have a bilateral treaty with the
    EU as a single unit than it is to have bilateral agreements
    with each of the different European nations in the EU.
        But at the end of the day, in fairness I think the member
    nations of the EU are going to have to decide their future. I
    think they are grappling with some serious questions even now
    as they adapt to Great Britain's departure. It appears to me
    most experts agree it will take about 2 to 3 years before we
    see those sorted out.
        Senator Shaheen. Brexit certainly seems to be creating as
    many problems for Britain as it does for the EU at this point.
        But given what you said and the fragility of the EU and the
    challenges that they are facing, how important is it for us to
    reaffirm our commitment to the importance of the security of
    Europe and the EU?
        Mr. Evans. Absolutely critically important because it makes
    them vulnerable. Our enemies take advantage when we are
    divided. That is the most vulnerable point that we have. And so
    unity is most important whenever you are facing such aggressive
    adversaries, overt aggression, making no secret of their plans.
    That is the moment where we have to come together because if we
    do not, we just render ourselves vulnerable to an enemy who is
    intent on defeating us.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Ms. Johnson, Senator Coons and Ms. Gonzales just talked
    about the Millennium Challenge Corporation and how important it
    has been. It concluded in Namibia in 2014. Can you talk about
    some of the successes that resulted in Namibia from its
    participation in MCC?
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Senator, and certainly.
        The compact was very successful in Namibia, in fact, so
    successful they worked themselves out of a job and were not
    eligible for a second compact because they reached upper middle
    income status. There were a lot of successes in the areas of
    tourism, infrastructure, and agriculture.
        But Namibia does still face economic challenges. They have
    a very high unemployment rate, 34 percent, probably 50 percent
    for people under 35. And you have got a population that is very
    young. 57 percent are under the age of 25. A huge income
    disparity. My understanding is that the government of Namibia
    is working very hard on some of those problems and that they
    are really trying to foster inclusive growth looking at how to
    incentivize manufacturing, entrepreneurship, improve the
    business climate further to attract trade and investment. So
    while it is true that the international assistance to Namibia
    is going down, it is now the Government of Namibia's
    responsibility to continue their economic growth.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Portman. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
        So, first, I appreciate the testimony today and all of you
    have had a chance to answer questions. Mr. Lawler was left out
    earlier. I am glad that Senator Coons asked him a little bit
    about his background and what he is going to do. I will say,
    Mr. Lawler, you get high marks from the professional career
    folks I have talked to at NSC and at the White House, but also
    the political people for your professionalism and your
    integrity. You are going to need it. This is a really important
    job.
        And one aspect of your job that we have not talked about
    today I would like your comments on is how you deal with the
    diplomatic missions here in this country. And my understanding
    is, having known some of your predecessors, that that is an
    important part of your job is to be mindful of the other
    diplomatic missions. And we have had some huge issues just in
    the last year, expelling Cuban diplomats most recently,
    expelling Russian diplomats. Some of these diplomats we
    believed were engaged in inappropriate activities. Some of it
    was in response, as I understand it, to broader geopolitical
    problems.
        But my question to you would be, when tensions with the
    United States and these foreign countries develop and prompt us
    to do these expulsions or close diplomatic facilities, what
    role does your office have in that, and how do you feel about
    that?
        Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Senator. That is obviously a very
    important issue not just for the State Department, but also for
    the Nation.
        Again, if confirmed, my main role in this is to be the
    President's liaison with the diplomatic corps in Washington,
    D.C. So I will deal directly with the chiefs of mission, the
    deputy chiefs of mission with any issues that they have that
    arise or any allegations that arise.
        But really I would just like to put maybe a little bit of a
    positive spin on this question. I very much look forward to
    this aspect of the job. Dealing with the President and
    accompanying him and introducing him is a great honor.
        But another big, large portion of this job is actually
    meeting with these ambassadors as they arrive, as they get
    credentialed, taking them to the White House and building
    relationships with them. There are programs right now in the
    State Department. One of them is Experience America, which when
    I first read about it, I was a little suspicious at the cost,
    but it is a wonderful, wonderful program where we take the
    diplomatic corps in Washington, spread them out into the United
    States, get them out of the Washington, D.C. bubble, meet
    constituents, and build exchanges.
        So I think to answer your question, really it is the
    relationship building on the front end and meeting with all of
    these ambassadors and building relationships so when there are
    troubles, they can be candid and we will have a better
    relationship.
        Senator Portman. Well, again, thank you for your
    willingness to take on this new role. And I think it is a
    logical evolution given your background in protocol in your 30-
    year career in the U.S. Navy.
        Ms. Johnson, Namibia. Senator Kaine asked you about human
    trafficking and how to get Namibia up to a tier 1 country. It
    is an issue that I have strong interest in but, more
    importantly, so does this entire Senate and this committee. And
    so we want to encourage you to work with them, again, to
    provide more of a model. The MCC program and the contract I
    think was effective, but we still have not made the progress we
    need to make on human trafficking.
        But on wildlife trafficking, we also have an issue in
    Namibia, and it is not only in Namibia. It is, unfortunately,
    pervasive in many countries in Africa. It not only has
    devastating impacts on wildlife and ecotourism in particular
    but also helps to fund terrorist activities. And that link has
    been confirmed more probably in the last decade than prior to
    that and it continues to be a problem.
        I guess my question is, do you have a commitment to this
    conservation program that Namibia has attempted to implement?
    There is legislation that Senator Coons actually drafted. He is
    the author of the End Wildlife Trafficking Act. I was one of
    his cosponsors, and it encourages you to provide support,
    particularly with community conservation efforts. So can you
    talk a little about that?
        Senator Isakson's question about economic development was
    focused on AGOA, and you talked about the importance of beef
    exports and that is important. But I would assume--and you tell
    us--that ecotourism is even a bigger part of the economy in
    Namibia and that wildlife conservation is key to keeping that
    ecotourism healthy.
        Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Senator.
        I actually have a very strong commitment to conservation,
    environmental protection coming from Washington State. It is
    very close to my heart.
        The Namibians actually brag about having enshrined
    environmental protection in their constitution. And they have
    been a model for sub-Saharan Africa in their communal
    conservancies. They have over 80 of them now, and that is a
    strong partnership between the Government of Namibia, local
    communities, NGOs, and the United States Government that
    actually provides some income for local communities from
    ecotourism and sport hunting.
        But Namibia does still have challenges. There was a spike
    in rhino poaching last year. Two-thirds of the world's black
    rhinos are located in Namibia. I think there were 60 poached
    last year. It is down to 27 so far this year. They also have
    trouble with illicit wildlife trafficking networks, which are
    becoming increasingly sophisticated, as you alluded to.
        So that is why we do continue to put some resources into
    grants with international NGOs. We are working with the
    Namibian Government on their draft national strategy to combat
    wildlife trafficking and also providing some training and
    technical assistance for ministry of environment and tourism
    park wardens and for customs officials. And we are also going
    to be working with them on the judicial side to ensure
    successful prosecutions.
        I think one of the really good signs is a single animal is
    poached in Namibia and it is front-page news. The Namibians
    know how important it is for them to protect this resource.
        So I definitely commitment to you that, if confirmed, I
    will continue to implement the intent of the End Wildlife
    Trafficking Act, which has really helped us, to strengthen our
    international partnerships and cooperation with countries to
    combat wildlife trafficking and poaching.
        Senator Portman. Well, I thank you for that answer, and I
    appreciate your commitment.
        Let me ask you about a specific program. As you know,
    Namibia is engaged in a regional effort as well with other
    countries, Botswana, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and some
    conservation organizations to conserve the Okavango River
    delta, which is such a critical habitat for endangered species
    and apparently an amazingly beautiful area and critical to
    ecotourism in the region.
        We have now invested as the U.S. Government, as I
    understand it, $40 million to help conserve that delta through
    watershed management programs and resource management programs.
        I assume you are aware of that program, and if confirmed,
    will you commit to working with Namibia to engage deeply in
    this Okavango River Basin project?
        Ms. Johnson. Absolutely, Senator. I actually had the
    fortune to visit the Okavango Delta when I served in South
    Africa. It is a beautiful area, and you have my full commitment
    to that effort.
        Senator Portman. Well, again, thank you all for being here.
    We appreciate all five of you being willing to serve. A few of
    you have done this for a long time in your career in the
    Foreign Service and in the military and a couple of you are
    coming out of the private sector. I had the opportunity at one
    point to serve as U.S. Trade Representative, and people asked
    me what was it like. I said just an amazing honor to represent
    our great country around the world and that is what each of you
    will be doing in your own ways.
        We will have differences here in this committee on policy
    issues, but we have no differences in terms of thanking you for
    your willingness to serve. And once you are confirmed--and I
    believe you will be based on the answers you gave today--we
    want to be able to support you and your colleagues to best
    represent the United States of America throughout the world.
    Thank you.
        This hearing is now adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
       Submitted to Irwin Steven Goldstein by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As a communications professional, I have worked
    consistently to promote the values of transparency and openness
    reflected in the First Amendment, which is fundamental to our
    democracy. Working at Dow Jones, the publisher of The Wall Street
    Journal, I was a strong advocate for press freedom in the United States
    and around the world. I was deeply involved in efforts to free reporter
    Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in Pakistan,
    and worked with colleagues in Pakistan and the Middle East to press for
    the protection of Mr. Pearl's rights both as an individual and as a
    journalist.
        I believe that all people are entitled to human rights and,
    throughout my career, have worked to ensure that everyone is treated
    equally. I put my commitment to equality into practice, and it is core
    to how I do my job.

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

        Answer. As an executive and manager, I have always sought to create
    a diverse workplace and provide opportunities for all staff members to
    take on additional responsibilities and advance their careers. I have
    tried to set an example by being open, fair, and encouraging, so others
    would feel they were being supported. I pledge to continue leading in
    this manner at the Department of State, should I be confirmed.

        Question 3. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors who you oversee as Under Secretary of State for Public
    Diplomacy are fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. The Secretary of State has called for more diversity within
    the Department of State's ranks, and I fully support this drive and
    pledge to sustain and promote it. I expect any supervisor reporting to
    me to create an environment that is fair and equal to people of diverse
    backgrounds and perspectives. If confirmed, I look forward to affirming
    my commitment to diversity and how we, as a team, live these values in
    how we manage. I will make clear by my own actions and conduct that
    fostering a diverse and inclusive work environment must be a top
    priority for supervisors and staff alike at all levels of the
    Department.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. No.

        Question 7. Do you acknowledge that the Russian Government carried
    out an influence and disinformation campaign aimed at the 2016 U.S.
    presidential election? Do you acknowledge that the Russian Government
    subsequently has carried out similar efforts to influence elections in
    Western Europe?

        Answer. Yes. U.S. intelligence community assessments make clear
    that the Russian Government undertook an influence and disinformation
    campaign aimed at the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Russia uses
    similar tactics to attempt to influence elections worldwide.

        Question 8. If confirmed, do you commit to working to address
    Russian influence and disinformation campaigns through the full
    exercise of the authorities of the Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy
    and Public Affairs, including the work of the Global Engagement Center
    (GEC), International Information Programs (IIP), and Bureau of Public
    Affairs (PA)?

        Answer. Yes. Russia is engaged in a campaign to undermine core
    Western institutions and weaken faith in the democratic and free-market
    system. This campaign is aggressive and coordinated. If confirmed,
    countering these disinformation activities would be a priority for me,
    leveraging all of the capabilities under my authority, including the
    Global Engagement Center, the Bureau of International Information
    Programs, and the Bureau of Public Affairs.

        Question 9. The mandate for the Global Engagement Center was
    altered by statute last year to also include efforts to counter foreign
    state propaganda against the United States.

       If confirmed, do you commit to fully implement congressional intent
            reflected in legislation related to the Global Engagement
            Center?

        Anawer. Yes.

        Question 10. If confirmed, what specific steps will you take to
    ensure that the GEC fulfill its statutory mandate and which countries
    will you prioritize as part of that effort?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with colleagues at the
    Department of State and the interagency community so that the GEC can
    fulfill its mandate through the use of technology and an ever-growing
    network of on-the-ground, counter-messaging partners to conduct its
    counterterrorism mission. Priority nations for this effort include
    Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.

        Question 11. If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that
    the GEC full responds to the challenges posed by Russian disinformation
    and influence campaigns?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the GEC and colleagues
    elsewhere to counter Russian disinformation by, in part, strengthening
    coordination of U.S. Government efforts in specific sub-regions;
    enhancing the capacity of local actors to build resiliency to
    disinformation in their communities; and convening anti-disinformation
    practitioners, journalists, and other influencers to exchange best
    practices, build networks, and generate support for U.S. efforts
    against disinformation.

        Question 12. If confirmed, how do you plan on using the GEC and our
    Embassies to reach a larger and/or targeted audience abroad that
    includes cultural, religious, and country-specific considerations in
    achieving our CT/CVE goals?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would promote the adoption by the
    Department of private-sector best practices in the use of information
    technology. This would include active and targeted use of the full
    range of social media platforms, including country- and region-specific
    platforms and advertising where appropriate, as well as online data
    analytics tools to measure how content is received by certain
    audiences, to help ensure the effectiveness of U.S. messaging abroad.
    Our Embassies are and will continue be a valuable part of our efforts
    to stay on top of how local and regional audiences obtain and consume
    information.

        Question 13. If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring that the State
    Department accepts the full amount of funding transfers from the
    Defense Department for the Global Engagement Center to conduct
    activities to address Russian disinformation?

        Answer. I understand that the Department very much appreciates the
    importance Congress places on combatting disinformation. Further, I
    understand that Secretary Tillerson has requested $40 million in
    funding from the Department of Defense to counter state-sponsored
    disinformation from Russia and other nations, commensurate with the
    threat each poses. If confirmed, I will carefully evaluate GEC
    activities to ensure the funds are being used effectively.

        Question 14. The Secretary of State belatedly accepted $40 Million
    in DOD funds that was authorized for transfer to the use of the GEC. If
    confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure the effective use of
    these funds to advance the GEC's activities? Are there activities that
    could have been undertaken, but won't be, given that the Secretary
    accepted less than the full amount of DOD funds that was authorized for
    transfer?

        Answer. I understand that the Department of State is working with
    the Department of Defense (DoD) to transfer funds for the GEC's
    mission, as authorized by the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization
    Act. Secretary Tillerson's request of $40 million in DoD funds came
    after a review process designed to ensure the funding would be used as
    effectively as possible. Through that process, the Department
    determined that the GEC could reasonably obligate, monitor, and
    evaluate $40 million in counter-disinformation programming this fiscal
    year. If confirmed, I will carefully evaluate GEC activities to ensure
    the funds are being used effectively.

        Question 15. If confirmed, do you commit to brief this committee 60
    days after taking office on the administration's strategy to address
    Russian disinformation in Europe and around the globe?

        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to brief
    your committee on the Department of State's efforts to address Russian
    disinformation in Europe and around the globe.

        Question 16. What do you think the biggest challenge to countering
    disinformation from foreign state actors is in the United States?

        Answer. I believe the biggest challenge is determining clearly and
    without doubt the origination of the disinformation, and in responding,
    we must be careful not to sacrifice our own democratic values. The
    United States should always present an accurate portrayal of America,
    its citizens, and our role in the world. We improve the prospects for
    success in countering disinformation when we pursue solutions that
    enhance our own credibility.

        Question 17. You testified about the importance of working with
    technology companies to counter disinformation, particularly on social
    media. Based on what we currently know about how state actors used
    social media to try to influence public opinion and sow discord, if
    confirmed, how will you engage internet and social media companies to
    address the Russian Government's use of their platforms for
    disinformation and influence campaigns? What specific steps would you
    recommend that the technology companies take to prevent further
    attempts by the Russian Government to inappropriately influence the
    American electorate? What steps that technology companies have taken
    thus far do you applaud, and what else do you think they should do?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would meet with key technology companies as
    soon as possible to increase their collaboration with the Department.
    Engaging with the technology sector, particularly internet and social
    media companies, is critical to addressing disinformation campaigns
    directed by foreign nations. While I applaud the willingness of
    technology companies to appear before Congress and increase their
    transparency with respect to election-related advertising and
    communications, no doubt more needs to be done. I look forward, if
    confirmed, to consulting with colleagues at the Department, with
    Congress, and others to better ensure foreign government disinformation
    efforts, including those aimed at the American electorate, are
    effectively countered. Solving this is a priority.

        Question 18. As you know, five American soldiers have been killed
    in Africa this year in countries battling terrorism and violent
    extremism. The Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
    leads America's public diplomacy outreach, which includes messaging to
    counter terrorism and violent extremism. If confirmed, what specific
    messaging strategy would you seek to advance for Somalia and Niger to
    counter terrorism and violent extremism? What steps would you take to
    strengthen such messaging?

        Answer. I understand that the Department of State already engages
    in some regional counterterrorism messaging in Africa, including in the
    Somali language. If confirmed, I would consult with colleagues at the
    Department to understand better what is currently being done and to
    identify other opportunities to use messaging to counter violent
    extremism in Somalia and Niger.

        Question 19. Part of the mission of the Under Secretary for Public
    Diplomacy and Public Affairs is expanding and strengthening the
    relationship between the people and Government of the United States and
    citizens of the rest of the world. How will you strengthen the
    relationship between Africa and the United States in the face of the
    administration's proposal to slash funding for one of America's
    signature programs for Africa-PEPFAR-which has heretofore enjoyed
    bipartisan support?

        Answer. The relationship between Africa and the United States is of
    vital importance. If confirmed, I will help lead the U.S. Government's
    efforts to strengthen ties between the United States and foreign
    publics in Africa and around the world. I am a strong proponent of
    medical, cultural, and education diplomacy, such as the Young African
    Leaders Initiative (YALI) and PEPFAR, and I plan to build on what is
    currently being done, within the resources that are allocated by
    Congress. Public Diplomacy tools are a valuable means of expanding
    relationships, and I commit to looking into the effectiveness of these
    tools and to supporting those that demonstrate success.

        Question 20. What role should the State Department play through its
    public communications and public diplomacy initiatives to promote
    democratic values and human rights?

        Answer. Our core American values are Freedom, Democracy, and
    Equality. We need to support and encourage a free press, freedom of
    religion, and the right to dissent. We aspire to be an example to the
    world. Our role, as we tell America's stories, is to inspire other
    countries to follow our lead. American values are the principles that
    have enabled us to be a beacon to the world, and Public Diplomacy is
    one of the best tools our government has for communicating those values
    directly to people overseas.

        Question 21. Under previous Republican and Democratic
    administrations, the State Department spokesperson held a daily press
    briefing, a practice that has been discontinued in 2017. How often do
    you think the State Department spokesperson should hold press
    briefings?

        Answer. I am a firm believer in more, rather than less,
    communication. For many years, the Department of State's press briefing
    has been an important tool for explaining U.S. foreign policy and
    national security interests to American citizens and foreign audiences.
    If confirmed, I plan to conduct a review of the Department's media
    practices, including press briefings, and provide recommendations on a
    way forward to the Secretary.

        Question 22. The public-both in the United States and across the
    globe-look to the spokespeople for the State Department to lay out
    diplomatic priorities, foreign policy goals, and explain the rationale
    for the actions the United States takes. How important do you think it
    is for an agency like the State Department, whose critical work affects
    people around the world, to be transparent and forthcoming in
    explaining U.S. foreign policy and diplomacy? How will you seek to
    ensure that the Department remains committed to transparency in
    explaining its actions to the American public and the world?

        Answer. It is important for the Department of State to be
    transparent and forthcoming in explaining U.S. foreign policy and our
    diplomatic efforts. If confirmed, I will strive to be as transparent as
    possible in carrying out my duties. The importance we place on
    transparency and freedom of expression--core American values--can serve
    as a model for the world, and our own communications should reflect
    that.

        Question 23. If confirmed, how will you work to broaden State
    Department public affairs efforts to ensure that they reach foreign
    audiences on the platforms where they most frequently consume news and
    information?

        Answer. We need to speak to people using the platforms on which
    they listen, and that includes heavy use of social media. The majority
    of people in Asia and Africa are under the age of 30, and young people
    consume news far differently than previous generations did. The State
    Department already uses a wide range of analytical tools to evaluate
    audience preferences and more effectively deliver U.S. messaging. If
    confirmed, I will seek out opportunities to broaden these efforts.

        Question 24. In your testimony, you talked about the importance of
    capitalizing on social media platforms to communicate to a broad
    audience. You have significant corporate communication experience;
    however, the audience the State Department seeks to reach is comprised
    of a multitude of very diverse audiences across the globe. What
    specific experience do you have in developing and launching digital and
    social media campaigns that have effectively targeted and reached a
    broad audience?

        Answer. When I led communications at TIAA-CREF, we were industry
    leaders in using social media to attract new customers and respond to
    the needs of a diverse base of existing customers. Because the
    financial services industry is highly regulated, we had to calibrate
    carefully our social media messaging. I understand how important it is
    to ensure that messages are communicated in ways that resonate with
    diverse audiences. I also have worked with a start-up technology
    company that enabled me to expand my understanding of communications
    technology and algorithms. If confirmed, I look forward to learning
    more about the unique audience considerations at the Department of
    State and how I, as Under Secretary, can help the career Public
    Diplomacy practitioners better reach these groups.

        Question 25. What more can the State Department do to improve its
    image, and public perception of the U.S. abroad, especially in
    countries where public opinion of the United States or U.S. foreign
    policy has declined in the past year?

        Answer. The United States has a great story to tell. We do more to
    promote international security and economic development than any other
    country in the world. There is a demand for U.S. technology, education,
    entertainment, and tourism. This presents an opportunity for the
    Department of State to increase support abroad for U.S. policy
    priorities.
        If confirmed, I would identify those countries where we need to
    enhance public perception of the United States and determine what we
    can do to improve public opinion. Strategies to consider include
    strengthening Department messaging on the scope of U.S. development and
    security support, increasing promotion of high-demand programs like
    U.S. education, and ensuring our diplomats abroad have timely,
    accurate, and compelling policy guidance for use with local audiences.
    We need to gain trust and respect with foreign publics by reaching
    people where they listen using clear language that they can understand.

        Question 26. As the Department continues to engage in a
    reorganization effort, many senior leadership posts remain vacant, and
    embassies are unable to fill posts while the hiring freeze remains in
    effect. This has caused some of our foreign partners to question our
    commitment to diplomacy and to continue to serve as a leader on the
    global stage. For instance, at the U.N. General Assembly earlier this
    year, the significant reduction of State Department senior officials in
    attendance adversely affected our ability to fully engage with our
    counterparts. If confirmed, what can you do, and what will you commit
    to doing to ensure that our foreign allies retain their confidence in
    our commitment to building relationships and remaining engaged in
    foreign diplomacy?

        Answer. Secretary Tillerson has made it clear that the Department
    of State is committed to retaining America's leadership role in the
    world, while pursuing greater operational efficiencies. He has
    confidence, as do I, that the highly skilled and knowledgeable people
    of the Department can deliver the value that the American people
    deserve. They will get the job done, and the United States will
    continue to lead. The redesign effort aims to help accomplish this
    goal.
        Public Diplomacy has an important role to play in building
    relationships and engaging foreign publics. If confirmed, I commit to
    fully supporting the efforts of the Department's Public Diplomacy
    practitioners around the world and to strengthening and enhancing the
    tools at their disposal.

        Question 27. Government corruption and human rights abuses are
    drivers of radicalization and bolster the message of violent
    extremists. How will you use the resources of your Under Secretariat to
    address corrupt and abusive governments to counter violent extremism?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the bureaus under my
    authority, with other bureaus in the Department of State, and across
    the interagency to ensure that the tools of Public Diplomacy are fully
    leveraged to help address the causes of violent extremism, including
    government corruption and human rights abuses.

        Question 28. Greater outreach to youth audiences is something that
    you shared as a priority in your hearing. If confirmed, how do you plan
    on using both our Public Diplomacy resources in Washington and in our
    Embassies to reach these audiences and to ensure that these activities
    and outreach consider gender equities to reach an equal number of women
    and girls?

        Answer. I believe that all Public Diplomacy programs should
    consider gender equity and take steps to help women and girls overcome
    the barriers they face in accessing information in certain areas of the
    world. For example, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
    seeks to provide educational opportunity through a wide range of
    education programs to both girls and boys in nations where schooling is
    still seen as a privilege, not a right.

        Question 29. If confirmed, how will you leverage flagship public
    diplomacy tools such as the International Visitor Leadership Program,
    and academic programs such as Fulbright to advance U.S. values and
    goals abroad and ensure these programs continue to be funded to support
    our global priorities?

        Answer. I believe that international exchange programs are a vital
    part of Public Diplomacy efforts to advance U.S. values and goals
    abroad. If confirmed, I intend to review carefully the effectiveness
    and impact of the Department of State's exchange programs and ensure
    appropriate funding is assigned to those that provide the greatest
    value in support of global U.S. policy objectives.

        Question 30. It was reported in a recent Wall Street Journal
    article that several State Department managed J-1 visa exchange
    programs--including Summer Work Travel, Au Pair, Intern, Trainee, and
    Camp Counselor--are under review by the Department and White House as
    part of the President's Buy American, Hire American Executive Order.

       If confirmed, your job would be to oversee the Department of
            State's regulatory agenda and ensure the proper process is
            followed. As you may be aware, the Senate Appropriations
            Committee just approved a provision in the FY18 bill that
            requires, if the administration is considering any changes to
            the J-1 program, the full notice and comment of the
            Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and consulting with the
            committees of jurisdiction, including this committee, is
            followed. Do you commit to carrying out the full APA notice and
            comment process, as well as to consulting with relevant
            congressional committees?

        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to adhering fully to APA
    requirements and consulting with the relevant congressional committees
    regarding any proposed regulatory changes to J-1 exchange programs. My
    understanding is that the Department of State is not currently
    proposing reductions in the number of participants in private sector-
    managed J-1 programs--including Summer Work Travel, Au Pair, Intern,
    Trainee, and Camp Counselor--and that any rulemaking affecting these
    programs already goes through a process that involves a notice in the
    Federal Register and an opportunity for public comment. I also
    understand that the Department follows regular Congressional
    notification procedures regarding how any proposed regulatory
    modifications to J-1 exchange programs would affect the Public
    Diplomacy goals of, and the estimated economic impact on, the United
    States.

        Question 31. The State Department recently put forward a set of
    policy priorities, which include asserting U.S. leadership and
    influence, bolstering U.S. national security, and fostering economic
    growth for the American people. The State Department's diverse set of
    international exchange programs directly support all three of these
    goals. If confirmed, what steps will you take to expand and strengthen
    our international exchange programs? If confirmed, will you commit to
    continuing to support State Department exchange programs as key
    elements of America's diplomatic engagement with the world?

        Answer. I agree that international exchange programs are a vital
    part of U.S. Public Diplomacy efforts, and if confirmed, I commit to
    helping ensure that the Department of State continues to prioritize its
    engagement with emerging world leaders through these programs. I
    believe academic, cultural, and professional exchange programs should
    remain significant and effective tools for achieving foreign policy
    goals, building ties, and establishing networks among current, and
    future, American and foreign leaders and policymakers.

        Question 32. What impact would the funding cuts proposed by the
    administration have on the effectiveness and impact of State Department
    international exchange programs? Can you explain the rationale to cut
    and curtail our engagement with emerging leaders from around the world
    via exchange programs?

        Answer. I have not yet had the opportunity to review the budget for
    international exchange programs, but will do so if confirmed. Further,
    if confirmed I look forward to participating in the full FY 2019 budget
    process.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
         Submitted to Irwin Steven Goldstein by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1. The Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy is not the
    spokesperson or face of the department, but in charge of critical tools
    for promoting American values and interests to foreign audiences. The
    United States has always formulated and promoted policies rooted in our
    values as a democratic, free, and pluralistic society, inspiring people
    all over the world. How would you define American values? Do you
    believe it is in our interest to promote those values through Public
    Diplomacy initiatives?

        Answer. Our core American values are Freedom, Democracy, and
    Equality. We need to support and encourage a free press, freedom of
    religion, and the right to dissent. We aspire to be an example to the
    world. We will not impose our values on others, but our role, as we
    tell America's stories, is to inspire other countries to follow our
    lead. American values are the principles that have enabled us to be a
    beacon to the world, and Public Diplomacy is one of the best tools our
    government has for communicating those values directly to people
    overseas.

        Question 2. What Public Diplomacy programs that would be coming
    under your purview do you believe are the most successful? How do you
    define the success of Public Diplomacy programs?

        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to leading a comprehensive
    analysis of all our Public Diplomacy programs. In my conversations with
    Members of Congress and their staffs, it was impressed upon me how
    valuable programs such as the Young African Leaders Initiative are
    because they encourage entrepreneurship, good governance, and other
    American values among future leaders. The American Spaces program also
    appears to be successful and, if confirmed, I intend to examine the
    impact of security arrangements on attendance levels and ways to work
    with the private sector to increase access to the right audiences. In
    addition, the Fulbright and other academic exchange programs serve an
    important purpose.
        The success of Public Diplomacy programs should be based on their
    ability to advance key American interests, and adapt to the needs of
    foreign audiences in a constantly changing geopolitical landscape.

        Question 3. Do you believe exchange programs and information
    programs further our foreign policy objectives?

        Answer. Yes. Exchange programs send Americans abroad to study and
    conduct research, which expands our ability to compete in the global
    economy by developing the foreign-language, cross-cultural, and
    leadership skills U.S. employers seek. Educational exchange programs
    promote U.S. higher education as a favored destination of exceptional
    foreign students, who in turn contribute nearly $36 billion annually to
    our economy. International Visitor Leadership Programs connect future
    leaders with their U.S. counterparts, fostering long-term relationships
    that bolster effective diplomacy. These and other exchange and
    information programs seek to promote American values, enhance America's
    image, and strengthen support for U.S. policies, which increases our
    nation's ability to achieve its foreign policy goals.

        Question 4. Do you believe you will have the resources necessary to
    fully execute your responsibilities and programs?

        Answer. I do believe the administration's proposed budget provides
    the resources necessary to carry out the Public Diplomacy programs and
    activities most important to our nation's interests. If confirmed, I
    will work to ensure that our Public Diplomacy responsibilities are
    carried out effectively and efficiently.
        Question 5. As you pointed out during your hearing, the
    Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) plays an important role in
    fighting disinformation and promoting U.S. interests overseas, but the
    FY 2018 budget request represents a $63.1 million decrease or 8.4
    percent reduction from the prior year. How do you believe this will
    impact our ability to advance our security interests, including
    countering Russian misinformation and violent extremism?

        Answer. While the administration's FY 2018 budget request includes
    a reduction in BBG's funding compared to FY 2017 enacted levels, the
    request envisions only small adjustments in funding for efforts to
    counter Russian misinformation and violent extremism. For instance,
    funding would continue for Current Time, BBG's 24/7 channel launched
    this year in Russian that broadcasts to former Soviet states and
    Russian-speaking populations. The Middle East Broadcasting Network
    (MBN), responsible for a wide range of programming in Arabic to counter
    violent extremism, is slated for a relatively modest reduction ($5.3
    million) from the FY 2017 level. I do not expect the request would
    substantially degrade the BBG's ability to combat Russian
    disinformation and violent extremism.
        As the administration works with Congress to establish final FY
    2018 funding levels for the BBG, I would certainly be mindful of the
    BBG's critical mission in advancing American security interests,
    including countering Russian misinformation and violent extremism.

        Question 6. How do you define your role and responsibilities in
    relation to the BBG?

        Answer. The Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and
    Public Affairs represents the Secretary of State on the Broadcasting
    Board of Governors and provides foreign policy guidance to help the BBG
    prioritize its activities and language services and to allocate
    resources accordingly. The Under Secretary also coordinates with the
    BBG to develop a comprehensive and coherent strategy--and long-term,
    measurable objectives--for the use of Public Diplomacy resources.
        I would note that neither the Under Secretary nor the Board are
    involved in making editorial decisions for the BBG networks. There is a
    ``firewall'' established by the U.S. International Broadcasting Act
    that prohibits interference with the objective, independent reporting
    of news by BBG journalists, thereby safeguarding the ability of BBG
    journalists to develop content that reflects the highest professional
    standards of journalism. The Under Secretary does, however, work with
    the BBG to develop appropriately identified editorials that accurately
    present the views of the U.S. Government.

        Question 7. The BBG budget also funds the Office of Cuba
    Broadcasting (OCB), which has been instrumental in combatting the
    repressive Castro regime, but the FY 2018 OCB request is $4.5 million
    below last year. How will this reduction affect our signature
    programming through Radio and TV Mart!? As Under Secretary for Public
    Diplomacy and Public Affairs, how will you ensure that we continue to
    offer the people of Cuba uncensored information and support despite
    these reductions?

        Answer. I appreciate your interest in the role that the Office of
    Cuba Broadcasting has played vis-a-vis the Cuban regime. I share your
    view that the goals of Radio and TV Marti should continue to provide
    uncensored information to a country lacking in the free-flow of
    information. As the Secretary of State's representative on the
    Broadcasting Board of Governors, if confirmed, I would evaluate
    potential budget reductions and trade-offs in light of this goal.

        Question 8. I was pleased to hear you state in your hearing that
    the State Department has finally started to allocate funding for the
    Global Engagement Center and requested a transfer from the Pentagon for
    the remaining funds. How will you ensure that this center funded by
    Congress to counter Russian disinformation and violent extremism is
    adequately resourced and supported?

        Answer. My understanding is that the Department of State is pleased
    to be working with the Department of Defense (DoD) to effect a transfer
    of funds to the Global Engagement Center (GEC), as authorized by the FY
    2017 National Defense Authorization Act. Proposed activities to be
    funded by the transfer include coordinating U.S. Government efforts in
    specific sub-regions; enhancing the capacity of local actors to build
    resilience against disinformation; and convening anti-disinformation
    practitioners, journalists, and other influencers to exchange best
    practices, build networks, and generate support for U.S. efforts
    against disinformation. Additionally, I understand that the GEC also
    leverages staff detailed from across the interagency--including from
    the intelligence community, DoD, the U.S. Agency for International
    Development, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Broadcasting
    Board of Governors, as well as from within the Department of State--to
    coordinate U.S. Government messaging efforts to counter disinformation
    and ensure they are streamlined and not duplicative. If confirmed, I
    would work closely with leadership within the Department of State, the
    interagency, and the administration to ensure the GEC has the human,
    budgetary, and technological resources needed to accomplish its mission
    effectively and efficiently.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
      Submitted to Irwin Steven Goldstein by Senator Christopher A. Coons

        Question 1. I understand that the administration is reviewing the
    J-1 visa category in relation to implementing the President's Executive
    Order on Buy American, Hire American. What role would you play in
    reviewing draft regulations or policy guidance that could alter J-1
    programs?

        Answer. I intend to review carefully any suggested changes to J-
    visa regulations and policy guidance, which currently facilitate Public
    Diplomacy engagement with approximately 300,000 participants from 200
    countries and territories annually. J visas are for educational and
    cultural exchange programs, not work programs. Additionally, private
    sector-managed exchange programs are funded primarily through fees paid
    by participants, at virtually no cost to the U.S. Government. My
    understanding is that existing regulations prohibit J-visa programs
    with a work component from displacing American workers and that the
    Department of State is not currently proposing reductions in the number
    of participants in these programs.

        Question 2. I led an amendment to the Senate's FY 2018 State,
    Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations bill that would
    require any changes to the Exchange Visitor Program to go through
    consultation with Congress and a formal rulemaking process. If
    confirmed, do you commit to adhering to a transparent process that
    includes meaningful input from the stakeholder community if
    modifications to the Exchange Visitor Program are considered?

        Answer. Yes. I want meaningful input from the stakeholder community
    and will make any decisions on the Exchange Visitor Program in a fully
    transparent manner.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
        Submitted to Irwin Steven Goldstein by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. What is your response to calls for U.S. Public
    Diplomacy to adopt more propagandistic approaches to communicating with
    foreign publics, in order to more effectively combat disinformation
    about the United States and its policies?

        Answer. I do not support a propagandistic approach to communicating
    with foreign publics. The United States needs to present an accurate
    portrayal of America, its citizens, and our role in the world using the
    diverse array of Public Diplomacy tools, including social media
    platforms like Facebook and Twitter. By focusing on American values
    such as transparency, accountability through elections, and rule of
    law, we increase our credibility and improve prospects for success in
    countering disinformation.

        Question 2. How can U.S. Public Diplomacy effectively reach publics
    deluged by a ``firehose'' of opposing views and disinformation from a
    multitude of sources?

        Answer. To reach publics deluged by opposing views and
    disinformation effectively, U.S. Public Diplomacy must speak with one
    voice where people listen. This effort should use all forms of
    communication including, but not limited to, social media, BBG networks
    and programs such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Current Time,
    and any other vehicle that allows America to accurately show that its
    core values of democracy, equality, and freedom underpin all that it
    does. We also need to help enhance the capacity of local actors and
    other credible voices to expose false narratives and inoculate
    communities against disinformation

        Question 3. Does U.S. Public Diplomacy risk becoming too reactive,
    trapped in a perpetual cycle of defensive explanation?

        Answer. Yes, I do believe that U.S. Public Diplomacy risks becoming
    too reactive. With the stakes as high as they are, we cannot afford to
    be playing defense all the time. We must have a strategy to actively
    communicate our message and anticipate future challenges, so that the
    ground is well seeded with the truth before our opponents attempt to
    spread their misinformation.

        Question 4. How can U.S. Public Diplomacy best capture the
    attention and trust of foreign publics in a way that durably diminishes
    their susceptibility to untruthful propaganda?

        Answer. U.S. Public Diplomacy practitioners around the globe
    actively work to counter disinformation, debunk myths, and reassure
    allies. There is an emphasis on improving media literacy, expanding
    civil society capacity, and digital diplomacy outreach, but there is
    much more that can be done. I plan to look at all available research,
    meet frequently with tech companies, and develop clear and concise
    messages designed to diminish susceptibility to untruthful propaganda.
    The average age in many countries is under 30. We must reach them where
    they listen, and that is what I plan to do if confirmed.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Irwin Steven Goldstein by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. Do you believe that our partners have the will and the
    capability to counter efforts by ISIS, its sympathizers, or any follow-
    on organization that relies on spreading its extremist messages?

        Answer. My understanding is that the Department of State is
    expanding its counter-terrorism messaging efforts through a growing
    network of foreign government and non-governmental partners, as people
    and groups closest to the battlefield of narratives are often the most
    credible voices in countering terrorist propaganda. Many of these
    groups already have the ability to counter terrorist propaganda, but
    other groups need more capacity.
        The Department's Global Engagement Center (GEC) currently works
    with messaging centers in the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom,
    Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, and Djibouti, among other locations. These
    messaging centers harness the creativity, expertise, and unique
    credibility of local actors to generate positive content that
    effectively challenges the falsehoods of ISIS and other international
    terrorist organizations. The GEC helps develop the capacity of these
    and other credible voices to reach the right audiences by sharing best
    practices from the private sector, including online audience analysis.
        Within the next twelve to eighteen months, the GEC intends to map,
    assess, and coordinate U.S. training and support for foreign national
    and international messaging centers in East Asia, Africa, and the
    Middle East to better enhance their abilities and strengthen the
    network among the centers and the United States.

        Question 2. Mr. Goldstein, in my travels to Saudi Arabia, the West
    Bank, Jordan, and other areas, I have been consistently told that
    international exchanges are one of our diplomats' best tools. People to
    people exchanges I believe are one the most effective ways to build
    long-term relationships and mutual understanding between U.S. and
    emerging foreign youth and leaders.
        In the President's FY 2018 budget for State Department programs,
    however, exchanges funding received a proposed cut of over 50 percent
    from FY 2017 levels.

       Do you agree with the argument that exchanges funding should be
            cut? Are there certain exchange programs that should be
            expanded?

        Answer. I agree that person-to-person exchanges are a vital part of
    America's Public Diplomacy effort, both short term and long term. If
    confirmed, I intend to review carefully the effectiveness and impact of
    the Department of State's exchange programs and the funding assigned to
    each. Programs that provide great value may warrant expansion.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Sean P. Lawler by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my 21 years in uniform, there were many
    occasions where I was personally involved in promoting human rights and
    democracy. A few specific examples would include: non-combatant rescue
    operations in Tirana, Albania in which I was awarded the Humanitarian
    Service Medal; I served in Operation SUPPORT HOPE to provide refugee
    support during the Rwandan genocide; received a personal award for
    support operations in Kosovo and Bosnia Herzegovina following
    hostilities. Finally, I was deployed at sea in Operations IRAQI FREEDOM
    and ENDURING FREEDOM. Preserving our American rights and supporting
    freedoms around the world has been the focal point of my career.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors is
            fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. Throughout the course of my military career, I witnessed
    first-hand the importance of a diverse working environment that
    promotes teamwork and mutual respect. If confirmed, I look forward to
    leading the Office of the Chief of Protocol by example in the promotion
    of an atmosphere where discrimination has no place.
        Establishing a workplace culture that promotes, encourages and is
    supportive of inclusion, equality and diversity is vital for growth and
    personal development. If confirmed, I will work together with
    supervisors to develop mission critical strategies for increased
    awareness and develop best practices to promote a culture that is built
    on inclusion through understanding, open dialogue, training, team
    exercises and mentoring opportunities.

        Question 3. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 4. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 5. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in any country abroad?

        Answer. Neither I nor my immediate family have financial interests
    in any country aboard.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
           Submitted to Lisa A. Johnson by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my Foreign Service career, I have promoted human
    rights and democracy around the globe in meaningful ways.
        Most recently, in The Bahamas, my team and I worked closely with
    the Bahamian Government and its Inter-Ministerial Task Force to combat
    Trafficking in Persons. By undertaking extensive awareness and training
    campaigns, improving victim identification and care, and arresting and
    prosecuting traffickers, The Bahamas in 2015 became the first Tier One
    country in the Caribbean. With our support and close engagement, The
    Bahamas since has maintained its Tier One ranking.
        The Bahamas has the highest incidence of rape in the Caribbean. I
    speak publicly about sexual and gender-based violence, and the Embassy
    funded an NGO grant for a training and awareness program that was
    implemented throughout the islands.
        Corruption is a major problem in The Bahamas. At the same time,
    civil society is relatively weak. I convened NGOs advocating for
    transparency and accountability, supported participation in U.S.-funded
    exchange programs and a grant-writing workshop, and helped local
    Bahamians begin establishing a Transparency International (TI) local
    chapter. For the May 2017 General Elections in The Bahamas, I developed
    and implemented a U.S. Embassy International Observers Mission. We
    fielded over 30 observers and coordinated closely with OAS and
    Commonwealth observer missions in evaluating conduct of the election.
        My greatest and most-wide ranging impact on human rights and
    democracy was as Office Director for Africa and the Middle East in the
    State Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
    Enforcement (INL). Effective rule of law is a necessary component of
    any democratic system. In the wake of the Arab Spring, my team
    initiated a program in Tunisia to reform the Ministry of Interior and
    security forces, re-orienting them toward serving the Tunisian people,
    including through community policing programs. In Morocco, we built the
    capacity of an independent anti-corruption commission and assisted an
    NGO in creating a cell phone ``app'' to allow citizens to report
    corruption. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, we worked with
    NGOs to deliver justice to rural victims of rape through an innovative
    mobile courts system. Our INL programs in over 30 countries in Africa
    and the Middle East, from professionalizing police forces to increasing
    court efficiency to improving prison conditions, all had at their core
    a strong human rights and democracy component.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Namibia? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Namibia? What do
    you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. Namibia is a stable multiparty democracy with regular,
    free, and fair elections. It has an independent judiciary and free and
    open media.
        The State Department's human rights report notes that the most
    significant human rights problems in Namibia include the slow pace of
    judicial proceedings and resulting lengthy pretrial detention,
    sometimes under poor conditions, and violence and discrimination
    against women and children. If confirmed, I would work with the
    Government of Namibia and civil society to address these problems while
    also highlighting Namibian successes so that they can serve as an
    example to the region.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Namibia in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Namibia is approximately twice the size of California, with
    a population of just under 2.5 million. Physical travel to locations
    and to meet with key human rights partners throughout the country can
    be challenging, but if confirmed, I would place a strong focus on
    engagement outside of Windhoek.
        Also, in order to fully engage on these issues, it is imperative
    that U.S.-Namibian relations continue to strengthen. Outreach and
    public diplomacy programs can provide Namibians with accurate
    information regarding U.S. efforts in the country and dispel any
    lingering mistrust toward U.S. intentions and foreign policy
    objectives. If confirmed, I will continue to work through our mission
    to invest in the next generation of Namibian leaders, including through
    programs like the Young African Leaders Initiative.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Namibia? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil society,
    and other non-governmental organizations. If confirmed, I will also
    ensure that my staff fully implements and complies with the Leahy Law
    and similar efforts.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Namibia to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Namibia?

        Answer. The Human Rights Report indicates that there were no
    reports of political prisoners or detainees in Namibia last year. If
    confirmed, I would engage with Namibia to address such cases should
    they arise.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Namibia on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Government of Namibia
    on matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance, while also
    highlighting Namibian successes as an example for the region.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Namibia?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. As a leader and manager in several diplomatic posts, I know
    that diversity enriches our work, as it does the United States as a
    whole. If confirmed, I will tap the diversity of my staff to benefit
    all at the Mission. I also pledge to promote a range of backgrounds and
    perspectives in the individuals whom I review for future positions.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that everyone on my team is
    treated professionally, that their rights are respected, that they are
    safe, and that they have the tools they need to perform their jobs. We
    are all one team working to advance U.S-Namibia relations and the
    interests of the United States and the American people.

        Question 12. Namibia ranked 53rd of 176 on Transparency
    International's Corruption Index.

       In what sectors is most official corruption found in Namibia?
       If confirmed, what tools do you have at your disposal to help
            address corruption and what actions will you take as Ambassador
            to advocate for improved transparency and good governance with
            relevant Namibian stakeholders?

        Answer. The State Department's Human Rights Report notes that
    Namibian law provides criminal penalties for corruption by officials;
    however, the Government did not implement the law effectively, and
    officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. There
    were isolated reports of corruption by individuals in government.
        If confirmed, I will use the full resources of our Mission to
    strengthen U.S. efforts to work with the Government of Namibia, as well
    as with non-governmental organizations, to increase transparency and
    promote good governance.

        Question 13. The State Department has ranked Namibia ``Tier 2'' on
    trafficking in persons.

       If confirmed, what types of U.S. diplomatic efforts and assistance,
            if any, would you pursue to help Namibia better tackle this
            problem?
       In what ways might such efforts be incorporated into existing U.S.
            programs that aim to help strengthen Namibia's security sector
            and the rule of law?

        Answer. Our annual trafficking in persons report designates Namibia
    as a ``Tier Two'' country. This means that, while the Government of
    Namibia does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination
    of trafficking, it is making significant efforts to do so.
        The Government of Namibia's efforts include identifying and
    referring to care, more trafficking victims, drafting a national
    mechanism to refer victims to care, and strengthening inter-ministerial
    coordination on trafficking cases.
        The Government did not meet minimum standards, according to the
    Trafficking Victims Protection Act, in several key areas. While the
    Government did not conduct TIP awareness activities or convict any
    traffickers in the last reporting period, it did conduct a major
    awareness event in July of this year. The Deputy Prime Minister and
    Minister of International Relations and Cooperation as well as the
    Minister of Gender Equality and Child Welfare hosted the high-level
    event to mark the World Day against Trafficking in Persons.
        If confirmed, I would continue the productive dialogue with the
    Namibian Government on this issue and include it in my engagement
    across the Government. For example, I would look for opportunities to
    provide Namibian officials with TIP-specific training, and use public
    diplomacy resources to amplify our messaging regarding this problem.

        Question 14. Namibia is named in the President's Emergency Plan for
    AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Strategy for Accelerating HIV/AIDS Epidemic
    Control (2017-2020) as one of 13 high-burdened countries prioritized
    for investment during the life of the strategy to achieve the 90-90-90
    targets by 2020, whereby 90 percent of people living with HIV know
    their status, 90 percent of people who know their status are accessing
    treatment and 90 percent of people on treatment are virally suppressed.

       What are the main challenges facing the country in achieving their
            90-90-90 goal?
       If confirmed, what will you do to support Namibia and its
            communities in achieving that goal?

        Answer. Approximately one in seven Namibians is HIV positive. This
    represents a profound and continuing challenge, but the country has
    made substantial progress in dealing with HIV/AIDS, and our partnership
    under PEPFAR has been integral to that success.
        Last year, fewer than 8,000 Namibians were newly infected with HIV,
    less than 5 percent of babies born to HIV-positive mothers became
    infected, and fewer than 3,200 patients died from HIV/AIDS. Most
    striking, an estimated 100,000 Namibian lives--nearly 5 percent of the
    country's total population--have been saved.
        Currently, 88 percent of Namibians with HIV know their status. Free
    antiretroviral (ARN) treatment is widely available across the country;
    77 percent of infected adults and 90 percent of infected children are
    on ARVs. Namibia is extremely close to being among the first African
    nations to achieve the 90-90-90 goals, but significant challenges
    remain, including high rates of infection among youth, and,
    disproportionately, young women. In the years to come, it will be
    necessary for the United States and Namibia to continue to fund
    specific efforts to target at-risk populations.
        The United States has played an integral role in these
    achievements, which have required a major investment. Of the roughly $2
    billion in foreign assistance the U.S. Government has invested in
    Namibia since 2003, about $1.5 billion has been dedicated to the fight
    against HIV/AIDS. Namibia's Government directly funds two-thirds of the
    national HIV response. In the years to come, it will be important to
    continue transitioning to greater Namibian ownership of the HIV/AIDS
    response.
        If confirmed, I will continue to partner with the Government of
    Namibia on this critical policy and humanitarian priority.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to Lisa A. Johnson by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1. The reported commercial and military ties between
    Namibia and North Korea are concerning. In 2017, U.N. sanctions
    monitoring experts twice reported on their investigations into the
    activities in Namibia of the Mansudae Overseas Project Group, a North
    Korean construction firm that has violated U.N. sanctions, and the
    Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation (KOMID), a U.N.-sanctioned
    North Korean entity that has engaged in prohibited financial
    transactions.In early 2017, the U.N. experts reported that the Namibian
    Government had admitted that KOMID and Mansudae had been active in
    building and supplying a national munitions factory between 2010 and
    2015; that Mansudae had provided laborers for the project; and that
    Mansudae had been involved in the construction of monuments and
    government buildings in Namibia.Namibia has reported that it ended its
    relations with the two firms, in compliance with U.N. Security Council
    (UNSC) Resolution 2270 (2016), but such activities may have continued.

       What is the extent of reported Namibian military and commercial
            ties to North Korea?
       What has been the U.S. response to Namibia's ties to North Korea?
            Has Namibia responded adequately to U.S. outreach regarding
            Namibia serving as a continued source of funding for North
            Korea's illicit activities?
       Will you commit to pressuring the Government of Namibia to ending
            its commercial and military relationship with North Korea?

        Answer. North Korea's stated intention to put a nuclear warhead on
    an ICBM poses a grave threat to the entire world. North Korea is a
    global menace, and in response, we need to see action from all
    countries to increase pressure on the DPRK to compel the regime to
    abandon its U.N.-proscribed nuclear and missile programs.
        In response to engagement from the United States and the
    international community, Namibia has taken positive steps to address
    the threat posed by North Korea. In February 2015, the Namibian
    Government expelled the last of the official North Korean diplomats
    present in Namibia. In June 2016, the Namibian Government publicly
    announced an end to its commercial relationship with North Korea. Since
    then, Namibia has implemented that statement and affirmed that it is
    abiding fully by all U.N. Security Council Resolutions related to North
    Korea, including by ending contracts with UN-designated companies. The
    Namibian Government has further stated that all North Korean nationals
    have departed the country. Namibia has made great strides in distancing
    itself from North Korea and eliminating sources of foreign funding for
    the Kim regime's ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs.
        While we have been pleased with Namibia's recent cooperation, the
    United States will not hesitate to act unilaterally to address
    individuals and entities supporting the North Korean regime. On August
    22, the Treasury Department designated Qingdao Construction (Namibia),
    a Namibian-based subsidiary of a Chinese company, for connections to
    the DPRK. Treasury also sanctioned a Namibia-based North Korean
    official linked to the Mansudae Overseas Projects, a DPRK firm also
    subject to U.S. sanctions. Through this action, we made clear that we
    will go wherever the evidence leads to cut off funding that supports
    Pyongyang's unlawful activities.
        If confirmed, I will make engagement on North Korea a priority and
    continue to work with Namibia to meet its pledge to comply with all
    U.N. Security Council resolutions and to further curtail any relations
    with the North Korea.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
          Submitted to Rebecca Gonzalez by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Throughout my personal and professional life I have
    championed human dignity, respect, inclusion, and opportunity. These
    guiding principles inform all my interactions. I make a proactive and
    concerted effort to promote human rights, equality, and democracy in my
    leadership, diplomatic engagement, and interactions in the work
    environment. As the Acting Labor Attache in Panama, I worked on
    workers' rights, engaging the Government of Panama on labor conditions,
    formation of new unions, fair hiring practices, and collective
    bargaining agreements. I met regularly with a range of labor leaders,
    and advocated for workers' rights with an often reluctant and
    unresponsive Labor Ministry. As a result of my efforts and
    contribution, I was able to advance our efforts in promoting workers'
    rights with the Government of Panama and improve working conditions for
    workers.
        As a career Foreign Service Officer with a focus on management,
    much of my personal effort to promote human rights and democratic
    principles has occurred within our Embassies and the Department. Over
    the course of my career, I recruited and led diverse teams and
    advocated and advanced issues of fairness, equity, and inclusiveness
    within the workplace.
        For example, when serving in India I worked closely with and
    mentored a multi-ethnic staff, promoting a culture of respect and
    inclusion so that regardless of gender, religion, or background, women
    and men alike felt comfortable and valued. In my daily management of
    the team, I provided opportunities for personal and professional growth
    and ensured we made reasonable accommodations for our employees with
    disabilities. I am proud that those I hired and mentored continue to
    thrive and are important partners contributing to our foreign policy
    goals in India. While serving in Saudi Arabia, there were instances
    when certain employees lectured and admonished third-country female
    employees for not being ``good Muslims''--i.e. modest and wearing the
    abaya/veil. I engaged with all employees, spoke to the targeted
    females, and took corrective action to ensure these incidents stopped
    immediately. In both India and Saudi Arabia, I believe that my actions
    resulted in a positive, safe, professional environment that valued and
    respected the uniqueness and differences of individuals.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Lesotho? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Lesotho? What do
    you hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The most pressing human rights issue in Lesotho is the
    control and conduct of the Lesotho Defense Force, which has been at the
    center of most incidents of political instability in Lesotho for 40
    years. It must be transformed into a professional force fully subject
    to civilian authority if Lesotho is to move beyond recurrent patterns
    of political instability and grow into a more mature democracy. In
    addition, allegations of police abuse are common. Gender-based violence
    is also a major challenge. If confirmed, I would continue to press our
    concerns about these issues, use the full range of public diplomacy
    tools to shine a spotlight on them, and engage the Government of
    Lesotho to address them.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Lesotho in
    advancing human rights, civil society, and democracy in general?

        Answer. Impunity and insufficient civilian control of the security
    sector remain the strongest obstacles and challenges to improving the
    human rights situation in Lesotho. Security sector reform is essential,
    a view endorsed by the Southern African Development Community (SADC)
    Commission of Inquiry, which in 2015 investigated unrest in Lesotho and
    provided specific recommendations. As a regional body to which Lesotho
    belongs, SADC will play a significant role in supporting Lesotho in
    this effort. I look forward to working with the Government of Lesotho
    and with SADC to continue to target U.S. assistance in ways that will
    advance reforms. I will also continue to seek out supportive voices in
    civil society, the business sector, the local diplomatic community, and
    the Government itself. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will work with the
    Government of Lesotho, civil society, and human rights activists to
    increase accountability of those responsible for human rights abuses
    and other illegal acts.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society, and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Lesotho? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. Most definitely, if confirmed as Ambassador, I will place
    importance on meeting with people from the full spectrum of society in
    Lesotho, particularly representatives of civil society and NGOs. If
    confirmed, I commit to meeting with U.S. and local human rights NGOs
    and ensuring that embassy personnel take the necessary steps for all
    security assistance and security cooperation activities to receive
    Leahy and other vetting to reinforce human rights concerns.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Lesotho to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Lesotho?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure my team actively engages with
    the Government of Lesotho to address allegations of abuse or unfair
    treatment. I will ensure that we continue to advocate with the
    Government of Lesotho to respect the rule of law and due process for
    all citizens in Lesotho.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Lesotho on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will engage with Lesotho on
    matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance. Like my
    predecessor, I will continue to engage actively in pressing Lesotho to
    improve respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, both in
    regular interactions with the most senior government officials, and by
    using the full range of public diplomacy tools and available funding
    for democracy and governance programming.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Lesotho?

        Answer. No.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am the person I am today because people mentored, helped,
    and gave me opportunities. If confirmed as Ambassador, one of my top
    priorities will be to mentor staff, recruit with an eye toward
    diversity, foster appreciation and respect for differences, and provide
    opportunities for employees' professional and personal growth. The
    support I give will not be limited solely to employees; my support
    would extend to our community as a whole and involve ensuring that
    family members are doing well, are given professional opportunities for
    employment when available, and feel part of the embassy community.
        I will work hard to create an environment that is respectful and
    inclusive of different backgrounds, experiences, ideas, and
    perspectives. This commitment to diversity has been evident throughout
    my career. I have consistently gone out of my way to provide
    opportunities to everyone, encourage individuals from underrepresented
    groups, and promote a culture of trust and inclusion. I will actively
    engage and support relevant State Department organizations that support
    and advocate for employees of various backgrounds.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will set an example for those
    under my authority and direct them to maintain inclusive environments
    in their sections and agencies, and will counsel accordingly when I
    learn of problems.

        Question 12. Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. No, there have been no material changes.
    Corruption
        Question 13. Lesotho is ranked 83rd of 176 on Transparency
    International's Corruption Index.

       In what sectors is most official corruption found in Lesotho?
       If confirmed, what tools do you have at your disposal to help
            address corruption and what actions will you take as Ambassador
            to advocate for improved transparency and good governance with
            relevant Basotho stakeholders?

        Answer. Corruption impacts multiple sectors in Lesotho; however, it
    is most pervasive in the public sector. This limits the country'
    ability to grow and produce wealth for its people. While the Government
    of Lesotho has shown an intention to combat corruption, steps to date
    have not been adequate. Anti-corruption institutions, principally the
    Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offenses (DCEO), lack adequate
    capacity to address all reported cases of corruption in the country.
    Anti-corruption policies and accountability mechanisms are generally
    weak, and the public's access to information about the Government's
    action is limited. The general public believes the army and the police
    fail to hold officers accountable for various abuses, including
    corruption.
        If confirmed as Ambassador, I would press the Government of Lesotho
    to take concrete steps to reduce corruption and improve transparency
    and good governance. I would work with the Government of Lesotho to
    strengthen its efforts to address corruption through implementation of
    national anti-corruption laws, such as requiring public officials to
    disclose their assets. I would strengthen U.S. efforts to work with the
    Government of Lesotho, as well as with non-governmental organizations,
    to increase transparency and promote good governance to better combat
    corruption and impunity. I would ensure our Embassy provides training
    and exchange opportunities for government and civil society to promote
    transparency and good governance.
    Trafficking in Persons
        Question 14. The State Department has ranked Lesotho ``Tier 2'' on
    trafficking in persons.

       If confirmed, what types of U.S. diplomatic efforts and assistance,
            if any, would you pursue to help Lesotho better tackle this
            problem?
       In what ways might such efforts be incorporated into existing U.S.
            programs that aim to help strengthen Lesotho's security sector
            and the rule of law?

        Answer. In the Department's most recent Trafficking in Persons
    report, Lesotho was listed as a Tier 2 country. This means that the
    Government of Lesotho does not fully meet the minimum standards for the
    elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts
    to do so by increasing efforts compared to previous years. While
    Lesotho has laws against human trafficking, prosecution and enforcement
    efforts remain uneven. Specifically, prosecutions have been delayed due
    to lack of clarity over court jurisdiction. If confirmed, I will urge
    the Government of Lesotho to continue its efforts to address these
    issues. I would look to raise the public's awareness of human
    trafficking and encourage training of law enforcement and judicial
    officials to investigate and prosecute these crimes.
        We currently have limited military cooperation and security sector
    activities with Lesotho, due to documented human rights concerns
    related to the military. Leahy vetting standards preclude assistance to
    a number of key units in the Lesotho Defense Force. We will be unable
    to resume general assistance to the military until solders implicated
    in human rights abuses are held accountable, and until there is serious
    reform of the security sector.
        We are engaging with the Government of Lesotho on programs that
    provide shelter and assistance for victims of Trafficking in Persons.
    Various local NGOs receive supplemental funding from the Government to
    implement these vital services. The Government of Lesotho has also
    established a multi-sectorial committee that is responsible for liaison
    with the Child and Gender Protection Unit (CGPU). Working together,
    these government entities can continue to improve enforcement of the
    Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act. If confirmed, I would partner with the
    Government and civil society in Lesotho to increase the effectiveness
    of Lesotho's rule of law institutions and push for additional programs
    to help strengthen the country's judicial capacity to investigate and
    prosecute these heinous crimes.
    HIV/AIDS
        Question 15. Lesotho is named in the President's Emergency Plan for
    AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Strategy for Accelerating HIV/AIDS Epidemic
    Control (2017-2020) as one of 13 high-burdened countries prioritized
    for investment during the life of the strategy to achieve the 90-90-90
    targets by 2020, whereby 90 percent of people living with HIV know
    their status, 90 percent of people who know their status are accessing
    treatment, and 90 percent of people on treatment are virally
    suppressed.

       What are the main challenges facing the country in achieving their
            90-90-90 goal?
       If confirmed, what will you do to support Lesotho and its
            communities in achieving that goal?

        Answer. In partnership with PEPFAR, Lesotho has made impressive
    progress in fighting HIV/AIDS and is on the path to reaching the 90-90-
    90 targets by 2020. Recent figures from Lesotho's Population-based HIV
    Impact Assessment (LePHIA) survey, which were released at the U.N.
    General Assembly in New York, showed that 77 percent of HIV-positive
    Basotho know their status; 90 percent of those who know their status
    are on treatment; and 88 percent of those who are on treatment are
    virally-suppressed.
        Using this data, we know that we need to continue to identify those
    who do not know their status. This means we will need to continue to
    optimize HIV testing and counseling through expanded patient-initiated
    testing and counseling and targeted community testing. The Government
    of Lesotho's decisive move last year to launch a national test and
    treat policy, meaning those who test positive are immediately able to
    start treatment, can be expected to promote further progress in
    controlling the epidemic.If confirmed, I will continue to work in
    partnership with the Government of Lesotho to fight the HIV/AIDS
    epidemic in Lesotho, and build on the success achieved thus far, and
    find ways to maximize efficient use of our resources under PEPFAR.
    Security Sector Reform
        Question 16. According to the State Department's 2016 human right
    report, major human rights problems in Lesotho include ``torture and
    cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and punishment by LDF members,
    police torture, and societal abuse of women and children.'' The report
    also observed that ``officials who committed abuses, whether in the
    security services or elsewhere in the Government'' were not prosecuted,
    ``although the army reportedly surrendered two soldiers implicated in a
    murder without political implications to police. Impunity remained a
    significant problem.''

       How can the United States most effectively help to support security
            sector reform, particularly regarding military justice and
            civilian control over the military?
       What is the status of former military chief Tlali Kamoli? And, what
            is being done to address the murder of his successor,
            Lieutenant-General Khoantle Motsomotso, in early September
            2017?

        Answer. The United States has been engaging and should continue to
    engage with the Government of Lesotho to press for security sector
    reform to ensure accountability in the security sector and adherence to
    the rule of law, as the Southern African Development Community's (SADC)
    Commission of Inquiry recommended. The killing of Commander Motsomotso
    further emphasizes the need for security sector reform. The recently
    elected government has taken steps toward full implementation of SADC's
    recommendations and, if confirmed as Ambassador, I would continue to
    urge the Government to take concrete steps to implement SADC's
    recommendations fully. I would continue to reiterate that the United
    States takes this issue seriously and encourage the Government of
    Lesotho to undertake these much-needed reforms in a transparent and
    inclusive manner.
        A national dialogue has recently begun in Lesotho, which includes
    the involvement of the current government, the opposition, and civil
    society organizations, with the intention of developing concrete and
    long-lasting reforms. The United States does not currently provide
    training to Lesotho's army due to Leahy Law concerns. However, the
    Embassy continues to monitor recent government steps to hold army
    officers accountable for past crimes. Such actions could eventually
    allow for the resumption of U.S. training and direct contributions to
    needed security sector reform.
        Former Lesotho Defense Forces (LDF) Commander Kamoli is currently
    in police detention. He is awaiting a bail hearing and is facing 14
    charges of attempted murder related to bombings in January 2014 and one
    charge of murder for the killing of a police official. Two senior
    officers implicated in former LDF Commander Mahao's 2015 murder
    allegedly killed General Motsomotso. Motsomotso's bodyguards
    subsequently killed these suspects in a confrontation. On September 14,
    the police also charged a third soldier in connection with the
    Motsomotso murder.
        Following the killing of Commander Motsomotso, the Government of
    Lesotho requested that SADC deploy troops to Lesotho to support the
    Government as it moves to hold soldiers accountable for wrongdoing and
    in its efforts to undertake security sector reforms. A SADC force is
    expected to arrive in Lesotho in the coming weeks.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
        Submitted to James Randoplph Evans by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I have always believed that making a difference in one's
    community is a fundamental tool for defending human rights. At the
    beginning of my career, I was active in the Boy Scouts of America,
    serving as Member Chairman (1985-86), District Chairman (1986-1988),
    and receiving the National Quality District Award in 1987 & 1988. I
    have been continuously active in my churches, serving now on the Board
    of the Church of the Apostles. In addition, my wife Linda and I have
    supported financially and in a leadership position, with me serving as
    General Counsel, ``Leading the Way''--a worldwide program that seeks to
    promote greater respect for human rights--including freedom from
    torture, freedom of expression, women's rights, children's rights, and
    the protection of minorities around the globe.
        Recently, through Leading the Way, we personally funded anti-
    rejection medicines for a kidney transplant refugee for almost two
    years until he and his family were able to emigrate from northern Iraq
    to Australia. Similarly, in 2004, we facilitated funds and donations in
    Memory of Airman 1st Class Antoine Holt, USAF through the Marine
    Corps--Law Enforcement Foundation to purchase a $20,000 maturity value
    scholastic Patriot Bond for Airman Holt's daughter Carmen. Airman Holt
    was a soldier from our county killed in the Iraq war.
        The Georgia Bar has twice asked me to step in to help with pressing
    issues, including chairing the Suicide Prevention and Awareness
    Committee (2012-2014) and chairing the Task Force for Indigent Services
    (where we developed funding mechanisms for providing free legal
    assistance to the indigent). We also support the Salvation Army, Zoo
    Atlanta, various military related charities, and currently sponsor
    through Children's Hope Chest three children in Uganda--Agnes Asio;
    Benjamin Opolot; and Simon Peter Ebenu. We have previously sponsored
    other children through World Vision.
        The impact of our collective service has been to improve the lives
    of others in our community, our State, and around the world in direct
    and personal ways for them, our country, and our world. From general
    support to personal involvement, we have been committed to and continue
    to promote human rights and democracy with both macro and individual
    impact on the lives of others.

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

        Answer. The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg enjoys a democratic
    government with free and fair elections, the rule of law, and
    guarantees of basic rights and liberties. According to the 2016 State
    Department Human Rights Report, there were no reports of egregious
    human rights abuses in Luxembourg. In 2016, the United States
    downgraded Luxembourg in its annual Trafficking in Persons (TIP) to
    Tier Two. After the report came out in June 2016, the Government of
    Luxembourg modified its Criminal Code to facilitate the fight against
    TIP and developed a National Action Plan, among other steps. Due to
    these efforts, Luxembourg was upgraded to Tier 1 in the 2017 report. To
    ensure sustained progress in addressing human trafficking, if
    confirmed, I will ensure the Embassy continues to closely monitor
    Luxembourg's anti-trafficking efforts and seek ways for our governments
    to work together and share best practices to continue to make progress
    against trafficking in persons.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Luxembourg in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Luxembourg not only upholds human rights at home, but it is
    a leader in promoting human rights around the world. It is one of the
    most generous countries in the world, devoting more than one percent of
    its gross national income to development aid. In his 2015 speech to the
    U.N. General Assembly, Prime Minister Bettel said that development must
    be human-rights-based, and must include issues of governance, justice,
    peace, security, environmental protection, sustainable consumption and
    production patterns, as well as sustained economic growth. If
    confirmed, I will seek opportunities for the United States and
    Luxembourg to continue to work together to promote and advance human
    rights around the globe.

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

        Answer. The Embassy routinely meets with NGOs in Luxembourg on
    issues from TIP, to religious freedom, to human rights. If confirmed, I
    will ensure that engagement continues. Additionally, I would be open to
    meeting with any NGOs in the U.S. that wished to discuss human rights,
    civil society, or other issues in Luxembourg.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Luxembourg to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Luxembourg?

        Answer. I am not aware of any cases of political prisoners in
    Luxembourg.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will support Embassy Luxembourg's work in
    implementing the provisions outlined in the Leahy Law, which requires
    vetting of security force units including police and military who
    receive assistance from the United States. If there is credible
    information that a security force unit or individual committed gross
    violations of human rights, we will take the necessary steps in
    accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to
    ensure the responsible units and individuals do not receive U.S.
    assistance and assisting their respective governments in bringing them
    to justice.

        Question 7. Will you engage with the people of Luxembourg on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. Yes. I am committed to ensuring our Mission remains engaged
    on these issues. Luxembourg shares our commitment to universal values
    such as human rights, and the Government of Luxembourg holds itself to
    the highest standards with regards to protecting the rights and
    liberties of its people. If confirmed, I will ensure that engagement on
    human rights and good governance remains an integral component of our
    mission.
    Diversity
        Question 8. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service?

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            U.S. Embassy in Luxembourg are fostering an environment that is
            diverse and inclusive?''

        Answer. One of the foundational ideals of this country is the idea
    that all of us are created equal. If confirmed, I will dedicate myself
    to ensuring that each and every member of my team is given the
    opportunities and tools needed to succeed, regardless of race, gender,
    sexual orientation, disability, religion, national origin or age.
        If confirmed, not only will I lead by example, demonstrating my own
    commitment to diversity and inclusiveness, but I will also work with
    the Deputy Chief of Mission and Country Team to ensure that all Embassy
    Luxembourg supervisors uphold equal employment opportunity principles.
    I will also direct our Mission managers responsible for hiring and
    recruitment to ensure that Embassy Luxembourg remains a diverse and
    inclusive workplace where all team members have an equal opportunity to
    achieve success.
    Conflicts of Interest
        Question 9. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 10. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 11. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Luxembourg?

        Answer. If confirmed, upon taking post, no. Currently, my law firm
    has an office there. If confirmed, upon taking office, I will sever all
    ties with my current law firm.
    Voting Rights
        Question 12. Have you ever supported or advanced policies that made
    it more difficult for eligible American citizens to exercise their
    right to vote?

        Answer. On election issues, I have consistently supported early
    voting, no-excuse absentee voting, and provisional ballots. As an
    appointed member of the Georgia State Election Board, I worked with my
    fellow board members whenever possible in a bipartisan way in the
    implementation of the 2006 Georgia law passed that year by the Georgia
    legislature and signed by the Governor requiring state officials to
    issue, free of charge, a photo identification card to any registered
    voter and requiring every voter who casts a ballot in person to produce
    an identification card with a photograph.
        The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld
    the constitutionality of the law when it affirmed the United States
    District Court for the Northern District of Georgia's same
    determination after a trial on the merits finding that any burden
    imposed was not undue or significant. The full opinion by the Eleventh
    Circuit can be found at Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 554 F.3d 1340
    (2009). The United States Supreme Court unanimously denied certiorari
    in NAACP v. Billups, 129 S.Ct. 2770, 174 L. Ed. 271 (2009).
        Similarly, the Georgia Supreme Court itself determined that the
    2006 Georgia law was constitutional under Georgia's Constitution in
    Democratic Party of Georgia, Inc. v. Perdue, 288 Ga. 720 (2011) stating
    that: ``the photo ID requirement for in-person voting is authorized by
    Art. II, Sec. I, Par. I [of the Georgia Constitution], as a reasonable
    procedure for verifying that the individual appearing to vote in person
    is actually the same person who registered to vote.'' Id. at 725-26.
    The Court stated: ``As did virtually every other court that considered
    this issue, we find the photo ID requirement as implemented in the 2006
    Act to be a minimal, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory restriction
    which is warranted by the important regulatory interests of preventing
    voter fraud.'' Id. at 730.

        Question 13. In your testimony, you stated that opponents
    challenged Georgia's photo ID law while the State Election Board was in
    the process of mailing ``educational'' letters to approximately 300,000
    voters. However, the 2006 Photo ID Act had been challenged in both
    federal and state court well before the letters were mailed in
    September of 2006. Can you clarify whether or not opponents had
    challenged the law before the Election Board began the process of
    mailing the letters?

        Answer. Multiple election specific challenges were filed to the law
    in 2006. Yet, it was contemplated that Georgia's educational efforts
    would continue. The Georgia Supreme Court in Democratic Party of
    Georgia, Inc. v. Perdue, 288 Ga. 720, 721-22 (2011), described the
    federal injunction and the educational efforts in Common Cause/Georgia
    v. Billups, 439 F. Supp. 2d 1294, 1351 (N.D. Ga. 2006), as follows:

              The district court preliminarily enjoined enforcement of the
            2006 Act, but limited the injunction to the July 18, 2006
            primary elections and corresponding primary run-off and
            declined to extend the injunction to future elections. [Cite
            omitted.] The court so ruled after finding that efforts to
            educate voters concerning the statutory photo ID requirements
            had been insufficient in the time available prior to the 2006
            primary elections and thus posed an undue burden on certain
            voters. [Cite omitted.] The district court noted, however:
              In issuing this Order, the Court does not intend to imply
            that all Photo ID requirements would be invalid or overly
            burdensome on voters. Certainly, the Court can conceive of ways
            that the State could impose and implement a Photo ID
            requirement without running afoul of the requirements of the
            Constitution. Indeed, if the State allows sufficient time for
            its education efforts with respect to the 2006 Photo ID Act and
            if the State undertakes to inform voters of the 2006 Photo ID
            Act's requirements before future elections, the statute might
            well survive a challenge for such future.
              Emphasis added.

        Similarly, as noted by the District Court in Common Cause/Georgia,
    there was ``a temporary restraining order issued by the Superior Court
    of Fulton County, Georgia, on July 7, 2006, enjoining the defendants in
    that case from enforcing the 2006 Photo ID Act during the July 18,
    2006, primary election or any resulting run-off election.'' 504 F.
    Supp. 2d at 1340 (citing Lake v. Perdue, Civil Action File No.
    2006CV119207, slip op. at 3-4 (Fulton County Super. Ct. July 7, 2006)).
        Similar actions were taken in connection with the Special Elections
    in 2006. Notwithstanding multiple challenges in multiple jurisdictions
    to specific elections, no injunction existed on the date the State
    Election began acting in accordance with directions from the federal
    court for the State to conduct an education effort as referenced above.
        To comply with the directions regarding educational efforts, all
    members of the State Election Board (including the Democratic Designee
    to the State Election Board and the Secretary of State, a Democrat)
    approved unanimously at the beginning of September 2006 a letter
    explaining to voters how to get a free photo ID. As noted in the
    District Court's timeline in its opinion, these efforts and opponents
    concerns were discussed with the federal court on September 5, 2006.
    See Common Cause/Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340, 1364. But, no
    injunction or other directive to stop the education efforts were
    issued. Id.
        The bottom line was that challenges to specific elections (primary,
    run-off, and special elections) had been made; the injunctions were
    limited to those specific elections; and the federal district court was
    specifically made aware of opponents' concerns and did not enjoin them;
    the federal court eventually determined that the overall educational
    efforts eliminated some of the potential bases for challenging the 2006
    Photo ID law.

        Question 14. The 2006 Photo ID Act was enjoined by a federal court
    on September 14, 2006, and it was declared unconstitutional by a
    Georgia state court on September 19, 2006. According to a filing by
    former Governor Roy Barnes, approximately 80,000 letters were sent on
    September 20, 2006, and approximately 116,000 letters were sent on
    September 25, 2006.

       In your testimony, you stated that ``although many of the letters
            had already gone out, some of the letters were received after
            the court's ruling.'' Given the timeline above, approximately
            200,000 letters were sent, not just received, after the
            injunction was issued. Can you clarify whether or not letters
            were sent after the injunction was issued?

        Answer. The actual timeline is as follows. The letter was
    unanimously approved around the first of September, 2006. Opponents of
    the State's educational effort, which included the letter, raised their
    concerns with the federal court on September 5, 2017. In paragraph 32,
    the Court stated:

              On September 5, 2006, the Court held a telephone conference
            with the parties to address Plaintiffs' concerns with respect
            to the educational efforts and the application of the 2006
            Photo ID Act to the September special elections.--Common Cause/
            Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340-41.

        Then, on September 6, 2006, the plaintiffs filed their motion for a
    preliminary injunction as to the September 2006 special elections. The
    Court chronicled this filing in paragraph 33 when the Court stated as
    follows:

              On September 6, 2006, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for
            Hearing on Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction
            in Advance of the September 2006 special elections.--Common
            Cause/Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340-41.

        Two paragraphs of the Court's actual order make the point clear. In
    paragraph 33, the Court stated as follows:

              On September 6, 2006, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for
            Hearing on Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction
            in Advance of the September 2006 special elections.--Common
            Cause/Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340-41.

        Notably, this was five (5) days after the State Election Board had
    unanimously approved with bipartisan support the September 1, 2006
    letter at issue regarding how to get a free photo ID. It also followed
    the September 5, 2006 telephone conference with the federal court with
    respect to educational efforts.
        Then, on September 14, 2006, the federal court enjoined the 2006
    Photo ID Act, but only with respect to the special elections. No
    injunction was issued notwithstanding Plaintiffs' expressed concerns to
    the Court regarding the State's educational efforts which were in
    process. In paragraph 34, the Court specifically stated as follows:

              On September 14, 2006, the Court held its third preliminary
            injunction hearing in this case. At the conclusion of the
            September 14, 2006 hearing, the Court verbally granted
            Plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction with respect
            to the September 2006 special elections.--Common Cause/Georgia,
            504 F. Supp. 2d at 1341 (internal citations omitted).

        Hence, the bipartisan educational letter was sent pursuant to the
    federal court's comments urging an educational effort which was
    followed by a telephone conference with the federal court to hear
    opponents' concerns. There was no injunction as to the law generally or
    the general election, and the federal court had been involved regarding
    the educational efforts to hear opponents' concerns.
        The federal court's entire timeline and notations can be found at
    Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 504 F. Supp. 1333 (N.D. Ga. 2007). On
    appeal, the Eleventh Circuit described the District Court's position on
    the educational efforts in this way:

              The district court stated that, pending education efforts
            initiated by the State, the requirement of photo identification
            might no longer be unduly burdensome in later elections, and it
            declined to extend the injunction to future elections. The
            district court also concluded that the organizations and voters
            did not have a likelihood of success on the merits of their
            complaint that the statute imposed an unconstitutional poll tax
            or violated the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act.--
            Common Cause/ Georgia v. Billups, 554 F.3d 1340, 1347 (11th
            Cir. 2009).

        Separately, there was a state court action. In Lake v. Perdue,
    Civil Action File No. 2006CV119207, slip op. at 3-4 (Fulton County
    Super. Ct. September 19, 2006), the state court of Fulton Court entered
    an order permanently enjoining the enforcement of the 2006 Act. The
    Georgia Supreme Court eventually vacated that Order and remanded ``with
    the direction that it be dismissed.'' Perdue v. Lake, 282 Ga. 348, 350
    (2007). This procedural history was also summarized by the Georgia
    Supreme Court in Democratic Party of Georgia, Inc. v. Perdue, 288 Ga.
    720, 722 (Ga. 2011).
        The State Election Board then immediately suspended its education
    efforts. Notably, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated in its
    opinion the following as it relates to the State's education efforts
    once the injunction in Perdue v. Lake was issued:

              During the pendency of this litigation, a state court
            permanently enjoined the enforcement of the new statute as
            violative of the Georgia Constitution. See Perdue v. Lake, 282
            Ga. 348, 647 S.E. 2d 6 (2007). The Supreme Court of Georgia
            later vacated the injunction and dismissed the action . . .
            While the injunction by the state court was extant, Georgia
            suspended all educational efforts about the requirement of
            photo identification.--Common Cause/Georgia, 554 F. 3d at 1347.
            (Emphasis added).

        In fact, upon learning of the state court injunction in the Lake
    matter, I urged and the State Election Board agreed that the State
    would NOT seek a stay of the state court injunction (although the State
    would appeal and the Georgia Supreme Court would vacate the Order and
    remand the case with instructions that it be dismissed); would NOT
    apply the 2006 Photo ID law to the remaining 2006 elections because if
    the State prevailed, the rules ``will have changed midstream''; would
    ``suspend all educational efforts about the requirement of photo
    identification''; and would send a second letter making very clear that
    the photo ID would not be required in the upcoming general election. 9/
    23/06 AP Alert--GA 07:31:47--Westlaw
        Since I was not involved in the actual administrative process of
    mailing letters approved on September 1, 2006, I was not involved
    enough to know whether the letters in process could have been stopped.
    But, I do know I advised immediately and then led the effort on the
    Board to suspend the application of the 2006 Photo ID law to the
    remaining 2006 elections, to suspend all educational efforts, and to
    insist on a second letter making clear that a photo ID would not be
    required.
        It is why the Eleventh Circuit determined that: ``While the
    injunction by the state court was extant, Georgia suspended all
    educational efforts about the requirement of photo identification.''
    Common Cause/Georgia, 554 F. 3d at 1347. (Emphasis added). Notably, the
    mailing itself had been approved unanimously by both the Democratic and
    Republican members of the State Election Board, including the
    Democratic Secretary of State well in advance of the injunction.
        It was also consistent with how the State had dealt with
    injunctions as to specific elections before. In Common Cause/Georgia v.
    Billups, 504 F. Supp. 2d 1333, 1340 (N.D. Ga. 2007), paragraph 31, the
    District Court stated as follows:

              After the Court's July 14, 2006 Order, and after the Georgia
            Supreme Court's refusal to stay the temporary restraining order
            issued in the Lake case, the State Defendants stopped all of
            their attempts to educate voters concerning the 2006 Photo ID
            Act. In early September 2006, the State Election Board voted to
            resume those educational efforts.

        Question 15. Given the timeline above, couldn't the State Election
    Board have prevented those letters from being mailed?

        Answer. The letters were unanimously approved well in advance of
    the injunction in accordance with directions to the State to engage in
    an education effort and a federal court, having heard opponents'
    concerns, took no action and did not issue an injunction to stop them.
        Additionally, since I was not involved in the administrative
    mechanics of the actual mailing process, I do not know whether it could
    have been halted midstream. I do know that immediately upon learning of
    the injunction, I opposed applying the photo ID in the November 2006
    election, supported suspending all educational efforts (which the
    Courts acknowledged), and supported sending a second letter making
    clear photo IDs would not be required in the upcoming election. It is
    why the federal court determined that the Board suspended all efforts
    once the state court injunction was issued.--Common Cause/Georgia, 554
    F. 3d at 1347.

        Question 16. Could this letter have misled Georgia voters?

        Answer. Not from my perspective. Given the statements, actions, and
    non-application of the 2006 Photo ID requirement in the 2006 elections,
    together with the provisional ballot rule that voters could vote and
    return to address any issues, it is clear that every voter was
    encouraged to vote in the 2006 election. In fact, given the letter's
    unanimous adoption by the Democratic Secretary of State, the Democratic
    appointee to the State Election Board, and the remainder of the Board
    as well as the federal district court's decision not to stop it after
    hearing opponents' concerns, it appeared that the unanimously adopted
    letter as drafted and adopted addressed any valid concerns about it--
    whether by Democrats, Republicans, and the federal court.
        Although not specifically addressing the September 2006 letter, in
    footnote 7 of the District Court decision, addressing the State's
    overall educational efforts, the Court in fact rejected the argument
    ``that the voter education materials provided by the State were
    misleading or did not provide sufficient information.''--Common Cause/
    Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1378 n.7.
        Of course, this letter was approved unanimously by both Democrats
    and Republicans on the State Election Board including the Democratic
    Secretary of State and the Democratic Party of Georgia's designee. The
    federal district court heard the concerns but took no action to stop
    the education effort and issued no injunction. No one thought the
    letter was misleading.

        Question 17. Once you learned that the 2006 Photo ID Act had been
    enjoined, what specific steps did you take to prevent the education
    letter from being sent to any additional voters?

        Answer. Immediately, I advised that I would oppose a stay of the
    injunction, I would oppose application of the photo ID law in the
    upcoming election, I would support a second letter to make clear that
    photo IDs would not be required, and I voiced to voters that the
    elections would go forward in accordance with the Court's ruling.

                                   __________

               Responses to Additional Questions for the Record
            Submitted to James Randolph Evans by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1. Mr. Evans, you served on Georgia's State Election Board
    and while you were a member, it sent 300,000 letters to voters just
    weeks before Election Day that suggested that a photo ID would be
    required to cast a ballot. Approximately 200,000 of those letters were
    sent after a judge struck down a state law requiring a photo ID to
    vote. While the letters were drafted prior to the judge's ruling, those
    letters still went out. It was well known that the law was being
    challenged while the letter was being prepared.
        As someone who is very concerned about voter suppression efforts
    and who has introduced legislation to combat this administration's
    efforts to suppress the vote, this is a concerning incident. For
    decades poor people of color have been discriminated against at the
    ballot box and discriminatory laws, like strict voter ID laws, have
    kept African Americans from voting.

       If this was not an effort to suppress the voter as I am sure you
            contend, how do you explain this large-scale administrative
            foul up?

        Answer. In 2006, the Georgia Legislature passed and Governor (now
    Secretary) Perdue signed into law Georgia's second attempt at a voter
    identification law. Once the United States Department of Justice
    cleared Georgia's new voter ID law, the State began to issue free
    identification cards to anyone who wanted or needed one.
        Unlike other similar legislation, this legislation was upheld as
    Constitutional under both the United States Constitution and the
    Georgia Constitution. The United States Court of Appeals for the
    Eleventh Circuit upheld the Constitutionality of the law when it
    affirmed the United States District Court for the Northern District of
    Georgia's same determination after a trial on the merits. The full
    opinion by the Eleventh Circuit can be found at Common Cause/Georgia v.
    Billups, 554 F.3d 1340 (2009). The United States Supreme Court
    unanimously denied certiorari in NAACP v. Billups, 129 S.Ct. 2770, 174
    L. Ed. 271 (2009).
        Similarly, the Georgia Supreme Court itself determined that the
    2006 Georgia law was constitutional under Georgia's Constitution in
    Democratic Party of Georgia, Inc. v. Perdue, 288 Ga. 720 (2011) stating
    that: ``the photo ID requirement for in-person voting is authorized by
    Art. II, Sec. I, Par. I [of the Georgia Constitution], as a reasonable
    procedure for verifying that the individual appearing to vote in person
    is actually the same person who registered to vote.'' Id. at 725-26.
        The Court went on to state: ``As did virtually every other court
    that considered this issue, we find the photo ID requirement as
    implemented in the 2006 Act to be a minimal, reasonable, and
    nondiscriminatory restriction which is warranted by the important
    regulatory interests of preventing voter fraud.'' Id. at 730 with
    emphasis added.
        Prior to the final resolution of the Constitutional issues,
    multiple election specific challenges were filed to the law in 2006.
    For example, the Georgia Supreme Court in Democratic Party of Georgia,
    Inc. v. Perdue, 288 Ga. 720, 721-22 (2011), described the initial
    federal injunction in Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 439 F. Supp. 2d
    1294, 1351 (N.D. Ga. 2006), as follows:

              The district court preliminarily enjoined enforcement of the
            2006 Act, but limited the injunction to the July 18, 2006
            primary elections and corresponding primary run-off and
            declined to extend the injunction to future elections. [Cite
            omitted.] The court so ruled after finding that efforts to
            educate voters concerning the statutory photo ID requirements
            had been insufficient in the time available prior to the 2006
            primary elections and thus posed an undue burden on certain
            voters. [Cite omitted.] The district court noted, however:
              In issuing this Order, the Court does not intend to imply
            that all Photo ID requirements would be invalid or overly
            burdensome on voters. Certainly, the Court can conceive of ways
            that the State could impose and implement a Photo ID
            requirement without running afoul of the requirements of the
            Constitution. Indeed, if the State allows sufficient time for
            its education efforts with respect to the 2006 Photo ID Act and
            if the State undertakes to inform voters of the 2006 Photo ID
            Act's requirements before future elections, the statute might
            well survive a challenge for such future. Emphasis added.

        Similarly, as noted by the District Court in Common Cause/Georgia,
    there was ``a temporary restraining order issued by the Superior Court
    of Fulton County, Georgia, on July 7, 2006, enjoining the defendants in
    that case from enforcing the 2006 Photo ID Act during the July 18,
    2006, primary election or any resulting run-off election.'' 504 F.
    Supp. 2d at 1340 (citing Lake v. Perdue, Civil Action File No.
    2006CV119207, slip op. at 3-4 (Fulton County Super. Ct. July 7, 2006))
    with emphasis added.
        Similar legal actions were filed in connection with the Special
    Elections in 2006. Notwithstanding multiple challenges in multiple
    jurisdictions to specific elections, no injunction existed on the date
    the State Election Board began acting in compliance with directions
    from the federal court for the State to conduct an educational effort
    as referenced above.
        Instead, to comply with the directions regarding educational
    efforts, all members of the State Election Board (including the
    Democratic Designee to the State Election Board and the Secretary of
    State, a Democrat) approved unanimously at the beginning of September
    2006 a letter explaining to voters how to get a free photo ID. As noted
    in the District Court's timeline in its opinion, these efforts and
    concerns about them were discussed with the federal court on September
    5, 2006. See Common Cause/Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340, 1364. But,
    the federal court did not enjoin or direct the State to stop the
    educational efforts underway. Id.
        The actual timeline is as follows. The letter was unanimously
    approved around the first of September, 2006. Opponents of the State's
    educational effort, which included the letter, raised their concerns
    with the federal court on September 5, 2017. In paragraph 32, the Court
    stated:

              On September 5, 2006, the Court held a telephone conference
            with the parties to address Plaintiffs' concerns with respect
            to the educational efforts and the application of the 2006
            Photo ID Act to the September special elections.--Common Cause/
            Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340-41.

        Then, on September 6, 2006, the plaintiffs filed their motion for a
    preliminary injunction as to the September 2006 special elections. The
    Court chronicled this filing in paragraph 33 when the Court stated as
    follows:

              On September 6, 2006, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for
            Hearing on Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction
            in Advance of the September 2006 special elections.--Common
            Cause/Georgia, 504 F. Supp. 2d at 1340-41.
        Notably, this was five (5) days after the State Election Board had
    unanimously approved with bipartisan support the September 1, 2006
    letter at issue regarding how to get a free photo ID. It also followed
    the September 5, 2006 telephone conference with the federal court with
    respect to concerns regarding educational efforts.
        Then, on September 14, 2006, the federal court enjoined the 2006
    Photo ID Act, but only with respect to the special elections. No
    injunction of the educational efforts including the letter was issued
    notwithstanding opponents' expressed concerns to the Court regarding
    the State's educational efforts which were in process.
        In paragraph 34, the Court specifically stated as follows:

              On September 14, 2006, the Court held its third preliminary
            injunction hearing in this case. At the conclusion of the
            September 14, 2006 hearing, the Court verbally granted
            Plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction with respect
            to the September 2006 special elections.--Common Cause/Georgia,
            504 F. Supp. 2d at 1341 (internal citations omitted). Again,
            there was no injunction to the educational effort.

        The bottom line was that challenges to specific elections (primary,
    run-off, and special elections) had been made. The injunctions were
    limited to those specific elections. The federal district court was
    specifically made aware of opponents' concerns, but did not direct that
    they be stopped and did not enjoin the educational efforts including
    the letter. The federal court did eventually determine that the overall
    educational efforts were not misleading and did in fact eliminate some
    of the bases for challenging the law.
        Hence, the process began for mailing the bipartisan unanimously
    approved educational letter--after the federal court's comments urging
    an educational effort and after a telephone conference with the federal
    court about concerns with the educational efforts. There was no
    injunction as to the law generally or the general election, and the
    federal court had been involved regarding the educational efforts prior
    to the injunction. The federal court's entire timeline and notations
    can be found at Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 504 F. Supp. 1333
    (N.D. Ga. 2007).
        On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit described the District Court's
    position on the educational efforts in this way:

              The district court stated that, pending education efforts
            initiated by the State, the requirement of photo identification
            might no longer be unduly burdensome in later elections, and it
            declined to extend the injunction to future elections. The
            district court also concluded that the organizations and voters
            did not have a likelihood of success on the merits of their
            complaint that the statute imposed an unconstitutional poll tax
            or violated the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act.--
            Common Cause/ Georgia v. Billups, 554 F.3d 1340, 1347 (11th
            Cir. 2009).

        Separately, there was a state court action. In Lake v. Perdue,
    Civil Action File No. 2006CV119207, slip op. at 3-4 (Fulton County
    Super. Ct. September 19, 2006), the state court of Fulton County
    entered an order permanently enjoining the enforcement of the 2006 Act.
    The Georgia Supreme Court eventually vacated that Order and remanded
    ``with the direction that it be dismissed.'' Perdue v. Lake, 282 Ga.
    348, 350 (2007). This procedural history was also summarized by the
    Georgia Supreme Court in Democratic Party of Georgia, Inc. v. Perdue,
    288 Ga. 720, 722 (Ga. 2011).
        Notably, as to the actions of the State Election Board upon the
    issuance of the state court injunction, the Eleventh Circuit Court of
    Appeals stated as follows:

              During the pendency of this litigation, a state court
            permanently enjoined the enforcement of the new statute as
            violative of the Georgia Constitution. See Perdue v. Lake, 282
            Ga. 348, 647 S.E. 2d 6 (2007). The Supreme Court of Georgia
            later vacated the injunction and dismissed the action . . .
            While the injunction by the state court was extant, Georgia
            suspended all educational efforts about the requirement of
            photo identification.--Common Cause/Georgia, 554 F. 3d at 1347.

        In fact, upon learning of the state court injunction in the Lake
    matter, I urged and the State Election Board agreed that the State
    would NOT seek a stay of the state court injunction (although the State
    did appeal and the injunction was vacated and the action ordered
    dismissed) . The State would NOT apply the 2006 Photo ID law to the
    2006 general election because if the State pursued a stay and
    prevailed, the rules ``will have changed midstream.'' The State would
    ``suspend all educational efforts about the requirement of photo
    identification.'' And, the State would send a second letter making
    clear that the photo ID would not be required in the upcoming general
    election. 9/23/06 AP Alert--GA 07:31:47--Westlaw.
        Since I was not involved in the actual administrative process of
    mailing letters approved around September 1, 2006, I was not involved
    enough to know whether the mailing in progress could have been stopped.
    But, I do know the Board immediately suspended the application of the
    2006 Photo ID law to the remaining 2006 elections, suspended all
    educational efforts, and took additional actions to make sure voters
    were accurately informed including sending a second letter making clear
    that a photo ID would not be required for the 2006 elections.
        It is why the Eleventh Circuit determined that: ``While the
    injunction by the state court was extant, Georgia suspended all
    educational efforts about the requirement of photo identification.'' It
    was also consistent with how the State had dealt with injunctions as to
    specific elections before. In Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 504 F.
    Supp. 2d 1333, 1340 (N.D. Ga. 2007), paragraph 31, the District Court
    stated as follows:

              After the Court's July 14, 2006 Order, and after the Georgia
            Supreme Court's refusal to stay the temporary restraining order
            issued in the Lake case, the State Defendants stopped all of
            their attempts to educate voters concerning the 2006 Photo ID
            Act. In early September 2006, the State Election Board voted to
            resume those educational efforts.

        As it turned out, there were no specific allegations of any voter
    being misled either by the letter or the educational effort. In fact,
    in addressing the overall education effort, in footnote 7 of the
    District Court decision, addressing the State's overall educational
    efforts, the Court rejected the argument ``that the voter education
    materials provided by the State were misleading or did not provide
    sufficient information.'' Common Cause/Georgia v. Billups, 504 F. Supp.
    2d at 1378 n.7.

        Question 2. The United States is a beacon of democracy for so many
    nations around the globe and you are about to represent this country in
    Luxembourg.

       If asked about President Trump's so-called Election Integrity
            Commission by government officials in Luxembourg and
            President's Trump's claims that millions of people voted
            illegally in the United States, what would you say?

        Answer. Until any report is issued, I will note that the claims are
    the subject of various investigations including the Election Integrity
    Commission. Upon the issuance of a report, I will defer to the report
    as well as any related government materials that may be generated by
    the Congress, states, or other government entities investigating the
    claims.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------                              5

                           TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Rubio [presiding], Flake, Gardner, Young,
    Isakson, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen, Murphy, Markey, and
    Merkley.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Rubio. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
    order. This is a full committee hearing on the nominations of
    Dr. Christopher Ashley Ford to be the Assistant Secretary of
    State for International Security and Nonproliferation, and Dr.
    Yleem Poblete to be Assistant Secretary of State for
    Verification and Compliance.
        I thank both of you for being here today and for your
    willingness to serve our country.
        Ranking Member, with your permission, because I know both
    Senator Boozman and Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen are scheduled, I
    was going to let them give their introductions before I gave
    mine.
        Senator Cardin. Absolutely. I am looking forward to hearing
    from our colleagues. So absolutely.
        Senator Rubio. And both because of how far she had to
    travel here across the Capitol to come over and her years of
    service to our country, if it is okay, Senator, I was going to
    give the Congresswoman the opportunity open with her remarks,
    and then I will recognize you.
        Senator Shaheen. And she is from Florida. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. Yes, the Florida part. Actually, as I
    proudly tell people, I was an intern for her in 1991, so not
    that long ago.
        Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. We still have high hopes for you,
    Senator. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. I will get there one day. But anyway, I
    mean, for your high hopes. I do not want anyone to read into
    that. The commissioner job of the NFL has been taken for now,
    so, anyway, I appreciate you being here. Thank you for being
    with the committee.

                STATEMENT OF HON. ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN,
                    U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA

        Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Chairman Rubio,
    Ranking Member Cardin, Senators.
        And thank you, Senator Boozman, for letting me go first.
    That is very nice of you.
        Today, I have the distinct honor and privilege to introduce
    to the committee Dr. Yleem Poblete, originally from Florida,
    now of Virginia, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
        I have known Yleem since she was a precocious 8-year-old,
    volunteering on my first campaign for the Florida statehouse.
    It was clear then, as it is now, that public service was her
    true calling.
        I can attest and promise to this committee, and to the
    entire Senate, that Yleem is a nominee who will make us all
    proud, that she will fulfill the duties and obligations of her
    office faithfully and vigilantly.
        She has more than 2 decades' worth of experience on issues
    directly related to this position to which she has been
    nominated. Yleem has navigated, executed, and led the
    legislative agenda on a wide array of foreign affairs and
    national security matters for the House of Representatives.
        During her time working for me and on the Committee on
    Foreign Affairs, she worked in a bipartisan manner to advance
    U.S. foreign policy interests in virtually every region of the
    world.
        So it is quite fitting that Yleem as President Trump's
    nominee for the position of Assistant Secretary of State,
    Verification and Compliance, at the Department of State, would
    be before you today, at a time when verification and compliance
    are critical to U.S. national security interests. Whether for
    the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the INF Treaty;
    Syrian chemical weapons use; or to prevent a nuclear-armed
    Iran, our Nation will be well-served to have Dr. Yleem Poblete
    as one of the first lines of defense.
        She has dedicated her professional life to holding rogue
    regimes and violator's feet to the fire. My dear colleagues,
    many of you can attest to this, having worked with her
    throughout the years, and I know that Senator Menendez and Mr.
    Rubio, you have worked with her directly.
        And thanks to her diligence and acumen, multiple bills
    targeting some of the most complex and dangerous proliferation
    threats in Iran, in Syria, in North Korea, in Russia, and
    elsewhere, have become law.
        I can go on and on about the totality of Yleem's
    professional achievements, because there are so many. But
    instead, I will just conclude with a note about her personal
    character and integrity.
        As a young Hispanic woman working on national security
    interests and all issues related to the welfare of our Nation,
    Yleem has rightfully earned credibility and respect in her area
    of expertise and from her peers, despite the odds.
        And all along the way, she has made it one of her primary
    missions to help so many others achieve their own goals. She
    has been a mentor and a role model for so many staffers. Yleem
    has encouraged them to achieve not only their educational
    goals, but to surpass their potential. And I know there are
    countless who are grateful for the care, for the support, and
    for the guidance that Yleem has given to them over the years.
    In the 20-years-plus of working for me, whenever I needed
    Yleem, she was there, and I shall forever be grateful for that.
    But she was there also for so many others.
        And now I believe that our Nation needs her more than ever,
    and I know that she is proud to answer that call. Her
    commitment to public service is admirable, and her dedication
    to protecting the United States and our national security
    interests makes Yleem the ideal nominee for this position.
        Yleem is accompanied this morning by her supportive
    husband, Jason Poblete, and watching the proceedings from Miami
    are her father, Octavio; her mother, Miriam; her sister,
    Giselle; her brother, Jonathan.
        I fully support her nomination. And with that, I am honored
    to introduce Dr. Yleem Poblete.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you. And thanks so much for being
    here. We appreciate that very much.
        Senator Boozman, we recognize you to present Dr. Ford.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS

        Senator Boozman. Thank you, Chairman Rubio and Ranking
    Member Cardin, for the honor of being here to introduce Dr.
    Yleem Poblete, the President's nominee for Assistant Secretary
    of State for Verification and Compliance. I have known and
    worked with Yleem for over 15 years and enthusiastically
    support her confirmation to this important position.
        I first got to know Yleem as a member of the House Foreign
    Affairs Committee. I was always impressed by her hard work,
    dedication to public service, ability to quickly synthesize
    difficult issues, and her singular focus on developing
    solutions, rather than identifying problems, which is so
    important.
        She is a consummate professional who is able to skillfully
    navigate competing priorities to advance U.S. national security
    interests and priorities. Her past successful efforts on bills
    targeting Iran, Syria, and North Korea are a testament, among a
    number of other things, but they are a testament to her skills
    and her determination.
        In conclusion, Yleem's policy expertise and political
    acumen will serve the State Department and our country very,
    very well, and I wholeheartedly support her confirmation.
        Senator Rubio. I thank you for being here as well. And I
    misspoke. I apologize. I said you were representing Dr. Ford.
    But I appreciate two presentations, and thank you both for
    being here and for your time today.
        And with that, I will move into my opening statements on
    nomination, and then we will proceed from there.
        Senator Cardin. But our two colleagues are free to leave,
    if they have other things to do.
        Senator Rubio. No, actually, we want you to stay and watch
    the whole thing, but it is on television now, so you can--
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Boozman. I am on the Budget Committee, so----
        Senator Rubio. Oh, you should go. Yes.
        Senator Boozman [continuing]. I have to run.
        Senator Rubio. You need to be there. But thank you again,
    both, for being here.
        So if confirmed, the two of you will help the United States
    to craft and improve policies seeking to prevent the
    international spread of nuclear weapons, chemical weapons,
    biological weapons, and other deadly and destructive
    technologies, and to verify the full compliance of countries
    that have entered into bilateral or multilateral agreements
    with the U.S. related to nonproliferation and arms control.
        While most countries comply with the 1968 nuclear Non-
    Proliferation Treaty and other key multilateral agreements
    aimed at restraining nuclear proliferation, there are certain
    bad actors that are posing severe challenges to the
    international order.
        In North Korea, the Kim regime poses direct threats with
    its nuclear warheads, ballistic missiles, and conventional
    military against its neighbors, including South Korea and
    Japan, as well as against American military forces that are
    forward-deployed in the Indo-Pacific. North Korea, which has a
    long history of cooperating with Iran on missiles, is also
    trying to build ICBMs capable of delivering nuclear warheads to
    American soil.
        We should also not forget that North Korea used the nuclear
    Non-Proliferation Treaty, which, by the way, it left in 2003,
    as well as President Clinton's 1994 agreed framework as cover
    to gain years to overtly and covertly acquire the capabilities
    to build nuclear weapons.
        In the Middle East, the Iranian regime's nuclear ambitions
    and growing missile arsenal pose long-term threats to its
    neighbors, which include Saudi Arabia and other gulf nations,
    as well as to American military forces forward-deployed in the
    region, not to mention, of course, the State of Israel.
        While the Obama administration was hopeful that its
    controversial nuclear deal with Iran would lead to restraint
    and moderation in the Iranian regime's behavior, the opposite,
    clearly, is happening.
        While the regime has a long-term path to getting nuclear
    weapons, especially when the Iran nuclear deal's key
    limitations expire in little more than a decade, they are
    aggressively expanding their missile capabilities in the near
    term. The regime has also used the financial windfall from this
    flawed deal to increase its support for terrorist organizations
    such as Hezbollah, for sectarian militancy throughout the
    region, and even for the Assad barbaric dictatorship in Syria.
        In light of the controversial nuclear deal with Iran, one
    of my biggest concerns is that other Middle Eastern nations may
    seek to enter into a race to develop civil nuclear programs,
    but with also having breakout capability.
        In the Europe-Eurasian region, Russia and Vladimir Putin
    continue to violate the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces
    Treaty, and to deny some of America's overflight requests under
    the Open Skies Treaty. This, of course, raises serious
    questions about the future viability of arms control between
    the United States and Putin's Russia.
        I should add that, in Syria, the Assad regime, which is now
    backed by Putin and the Iranian regime, has repeatedly used
    chemical weapons against its own people. The 2013 Obama-Putin
    agreement clearly failed to verifiably eliminate all chemical
    weapons in Syria.
        These are just some of the many serious challenges that the
    international spread of nuclear weapons and other deadly and
    destructive technologies pose to the United States and to our
    allies.
        Dr. Ford and Dr. Poblete, I look forward to hearing your
    views on these issues and other issues today, because if you
    are confirmed, I cannot stress how important your positions in
    the State Department will be in helping our Nation's leaders
    chart the right path toward stopping these threats.
        With that, I now recognize the ranking member.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Well, Senator Rubio, first of all, thank
    you for conducting this hearing and chairing this hearing.
        I want to welcome both of our nominees, Ms. Poblete and Dr.
    Ford. Both of you, we thank you for your willingness to serve
    our country. And increasingly, these are very important
    positions.
        I also want to acknowledge your past work here in Congress.
        Dr. Ford, I personally enjoyed our relationship with
    Senator Corker and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and
    your critically important work on behalf of our committee.
        Ms. Poblete, your work on the House Foreign Affairs
    Committee, we appreciate that. And that is a plus. We want you
    to know that. We appreciate people who have experience here on
    Capitol Hill.
        I also want to acknowledge your families that are here
    today, your spouses, and your daughter that is here, Dr. Ford.
    It is impressive to see the family support, because we know it
    is going be a family sacrifice, the work that you are going to
    be doing.
        As I have indicated, these positions are critically
    important to our national security. They deal with arms control
    and nonproliferation, vital arms control treaties that we have
    with Russia. The chairman has mentioned the INF Treaty, which
    is, obviously, one of our most important bilateral treaty
    obligations dealing with arms control and nonproliferation, and
    the New START treaty, which is in its early stages, but a very
    important treaty, and its long-term implications, we would be
    interested in hearing today. Multilateral treaties and
    agreements, including the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and
    the Chemical Weapons Convention, are also very much on our
    minds today and have been in the headlines.
        The AVC Bureau produces an annual report, which we look to
    every year to see the compliance of our treaty partners and the
    obligations that they have entered into. And the ISN deals with
    preventing proliferation. And as the chairman pointed out, we
    have major issues today in North Korea and Iran that we would
    welcome your views on.
        And, Dr. Ford, as we both learned recently, you also, if
    confirmed, will have the responsibility in regard to carrying
    out certain sanction programs, including that with Russia,
    particularly military aspects to that. So we look forward to
    learning more about your views on these important subjects.
        I am going to highlight four areas of concern that I hope
    we can get into during today's nomination hearing.
        The first issue that requires immediate attention is the
    INF Treaty. Since 2014, the State Department, in its annual
    compliance report, has determined that Russia is in violation
    of its INF obligations to refrain from building ground-based
    missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. Russia
    has continued to deny it has developed a ground-based cruise
    missile and has, in turn, with no evidence, accused the United
    States of violating the treaty.
        I have advocated an approach to Russia's INF violations
    that emphasizes defensive measures to protect ourselves and our
    allies from Russia's aggression, but does so in a manner that
    maintains the rule-based order that bolsters European and
    American security. I want to hear from our witnesses today how
    they believe the United States should be constructively
    approaching Russia's INF violations.
        The second issue deals with New START. By February 2018,
    the United States and Russia must reduce their strategic
    nuclear forces to a level agreed to by that treaty. Assuming
    Russia meets these obligations, and the size of Russia's forces
    are verified through the U.S. onsite inspections, the United
    States must decide whether it wants to extend the treaty for
    another 5 years until 2026. The United States could decide to
    negotiate a new treaty or end all legal binding nuclear arms
    control limitations with Russia.
        I am eager to hear our witness's views on how the United
    States should move forward on this critical issue, given the
    heightened tension between the United States and Russia.
        The third issue is one, probably, that this committee has
    spent more time on than any other single issue, and that is the
    Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA, with Iran. In
    October, President Trump did not make the every-90-day
    compliance certification outlined in the INARA act. The
    President indicated he wanted to work with Congress and our
    allies to address the JCPOA flaws, but, ``In the event we are
    not able to reach solution working with Congress and our
    allies, then the agreement will be terminated.'' I find the
    President's approach extremely troubling and puzzling.
        Dr. Ford, as the current senior director of WMD at NSC, I
    assume you were deeply involved in the administration's view of
    Iran policies. I hope you can shed some light on the
    administration's thinking on the future of the JCPOA.
        Finally, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reviews and
    provides oversight on all civilian nuclear cooperation
    agreements, often referred to as 123 agreements, with other
    countries. We have heard credible reports that the Trump
    administration is considering entering into civilian nuclear
    cooperation with Saudi Arabia. In 2009, the United States
    negotiated a 123 agreement with the UAE, legally renounced its
    enrichment and reprocessing technologies and capabilities. This
    was the so-called gold standard.
        It is important for this committee to know whether the
    United States is negotiating a nuclear cooperation with Saudi
    Arabia, and whether it will insist on the same nonproliferation
    standards that were included in the UAE agreement.
        So, Mr. Chairman, you see that we have two individuals who
    are willing to step forward on very important responsibilities
    for this country, but there are many questions that we are
    going to want to ask.
        Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you to the ranking member.
        To both nominees, your opening statements are in the
    record. I provide you the option of going straight to
    questions, but you are more than welcome to sort of provide
    them now. I would just encourage you, to the extent you can, to
    limit them to the time allotted, so that we can get to
    questions. I know that we have a lot of members coming in and
    out that do want to engage with you on some important matters.
        And so with that, Dr. Poblete, we can start with you.

     STATEMENT OF YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, PH.D., OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AN
      ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR VERIFICATION AND COMPLIANCE

        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator. Mr. Chairman, Ranking
    Member, members of this committee, it is an honor and a
    privilege to be here with you today. I am truly humbled by the
    trust President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have placed in me
    via this nomination. And I wish to thank Vice President Pence
    for his support, and Senator Boozman, former Congressman Howard
    Berman, and Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for having taken
    the time to be here today or to weigh in on my behalf.
        Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, Ilie, is more than a former
    boss. She is a friend. She was the key that opened the door to
    my almost two decades of public service on the House Foreign
    Affairs Committee, a trajectory which enabled me to undertake
    new regional or functional portfolios every few years and, as
    such, helped me develop a greater appreciation for the
    experiences of State Department personnel.
        I rose through the ranks to become staff director and chief
    of staff, and worked with some extraordinary individuals, many
    of whom are in the audience here today or working on this side
    of the Capitol, some sitting here on the dais or behind the
    dais.
        My committee experience enabled me to work on the threats
    posed by radiological weapons and the role of the International
    Atomic Energy Agency in securing these materials; to work on
    nuclear cooperation agreements, such as the 123 agreement with
    the UAE; to exercise oversight of U.S. statutes and of
    compliance by foreign countries with their obligations and
    commitments under bilateral and international agreements or
    commitments; to develop policy responses to counter threats
    from rogue regimes seeking nuclear, chemical, biological
    weapons capabilities or destabilizing numbers of advanced
    conventional weapons; and to secure support for the U.S. agenda
    and priorities in international fora.
        None of this, however, would have been possible were it not
    for the Lord's protection and for my family. Words fail me in
    appropriately thanking my parents and grandparents for their
    many sacrifices, in thanking my siblings and my husband, Jason,
    for their unconditional love and support.
        I grew up in a family who experienced, firsthand, the evils
    of communism. When my mother arrived in the United States from
    Cuba, she knelt and literally kissed the ground. Gratitude and
    respect for this great Nation prompted my father, a young
    refugee, to serve in the U.S. Army.
        My family, throughout, instilled in me the firm belief that
    this Nation is the last best hope of man on Earth, that there
    are actors who seek to do her harm. And I feel privileged to
    have the opportunity, if confirmed, to contribute to keeping
    her safe through the rigorous verification and enforcement of
    arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements or
    commitments.
        I am fully aware and appreciate that this mandate comes
    from you, the Congress, when establishing the position for
    which I have been nominated. Turning to the committee report
    for guidance, it said: The Assistant Secretary will have
    overall oversight of policy and resources for verification and
    compliance regarding not only various treaties but also
    executive agreements and commitments, including those falling
    within the purview of regional bureaus when such agreements or
    commitments pertain to arms control, nonproliferation, or
    disarmament.
        I recognize the Congress sought to ensure the verification
    and compliance mechanisms would be integrated into these
    agreements from their inception and be rigorously enforced.
        In that vein, Senators, I commit to you today that, if
    confirmed, I will dutifully fulfill this mandate and pursue
    effective verification, seeking to detect violations well
    before they become a threat to our national security and
    interests, and before options to address these and to correct
    or counter the situation are limited.
        Effective verification must also include detection,
    documentation, and accountability for patterns of marginal
    violations or noncompliance. Violations must be appropriately
    and effectively addressed. Maximizing the expertise of the
    bureau, of the Department of State, of our intelligence and
    resources from across the U.S. Government and from partner
    nations will be a priority, as will identifying, applying,
    spurring, and maximizing new technologies in order to address
    today's security needs while preparing for the challenges of
    tomorrow.
        To conclude, Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Cardin, members
    of this committee, let me close by again thanking you for the
    privilege to appear before you today. I consider this
    appointment, if confirmed, to be the highest honor and solemn
    responsibility to undertake, and I relish the opportunity to
    serve our Nation. And once again, I am humbled by the trust and
    confidence of the President and the Secretary of State via this
    nomination.
        Thank you.
        [Dr. Poblete's prepared statement follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Dr. Yleem D.S. Poblete

        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, members of the committee. It is
    an honor and privilege to be here today.I am humbled by the trust
    President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have placed in me via this
    nomination and for the opportunity, if confirmed, to join public
    servants at the Department of State and throughout the administration
    in advancing U.S. national security and interests.
        I wish to thank Vice President Pence for his support; Senator
    Boozman, former Congressman Howard Berman and Congresswoman Ileana Ros-
    Lehtinen for taking the time to be here today or to weigh in on my
    behalf. Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen is more than a former boss. She is a
    friend. She was the key that opened the door to my almost two decades
    of public service on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs--a
    trajectory which enabled me to undertake new regional or functional
    portfolios every two to four years and, as such, helped me develop a
    greater appreciation for the experiences of Foreign Service, Civil
    Service, and other State Department personnel.
        I rose through the ranks to become Staff Director and Chief of
    Staff and worked with some extraordinary individuals, many of whom are
    now on this side of the Capitol. My committee experience enabled me:

       to work on the threat posed by radiological weapons and the role of
            the International Atomic Energy Agency in securing these
            materials;
       to work on nuclear cooperation agreements;
       to exercise oversight of U.S. statutes and of compliance by foreign
            countries with their obligations and commitments under existing
            bilateral and international agreements.
       to develop policy responses to counter threats from rogue regimes
            seeking nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons capabilities,
            and/or destabilizing numbers of advanced conventional weapons;
            and
       to secure support for the U.S. agenda and priorities in
            international fora.

        None of this, however, would have been possible were it not for the
    Lord's protection and for my family. Words fail me in appropriately
    thanking my parents and grandparents for their many sacrifices; in
    thanking my siblings and my husband, Jason, for their unconditional
    love and support.
        I grew up in a family who experienced first-hand the evils of
    Communism--persecution, intimidation, arbitrary arrest and detention,
    friends and relatives killed before them. When my mother arrived in the
    United States as a teenager via the Peter Pan flights from Cuba, she
    knelt and literally kissed the ground--the soil of liberty.
        Gratitude and respect for this great nation prompted my father, a
    young refugee, to serve in the U.S. Army.
        My family instilled in me the firm belief that: ``this nation is
    the last best hope of man on Earth''; that there are actors who seek to
    do her harm, and I feel privileged to have the opportunity, if
    confirmed, to contribute to keeping her safe through the rigorous
    verification and enforcement of arms control, nonproliferation, and
    disarmament agreements or commitments.
        I am fully aware and appreciate that this mandate comes from you,
    the Congress, when establishing the position for which I have been
    nominated. Turning to the committee report for guidance, it said: the
    Assistant Secretary will have ``overall oversight of policy and
    resources for verification and compliance regarding not only various
    treaties, but also executive agreements and commitments, including
    those falling within the purview of regional bureaus when such
    agreements or commitments pertain to arms control, nonproliferation, or
    disarmament.''
        I recognize that by combining these components in a single bureau
    under one assistant secretary, the Congress sought to ensure that
    verification and compliance mechanisms would reflect the challenges and
    concerns of policymakers, would be integrated into the agreements from
    their inception, and would be rigorously enforced.
        In that vein, I commit to you today that, if confirmed, I will
    dutifully fulfill this mandate and pursue ``effective verification''--
    seeking to detect violations well before they become a threat to our
    national security and interests and before options to address, correct
    or counter the situation are limited. Effective verification must also
    include detection, documentation, and accountability for ``patterns of
    marginal violations'' or non-compliance.
        Violations must be appropriately and effectively addressed. Failure
    to do so, as stated in the 2017 Compliance Report produced by the
    Bureau I have been nominated to lead, can ``perpetuate and compound the
    dangers [to U.S. and allies' security].''
        Maximizing the expertise of the Bureau, of the Department of State,
    of intelligence and resources from across the U.S. government and
    partner nations will be a priority, as will identifying and applying
    new technologies to correct deficiencies which may exist, in order to
    address today's security needs while preparing for the challenges of
    tomorrow.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, members of the committee, let me
    close by, again, thanking you for the privilege to appear before you
    today. I consider this appointment, if confirmed, to be the highest
    honor and solemn responsibility to undertake. I relish the opportunity
    to serve our nation and am humbled by the trust and confidence that the
    President and Secretary of State have placed in me via this nomination
    for Assistant Secretary for Verification and Compliance.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Dr. Ford?

    STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY FORD, D.PHIL., OF MARYLAND, TO
     BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
                         AND NON-PROLIFERATION

        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin,
    and members of the committee. It is an honor to appear before
    you today as President Trump's nominee to be Assistant
    Secretary of State for International Security and
    Nonproliferation.
        I want to thank the President for his confidence in me and
    for the opportunity, with your approval, of course, to help
    meet the formidable challenges in protecting the American
    people and preserving and advancing the national interests of
    our great Republic in the face of ongoing challenges from the
    proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, delivery systems,
    advanced conventional weapons, and associated materials and
    technologies.
        I would also like to thank Secretary of State Rex Tillerson
    for his support for my nomination.
        But I also would like to take moment to thank my family, my
    wife, Schuyler, and my daughter, Stella-Grace, for their love
    and for their support.
        Almost all of my professional career has been spent in
    government or near it in the public policy community, and I
    think my record demonstrates an unstinting commitment to public
    service. But nevertheless, it is they, my wife and my daughter,
    who are really the sun around which my planet revolves. I owe
    them a tremendous debt of gratitude for all of their patience,
    their kindness, and their support, especially in the months
    since I joined the National Security Council staff last
    January, as you might imagine. And I am pleased beyond words
    that they are able to join me here today.
        So, Schuyler and Stella-Grace, I love you, and I thank you
    with all of my heart.
        I have been, Mr. Chairman, privileged to serve in many
    positions of responsibility and trust in national security
    affairs over more than 2 decades, as, indeed, it was always my
    dream to be when I was studying many years ago as an
    undergraduate at Harvard, getting my doctorate at Oxford as a
    Rhodes Scholar, and getting my law degree at Yale.
        I have served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy
    Reserve, as a Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State at
    what was then the Verification and Compliance Bureau, and as
    the U.S. Government's Special Representative for Nuclear
    Nonproliferation.
        In addition to that, I have worked for five different
    Senators on six different committee staffs here in the Senate,
    including at this very committee.
        It has been my particular honor to serve the American
    people over the last 11 months on the National Security Council
    staff where I presently run the Weapons of Mass Destruction and
    Counterproliferation Directorate and serve as a special
    assistant to the President.
        My experience with nonproliferation and related issues goes
    back many years now, but it is probably my time at the NSC that
    has best prepared me for the honor of serving, if confirmed, as
    the Assistant Secretary for International Security and
    Nonproliferation.
        I am proud of the role that I have played in helping this
    new administration find its footing in this arena and begin to
    build out a farsighted and resolute approach to the many
    challenges that we face.
        Mr. Chairman, although I have never been able to imagine
    not being deeply involved in working on U.S. public policy and
    national security issues, the WMD business is not one in which
    I originally expected to be. My doctoral dissertation, after
    all, was on international relations theory and African regional
    relations. When I practiced law, I worked on large toxic tort
    class action litigation cases, and I spent years on different
    congressional staffs doing investigations.
        My Senate career has included doing intelligence oversight
    work in the years just after 9/11 and during the global war on
    terrorism, working on appropriations legislation round about
    2013 in the time of the government shutdown at the time, and
    has included a broad range of legislative work for this very
    committee.
        I have also, at various points, helped an international war
    crimes tribunal get itself established in West Africa, produced
    intelligence analysis as a naval officer, clerked briefly for a
    Federal appellate judge, and helped with research on elephant
    physiology, of all things, while living in a tent in a game
    park in Kenya. I have trained at a Zen center in the Sangre de
    Cristo Mountains. I have taught Japanese jujitsu at a dojo here
    in Washington. And I have written books on naval history and
    Sino-American relations.
        But I have been drawn, especially, to the field of weapons
    of mass destruction, because of its combination of intellectual
    challenge and technical complexity, and because of its obvious
    criticality, not just to the preservation of U.S. national
    security, but also of international peace and security, and,
    indeed, potentially, of civilization itself. This admixture of
    challenge and criticality and urgency has made these issues,
    for me, an abiding passion.
        Preventing the use and spread of weapons of mass
    destruction is clearly a vital national security interest of
    the United States. It is critical to slow, stop, or roll back
    the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction, delivery
    systems, advanced conventional weapons, and associated
    materials and technologies by state and nonstate actors alike.
    It is critical both to prevent the use of such weapons and to
    hold those who do use them strictly to account. And it is
    critical to manage wisely the challenges of stability and
    deterrence that are inherent in relationships between nuclear-
    weapon states.
        If confirmed, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with
    State Department colleagues, with stakeholders from across the
    interagency, with diplomatic counterparts, with the private
    sector and civil society, and yes, of course, with
    congressional members and staffs in order to protect and
    advance the interests of the American people and of
    international peace and security.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, members of the
    committee, I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today, and I do welcome your questions and your comments.
        [Dr. Ford's prepared statement follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Dr. Christopher A. Ford

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the committee,
    it is an honor to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee
    to be Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and
    Nonproliferation. I want to thank the President for his confidence in
    me, and for the opportunity--with your approval--to help meet the
    formidable challenges of protecting the American people and preserving
    and advancing the national interests of our great Republic in the face
    of ongoing challenges from the proliferation of weapons of mass
    destruction (WMD), delivery systems, advanced conventional weapons, and
    associated materials and technologies. I would also like to express my
    gratitude to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for supporting my
    nomination.
        But I also want to take a moment to thank my family--my wife,
    Schuyler, and my daughter, Stella-Grace--for their love and support.
    Almost all of my professional career has been spent in government, or
    near it in the public policy community, and I think my record
    demonstrates an unstinting commitment to public service. Nevertheless,
    it is they, my wife and my daughter, who are really the sun around
    which my planet revolves. I owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude for
    all their patience, their kindness, and their support--especially in
    the months since I joined the National Security Council staff last
    January--and I am pleased beyond words that they have been able to join
    me here today. Schuyler and Stella-Grace, I love and I thank you with
    all my heart.
        I have been privileged to serve in many positions of responsibility
    and trust in national security affairs over more than two decades--as
    indeed it was my dream to do when studying many years ago as an
    undergraduate at Harvard, getting my doctorate as a Rhodes Scholar at
    Oxford University, and getting my law degree at Yale. I have served as
    an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, as a Principal Deputy
    Assistant Secretary of State, and as the U.S. Government's Special
    Representative for Nuclear Nonproliferation, and I have worked for five
    different Senators on six different committee staffs here in the U.S.
    Senate--including at the Foreign Relations Committee.
        It has been my particular honor to serve the American people over
    the last 11 months on the National Security Council (NSC) staff, where
    I presently run the Weapons of Mass Destruction and
    Counterproliferation Directorate and serve as a Special Assistant to
    the President. My experience with nonproliferation and related national
    security issues goes back many years now, but it is probably my time at
    the NSC that has done the most to prepare me for the honor of serving--
    if confirmed--as Assistant Secretary of State for International
    Security and Nonproliferation.
        I am proud of the role I have played in helping the new
    administration find its footing in this arena and begin to build out a
    far-sighted and resolute approach to meeting the many challenges we
    face.
        Though I have never been able to imagine not being deeply involved
    in working on U.S. public policy and national security issues, the WMD
    business is not a line of work in which I originally expected to be. My
    doctoral dissertation, after all, was on international relations theory
    and African regional relations. When I practiced law, I worked on toxic
    tort class action litigation, and I spent years doing Congressional
    investigations on multiple Senate staffs. My Senate career has also
    included doing intelligence oversight during the first two years of the
    ``Global War on Terrorism,'' working on appropriations legislation
    during the tumultuous period surrounding the 2013 government shutdown,
    and a broad range of subsequent legislative work for this very
    committee just last year.
        I have also, at various points, helped an international war crimes
    tribunal set itself up in West Africa, produced intelligence analyses
    as a Navy officer, clerked briefly for a federal appellate judge, and
    helped with research on elephant physiology while living for months in
    a Kenyan game park. I have trained at a Zen Center in the foothills of
    the Sangre De Christo Mountains, taught Japanese jujutsu at a dojo here
    in Washington, and written books on naval history and on Sino-American
    relations.
        But I have been drawn to the field of WMD because of its
    combination of intellectual challenge and technical complexity, and
    because of its obvious criticality to the preservation of U.S. national
    security, of international peace and security, and potentially even of
    civilization itself. This admixture of challenge and urgency has made
    these issues, for me, an abiding passion.
        Preventing the use and spread of weapons of mass destruction is
    clearly a vital national security interest of the United States. It is
    critical to slow, stop, or roll back the acquisition of WMD, delivery
    systems, advanced conventional weapons, and associated materials and
    technologies by state and non-state adversaries alike. It is critical
    both to prevent the use of such weapons and to hold those who do use
    them strictly to account. And it is critical to manage wisely the
    challenges of stability and deterrence that are inherent in
    relationships between nuclear weapons states.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with State Department
    colleagues, with stakeholders from across the interagency, with
    diplomatic counterparts, with the private sector and civil society,
    and--yes, of course--with Congressional Members and staffs to protect
    and advance the interests of the American people and of international
    peace and security.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee, I
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I welcome
    your comments and questions.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you, Dr. Ford. And you have already
    made an extraordinary contribution. My wife has an upcoming
    birthday, and you just made a statement about your family. I
    hope this is not on television, but I am going to use that in
    the card. The sun that my planet revolves around. That is going
    on the card next week. Don't tell anybody. [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. Don't tell anybody where I got it. All
    right.
        So I will begin with the same question for both of you, and
    then I am going defer to the ranking member of the committee.
    So I just want to start out with this opening question, because
    I think it will cover sort of the scope of the hearing, and I
    think maybe set you up for future questions here from other
    Senators.
        And I will begin with you, Dr. Ford. What do you consider
    to be the biggest challenge that you will be facing, if and
    when confirmed?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would say that the biggest challenge is not any
    particular piece of the ISN Bureau's portfolio, but rather in
    the aggregate challenge that we face in dealing with
    nonproliferation issues generally.
        I think we are at a point at this juncture in world history
    where the global nonproliferation regime faces the accumulated
    stresses of many years, frankly, of failures of the
    international community to address proliferation challenges as
    quickly and effectively as they probably should. We are and
    have been in something of a race between the proliferators, who
    are trying to develop their threat systems as rapidly as
    possible, and the international community, which has been
    trying to build diplomatic and various other sorts of support
    to bring pressure upon those proliferators to not take such
    actions, to shore up, buttress, and improve the international
    institutions and norms and practices that help make it very
    difficult, if not impossible, to advance such systems. And we
    have not collectively been able to react to the challenge as
    fast as we had. The system has been placed under a very sort of
    slow-motion stress that it is not yet clear that it can handle.
        It is part of our challenge today in the policy community
    to react to these challenges across a range of policy areas,
    including in the areas that I would, if confirmed, have the
    honor to help manage at the ISN Bureau.
        Part of it will be shoring up those institutions to slow,
    stop, and, perhaps, roll back the possession of these
    technologies and materials, and just impede the progress of
    threat programs. Part of it is to improve international
    solidarity against those proliferators. Part of it is also, in
    a slightly different arena, to shore up the alliance
    relationships that were very important during the Cold War, and
    I think still remain extraordinarily important as
    nonproliferation tools. And fundamentally, it is to, if
    necessary, position ourselves for that which we cannot prevent
    from happening, to make sure that we are in a position to
    manage the challenges that proliferation presents once it has
    taken root.
        This is a full-spectrum challenge that we have, I think,
    over the years hitherto not been very good collectively
    addressing. And it is going to be a full-court press I think
    across the U.S. interagency and with international partners to
    address it in the years ahead.
        That is most formidable challenge, I think, that we face.
        Senator Rubio. Dr. Poblete, I have the same question with a
    slight twist on it. In addition to the broader context, if you
    could, a little bit, get into, as part of the question of what
    the biggest challenge would be, the notion or the idea or the
    reality of the impact that a series of smaller violations taken
    in their sum on any of these agreements, the cumulative effect
    of a pattern of smaller violations over an extended period of
    time, the role they might play in your job, as well as
    answering the broader question of what you consider the biggest
    challenge you will face, if confirmed.
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator.
        First, I have not had the opportunity to consult with the
    experts in the bureau, so in response to your question about
    the biggest challenges, based solely on my interpretation and
    my observations of these issues, and consultations with my
    would-be predecessors, if confirmed, I would answer it simply
    as integration of the Arms Control, Verification and Compliance
    Bureau, and restoring the bureau's statutory role.
        And what I mean by that is--Senator Cardin mentioned
    preventing proliferation. To prevent proliferation, we also
    need to ensure that we have rigorous verification and
    compliance measures incorporated from the onset. We must also
    ensure that there is accountability for those immediate
    violations as well as patterns of marginal violations.
        When I referred to patterns of marginal violations in my
    prepared remarks, it is, again, referring to the mandate that
    the Congress provided to the bureau. And unfortunately, when I
    look at what has transpired in the last few years--I will use
    the example of Iran and the JCPOA.
        It is my understanding that here is a seminal, by many
    accounts, a seminal, politically binding commitment, not a
    formal agreement, but a politically binding commitment, to
    counter the threat posed by a rogue regime such as Iran. Yet it
    is my understanding that neither in the negotiation nor in its
    implementation was the bureau that was mandated, statutorily
    tasked, with verification and compliance included in these
    negotiations in the implementation process.
        I find that to be very troubling. I do not believe that
    that is the intent of the Congress, of this committee.
        And when referring to patterns of marginal violations,
    again, I must revert back to the JCPOA.
        In its totality, one can see a troubling response and a
    troubling set of actions and activities by the Iranian regime.
    If those go unanswered, if we allow the Iranian regime, just as
    in the past we have allowed Russia or North Korea or other
    violators to test the waters of our commitment to these legally
    binding agreements or politically binding commitments, we are
    eroding our very priorities to prevent proliferation.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        The ranking member.
        Senator Cardin. Dr. Poblete, let me ask you a question in
    regard to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. We are not a
    member of that treaty. It has never been ratified. Do you see
    any circumstances in which the United States would no longer
    maintain its ban on nuclear explosion testing?
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator.
        First, I would like to clarify that the administration is
    undertaking a comprehensive review of all the arms-control
    agreements, nonproliferation agreements, that we are
    signatories to, parties to, that we have ratified and not
    ratified.
        Now, I will not presume to assume what the administration
    will determine with respect to the Comprehensive Test Ban
    Treaty. What I will say is that in the U.S. deliberations and
    the U.S. role and perception of the Comprehensive Test Ban
    Treaty, there is value. The U.S., writ large, this
    administration and others, have identified certain components
    of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty such as----
        Senator Cardin. I am trying to get to the specific answer.
        Dr. Poblete. Sure.
        Senator Cardin. Are there any circumstances that you would
    support the United States giving up its moratorium on nuclear
    testing?
        Dr. Poblete. No, sir.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. I appreciate that answer.
        New START, if Russia is in compliance, if they get down to
    the numbers that are required, would you recommend a 5-year
    extension of the New START Treaty?
        Dr. Poblete. Senator, as you mentioned in your opening
    statement, this is still in the early stages. The Russian
    Federation, I understand, is on track to meet the obligations,
    the central tenets, of New START in February of next year. That
    has yet to be confirmed. That has yet to be seen. It is yet to
    be verified.
        Senator Cardin. We will have inspections that we will be
    able to determine whether, in fact, they have reached that. If,
    in fact, the report shows that they have reached the required
    limit, do you believe we should extend the New START for the 5-
    year provision?
        Dr. Poblete. Again, Senator, it would be premature of me to
    get ahead of the administration's review. However, specifically
    to your question, it hasn't happened yet. And again, I would be
    getting ahead of the facts.
        Senator Cardin. I understand you have to--and we have had
    nominees who have come here, given their views, and the
    administration has come out with different views, and they
    support the administration's view. I understand that.
        But you are certainly aware of the New START Treaty and its
    obligations, et cetera. If, in fact, there is compliance, do
    you believe it is a useful treaty for us to continue for an
    additional five years? I am just asking your view on it. I
    understand that the administration will make the final
    judgments.
        Dr. Poblete. It is a useful treaty, if compliance by the
    Russian Federation is sustained, verifiable, and accounted for.
    We still have a few years before a determination needs to be
    made as to whether or not to extend the New START Treaty.
        So all I can say to you, sir, is that I will commit to
    ensuring that there is the necessary information; that I put
    forth that information that has been verified, confirmed, and
    documented to the policymakers; that I will build the case one
    way or the other. If there are violations, I will build that
    case and put it forth to the policymakers. If there is
    compliance, I will do so as well.
        Senator Cardin. Yes, I understand. The question is not
    whether there is compliance or noncompliance. I am assuming
    there is compliance. Otherwise, obviously, we have a different
    issue. I was trying to assess your views as to whether this
    agreement should be extended if there is compliance by Russia.
        And as I understand it, you are not prepared to make a
    statement on that at this time.
        Dr. Poblete. Sir, I think it is too early to tell since the
    Russian Federation has not met its central limits just yet,
    just yet.
        There is value to intrusive inspections. There is
    definitely value to the data-sharing that is encompassed in the
    New START Treaty. However, it is too early to make a
    recommendation when we do not yet have a definitive conclusion
    on compliance by all the parties.
        Senator Cardin. Well, we do know the Russia is out of
    compliance with the INF. We do know that. That determination
    has been made. How do you believe we should proceed, in regard
    to Russia's violations in its GLCM missile program?
        Dr. Poblete. Senator, simply, we have a three-pronged
    approach. It is my understanding that the U.S. continues to
    engage the Russian Federation, either through the Special
    Verification Commission, through allies at the highest levels,
    to try and convince the Russian Federation to come into
    compliance. I also know that we are engaging our allies and
    partners who are directly affected by the Russian Federation's
    violations of the INF. And lastly, we are considering a number
    of countermeasures, some of which have the congressional
    imprimatur, such as economic countermeasures.
        Our focus, however, given that our responsibilities, our
    international obligations to our allies and partners, must also
    include robust missile-defense capabilities to ensure that we
    are in compliance not just with our INF commitments but our
    global commitments to our allies and partners.
        Senator Cardin. So the National Defense Authorization Act
    provides authorization for defense against Russia's activities
    in regard to the missile program, which is something I strongly
    support. Do you believe we should seek compliance with the INF
    by Russia, not try to escalate the violations by the U.S.
    producing a weapon that would also be in violation of the range
    of the INF?
        Dr. Poblete. Well, Senator, if confirmed, what I can commit
    to you is that any countermeasures involving the range of U.S.
    Government agencies, that it will be my responsibility and my
    commitment to ensure that the United States is treaty-compliant
    and that whatever measures are undertaken do fall within the
    construct of a legally binding agreement, which is the INF.
        I know the Russian Federation has made very false claims
    against the U.S., trying to create a narrative that the United
    States' capabilities, missile-defense platforms in Romania and
    Poland under the European Phased Adaptive Approach, are in
    violation of INF. But the U.S. position is that interceptors
    are not a violation of the INF, given their purely defensive
    capabilities.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Senator Isakson?
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Chairman Rubio.
        Thank you, both of you, for being willing to serve our
    country.
        Mr. Ford, you made a comment, I think I took my notes
    right, but I want to repeat it, if I didn't, so you can correct
    it or amplify on it. You said we are confronting a time now
    where we are facing the aggregate accumulation of failures to
    deal with many nonproliferation issues.
        I believe I got that right. Did I get that right?
        Dr. Ford. That sounds correct to me, Senator.
        Senator Isakson. I happen to think you are right. I come
    from the State that was represented here in Senate for years by
    Sam Nunn who was on this committee under Dick Lugar. Dick Lugar
    and Sam Nunn are the two most prominent Americans on
    nonproliferation that I think we have alive today in this
    country.
        I think they would agree with you that we have accumulated
    some failures, and it is time for us to have some successes.
        Should you be confirmed, which I believe you will, what are
    you going to focus on to put an end to the failures and begin
    some successes?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator.
        I think in that respect, I would identify two things that
    correlate, I think, to the most significant failures that we
    collectively, not just in the U.S., but in the international
    community, have had. One of the challenges, of course, most
    obviously is North Korea.
        When I was last in the State Department, it was round about
    the time when we confronted them with evidence of their
    cheating under the so-called agreed-framework of 1994. They, in
    response to being caught with their hand in the proverbial
    cookie jar, pulled out of the NPT and have been busily building
    up their missile forces and their nuclear weapons ever since.
        Clearly, getting a hand on that somehow has got to be an
    enormous priority. It is the single most horrific sort of
    bleeding sore on the global nonproliferation regime today.
        The ISN Bureau has, in that respect, very important
    responsibilities related to the implementation of
    nonproliferation sanctions against the North Korean regime. And
    certainly, if confirmed, it would be a subject of enormous
    focus and emphasis for me as Assistant Secretary to make sure
    that we were doing absolutely everything that we can do in
    support of the President's what we call the maximum pressure
    strategy of using every available diplomatic, economic,
    sanctions, law enforcement, financial, and other tool to
    maximize the pressure upon the North Korean regime in ways that
    have not yet hitherto been done and to bring international
    partners along with us in that respect, to make sure that they
    face, finally, at long last, an incentive to make a different
    strategic choice.
        So that would be the highest priority. And I would also
    identify the slightly longer term, but also extremely important
    challenge, Senator, of addressing the Iranian proliferation
    challenge.
        One of the accumulated problems, I think, that the global
    nonproliferation regime faces is the legitimation of fissile
    material production in Iran, a country which, of course, for a
    long time had a very active nuclear weapons program. Managing
    the challenge that that presents to the nonproliferation regime
    is going to be an ongoing one for all of us. Negotiating a
    better way to approach Iranian proliferation challenges,
    especially over the long term in the years in which the current
    restrictions under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
    nuclear deal are set to evaporate, and leave Iran in a place
    where they can build up essentially any size nuclear program
    they want, that is not an acceptable nonproliferation path, I
    think, from the United States' perspective. And it would be an
    important focus of effort, if I were confirmed to be Assistant
    Secretary for ISN, to help lead the diplomatic charge to bring
    that threat finally under control in an enduring not merely a
    temporary fashion.
        Senator Isakson. I think you are exactly correct. I think
    Senator Nunn and Senator Lugar would have said the same thing
    were they sitting in this room today.
        The two challenges that face us are the Iranians and the
    joint agreement, and the North Koreans, where we have almost
    been an enabler, in some sense, by looking the other way,
    allowing them to get away with some of the things that they
    have.
        Ms. Poblete, you made a very interesting statement, which I
    also want to give you a chance to correct if I wrote it down
    wrong, because I was trying to write while I was listening. You
    said you were somewhat shocked by the non-inclusion of the
    Secretary's department that you are going to replace in the
    JCPOA.
        Was there not any inclusion in the State Department of any
    State Department personnel during the JCPOA negotiations, as
    far as compliance issues are concerned?
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator.
        It is my understanding, after having spoken with a range of
    former and current State Department officials, including the
    would-be predecessors, the former Assistant Secretaries for
    Verification and Compliance, that, no, that bureau was not
    engaged. And to go even further, if I may, Senator, on the Iran
    missile threat, for example, it turns out that the Verification
    and Compliance Bureau has virtually zero role in the
    implementation and verification of Iranian compliance with the
    U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231 regarding Iran's
    ballistic missile capabilities.
        At most, the Verification and Compliance Bureau's role with
    respect to Iranian missile threats or North Korean missile
    threats is reassuring our allies, engaging, fortifying via the
    strategic dialogues with the Republic of Korea, with Japan, and
    really focusing on ballistic missile defense to protect against
    those emerging threats, growing threats, from those two rogue
    regimes.
        I hope, if confirmed and given the opportunity, to be a
    strong advocate for the bureau and ensuring that its role is
    restored to its statutory commitment, its statutory guidance,
    which is to be an integral part, perhaps not the lead, as
    regional bureaus tend to take the lead on these agreements, on
    these negotiations, but certainly to be at the table and make
    sure that verification and compliance is not set aside and is
    considered a priority.
        We cannot have executive orders, national emergencies, with
    respect to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and
    not have the Verification and Compliance Bureau.
        If I may just indulge for one second, it has been said in
    the compliance report, which Senator Cardin mentioned in his
    opening statement, it has been said by a range of
    administration officials that failure to hold accountable,
    failure to ensure the verification and compliance is an
    integral part from the declarations by the target nations to
    the implementation of agreements and throughout negotiations
    will only help perpetuate the problem and will only help fuel
    further proliferation.
        Senator Isakson. Mr. Chairman, I know I am over time, but I
    allowed her to indulge herself in her answer. I am going to
    indulge myself in just a little amplification on that.
        Your answers were fantastic, and I appreciate both of them,
    because no question, North Korea and the JCPOA are the two
    formidable challenges we have to meet in the future.
        Also, with Senator Cardin's questioning on New START, I was
    here when we negotiated New START, did the hearings here. And
    the one thing about New START, and you can correct me if I am
    wrong, we did some breakthroughs in the compliance area that we
    had never done in any treaty before. We have more ability in
    terms of New START to verify whether the Russians are or are
    not complying than we have in any other agreement, collective
    group of agreements combined. If the JCPOA had even a smidgen
    of the compliance requirements that the New START has, we would
    not be worried about that today.
        So I just want to commend both of you on your answers and
    hope you will follow through on that direction in your jobs. If
    you do, you will go down in history as two of the best
    appointees this President has made.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you both for your past service to the country and
    for your willingness to be considered for these very important
    positions.
        Dr. Ford and Dr. Poblete, Secretary Tillerson has said that
    Iran is complying with the JCPOA.
        Dr. Poblete, I understood you to say that you think they
    are in violation. Did I understand that correctly? And can you
    describe what those violations are?
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator, for the opportunity to
    clarify. What I was focusing on were patterns of marginal
    violations.
        The Secretary General, the Director General of the IAEA, as
    you mentioned, the Secretary of State have said that Iran is in
    compliance. But really what the IAEA Director General has said
    is that it is not in material breach. But the Director General
    has, in fact, mentioned marginal breaches. The President also
    delineated a number of marginal breaches. Several members of
    this committee have also done so.
        Senator Shaheen. Okay. So that is what you were referring
    to when you were suggesting violations.
        Dr. Poblete. Right.
        Senator Shaheen. Dr. Ford, do you agree with Dr. Poblete
    relative to that concern?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator.
        One of the things that we have tried to do as resolutely as
    we can over the last 11 months or so since the new
    administration took office is to try to ensure that the JCPOA
    is interpreted as strictly as possible, and that it is enforced
    as rigorously as possible.
        In addition to all the other work that we are trying to do
    with respect to addressing the Iranian proliferation challenge
    over the long term, one of things that we have tried to do in
    the Joint Commission process under the JCPOA, for instance, is
    to work with our European partners, in particular, to end pre-
    existing approaches to sort of meeting in the middle when Iran
    and its continual efforts to sort of push the envelope of JCPOA
    interpretation would ask for something that is on the margins
    of what it clearly should--perhaps slightly beyond where it
    should actually be allowed to go. There was a degree of
    compromise in approaching those things in the past, which one
    can see from the publicly released Joint Commission documents
    that were published I believe last December.
        We are not in the meeting-in-the-middle business anymore.
    In working with our Joint Commission partners, from whom we
    have been pleased to get very good support, we have been taking
    a much more strict line on those things within the JCPOA since
    last April.
        Senator Shaheen. I appreciate that. And I think all of us
    agree that we want to hold Iran accountable. But if the
    administration and if the State Department believes that Iran
    is not complying, why hasn't the administration invoked the
    dispute resolution provisions of the agreement? For either of
    you.
        Dr. Poblete. Well, Senator, I have only been part of the
    administration since----
        Senator Shaheen. You can just tell me what you know. You do
    not have to give me the response from the administration.
        Although, Dr. Ford, you were part of the NSC, so I would
    assume this came up on the NSC and you might have discussed
    whether to invoke those provisions.
        Dr. Ford?
        Dr. Ford. Sure. Yes, we have many times and continually
    over the last year or so discussed Iranian compliance. At the
    moment, the assessment is that Iran is complying with its
    obligations under the JCPOA. As I indicated, we are trying to
    keep them from sort of nudging up to those lines in ways that
    they felt free to do before.
        And I should also point out that in the President's speech
    on October 13th, he declined to recertify under the INARA
    statute, not on the basis of Iranian compliance questions, but
    on the basis of a different INARA certification criterion set
    forth in the statute, whereby he determined that, in his view,
    the sanctions relief given to Iran under the JCPOA was not
    proportional and appropriate in light of what it was that we
    got from Iran under that deal.
        There are multiple criteria under INARA. He chose that
    particular one, and it has been his direction to the
    administration to try to work with Congress and international
    partners to better address these challenges going forward, but
    remaining for now, certainly, within the JCPOA construct in
    order to use that remaining within the agreement in order to
    leverage international support, not just in addressing long-
    term proliferation challenges but also the range of Iranian
    malign acts outside the JCPOA.
        Senator Shaheen. Right. And I think we would all agree that
    Iran is engaging in those malign acts outside of the JCPOA, but
    they are not issues that are covered under the JCPOA. And I
    understood you to say that you believe that Iran is in
    compliance, and that is why the administration hasn't invoked
    the dispute resolution mechanism.
        Can I ask you, Dr. Ford, if you agree, and maybe I
    misunderstood what you were saying, Dr. Poblete, but I
    understood you to say, in answer Senator Cardin's question
    about nuclear testing, that you believe we should continue the
    moratorium on nuclear testing.
        Did I understand that correctly? A yes or no answer would
    be appreciated.
        Dr. Poblete. That is correct, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Do you agree with that, Dr. Ford? Yes or
    no.
        Dr. Ford. I am sorry, Senator, do I agree that?
        Senator Shaheen. That we should continue the moratorium on
    nuclear testing?
        Dr. Ford. I see no reason to do otherwise at this time,
    Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        I want to ask you both, one of the concerns that I have
    expressed, as have other members of this committee, has been
    relative to the proposed reorganization that is going on at the
    State Department. And you are both taking over very important
    bureaus at the State Department. Can you tell me if you have
    been consulted on the reorganization plan, either of you?
        Dr. Poblete. No, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Dr. Ford?
        Dr. Ford. I am not privy to what the redesign will look
    like. I have not consulted on this, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. And if you have not been, are there any
    concerns or changes that you believe should be made to the
    bureau that you are going be heading, should you be confirmed?
        Dr. Poblete. Senator, as I mentioned previously, my goal
    is, if confirmed, to first meet with all the personnel that is
    currently in the bureau, to seek their guidance, their insight,
    their perspectives on what they perceive to be the challenges
    of the bureau and the needs of the bureau. And if confirmed, I
    hope to next year be actively engaged and have the opportunity
    to engage the Secretary directly on these redesign, budgetary,
    and related issues.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. That seems like a very
    reasonable approach to me.
        Dr. Ford?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator. My contact with the ISN
    Bureau is quite routine in my current responsibilities, but I
    am less familiar with the details of how it is staffed and
    organized internally with respect to how it meets its current
    challenges.
        At this point, what I should point to--and that is
    something to which Senator Cardin alluded earlier. It has come
    to my understanding that relatively recently, pursuant to the
    Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or
    CAATSA as its acronym, I think, goes--I do not know who is
    responsible for the acronyms, but that is an impressive one.
    The Secretary has identified the ISN Bureau as having a lead
    responsibility for administering Section 231 of that statute,
    which has to do with putting sanctions of various sorts upon
    those who engage in what are called significant transactions
    with entities affiliated with the Russian defense and
    intelligence sectors, as set forth in the Secretary's guidance,
    I believe just a month ago.
        This is an area with which my current NSC responsibilities
    have not had much to do yet, so I am learning this area as
    well. But it is my understanding that this now will be a part
    of the responsibilities of the ISN Bureau, and it is not
    something that the bureau has hitherto been involved in doing.
        So certainly, from this vantage point, I think one of the
    more important initial things for me to look at, if confirmed,
    would be to make sure that appropriately staffing and managing
    these new paths of CAATSA responsibilities under Section 231
    are appropriately handled in a way that allows ISN to fulfill
    those responsibilities well, but also to do so in a way that
    does not detract from the core missions of the bureau in
    fighting proliferation.
        So that would be, I think, certainly one management
    challenge that is visible immediately out-of-the-box, as it
    were.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I certainly hope you
    will, like Dr. Poblete, engage with members of the bureau and
    respond to concerns before making any sweeping changes.
        Dr. Ford. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you to both of you.
        I wanted, Dr. Poblete, to ask a follow-up question on the
    verification and monitoring measures that are being used in the
    JCPOA. We heard reference earlier that if only they were as
    good as some of our other agreements like New START, we would
    be in good shape. My impression of the IAEA protocols is that
    they are more prevalent, more in number, more in high-tech, in
    every possible way improvements on our previous arms control
    agreements. But can you just comment a little bit on the
    extensive measures that are being used for real-time
    monitoring?
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator.
        It is my understanding, based on some of the recent
    statements made by the Director General of the IAEA, that it is
    their assessment that, currently, they have some of the most
    rigorous monitoring and verification capabilities that they
    have had in recent years. However, as you well know,
    verification and compliance is an evolving process. As we
    develop new technology, as we look at addressing new threats
    and, again, trying to look at not just what is known but trying
    to anticipate what is the unknown.
        And in the case of Iran and the JCPOA, given Iran's
    history, it is incumbent upon us to not just rely on the IAEA,
    not just provide support to the IAEA, but also spur our own
    efforts at identifying and developing technologies that will
    address the unknown, everything from trying to identify ghost
    particles to the lowest possible yield of nuclear material.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. And I have been very impressed
    by some of the new mechanisms that are being developed to do
    real-time monitoring of the gas flows in the enrichment
    location, in order to make sure that they stay below the 3.67
    percent. So I know the IAEA is doing everything it can to
    utilize those new provisions.
        Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty states that each
    of the parties undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith
    ``on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict
    and effective international control,'' referring to nuclear
    disarmament.
        Is the U.S. currently undertaking such negotiations, Dr.
    Poblete?
        Dr. Poblete. I am not aware, Senator, of what the status is
    of the U.S., with respect to your question.
        Senator Merkley. It is one of the three pillars of the NPT.
    Are there various ways that you think those three pillars could
    be strengthened?
        Dr. Poblete. Again, Senator, I would not presume to engage
    until I have had the opportunity to discuss this matter, if
    confirmed, with the legal experts, with the technical experts,
    the scientific experts, to ensure that I have a holistic view
    of what the opportunities are with respect to the NPT.
        Senator Merkley. Those three pillars are nonproliferation,
    peaceful use of nuclear power, and disarmament, and they are
    meant to bridge the very difference between nuclear power
    states and non-nuclear power states. Is that bridge, which puts
    different responsibilities on different parties to the treaty,
    one which you fully support?
        Dr. Poblete. Senator, I fully support looking at the treaty
    in a holistic fashion. In fact, one of the concerns that I had
    before, during, and after, with respect to Iran or North Korea,
    but particularly with respect to Iran, is that, predating the
    JCPOA, when Iran was in violation of its safeguard agreements,
    when Iran was in violation of its overarching NPT obligations,
    that the focus was still on its ``inalienable right'' to
    peaceful, civilian nuclear energy, without taking into
    consideration that there are other articles of the NPT that
    hold parties accountable for violations of their safeguard
    agreements and their overarching NPT obligations.
        So I definitely agree that the NPT cannot be approached
    from a myopic standpoint, that we must look at all of the
    articles of the NPT in tandem.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. I want to ask you about Article
    VI and our responsibilities to be engaged in conversations
    about complete disarmament, nuclear disarmament. You indicated
    that you weren't familiar with such ongoing discussions. But
    there has been, in the past, a P5 process that at least
    constitutes a forum for such discussions, discussions at least
    pointing in the direction of the possibility of pursuing the
    responsibilities under Article VI.
        Do you support reengaging a P5 process?
        Dr. Poblete. Well, sir, I believe it is always helpful to
    engage with our allies, particularly nuclear-weapons states. I
    believe that, given the current security environment, however,
    the focus needs to be on countering the proliferation by
    nonnuclear-weapons states.
        The P5 have demonstrated, most of them being democracies,
    but they have demonstrated to be fairly responsible as
    stakeholders, perhaps with the exception of Russia and China.
    But generally, the P5 have demonstrated to be responsible
    stakeholders.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Senator Young?
        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Poblete, Dr. Ford, great to be with each of you.
        Can either of you tell me whether the IAEA inspectors have
    inspected the military sites in Iran since the implementation
    of the so-called Iran nuclear agreement?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator.
        The specific locations of the inspected sites are treated
    within the IAEA system as safeguards confidential, and they do
    not publicly report that.
        Through various means, we have frequently some insight into
    what the IAEA has been able to accomplish. And according to the
    Director General, they have not been refused, so far, any
    request to visit any site at which they have had reason to
    believe illicit activity has been occurring or which they felt
    it necessary to visit in order to fulfill their monitoring and
    verification responsibilities under the JCPOA.
        It would be easier to talk about what we think we know
    about IAEA activity in this respect in a closed session. But so
    far, the IAEA has been very clear that they do not feel that
    they have been rebuffed in any inappropriate way, thus far.
        Senator Young. So that was a very precise and much
    appreciated answer. The short answer is you do not know,
    because it is difficult to differentiate between military sites
    and other sites, because IAEA doesn't release that information.
    Is that a correct recapitulation of how you started your
    response?
        Dr. Ford. I would say the safest way to characterize it,
    Senator, is that it would be a much easier conversation to have
    if we were in closed session, so that it would be possible to
    discuss information that it is not possible to discuss in
    public.
        Senator Young. Okay. That is fair.
        Doctor, do you have anything to add?
        Dr. Poblete. Well, Senator, as the IAEA has said, they have
    not been denied requested access. Now, I believe that you might
    be referring to what is known as the T Section of the JCPOA.
        While the IAEA may feel that it has not been denied, the
    question rests on whether or not, if they were to ask, whether
    or not they have asked for specific access to these designated
    military facilities, some of which were part of the possible
    military dimensions questions that the IAEA had prior to the
    JCPOA, and to whether or not they will have the authority, if
    they press the Iranian regime, to gain that access. That is
    still a subject for discussion.
        Senator Young. So do we know, and can you tell me in this
    setting, whether the IAEA inspectors have requested access to a
    designated military site in Iran?
        Dr. Poblete. The IAEA Director General has said that they
    have not been denied access to any facilities that they have
    requested. As to whether or not those requests have included
    specific military facilities, I do not know, sir.
        Senator Young. Is that information that you have access to?
        Dr. Poblete. In my current role, I do not have access to
    certain intelligence information and----
        Senator Young. Dr. Ford, do you have access to that
    information?
        I am sorry for interrupting.
        Dr. Ford [continuing]. Senator, I do have insight into some
    of these questions, which I would be happy to talk to you in a
    different forum, if that is all right, sir.
        Senator Young. Okay. I will take you up on that. I am
    grateful, for volunteering that. And I just note that it is
    pretty difficult for us to strictly and robustly verify
    compliance, if we do not have answers to these questions and,
    more specifically, if the military sites have been designated,
    effectively, no-go zones for IAEA inspectors.
        So I see my time is dwindling down, but I will turn very
    quickly to Iran's ballistic missile program.
        In addition to their development over the years of WMD,
    their delivery systems have caused great consternation for
    those of us who want to keep the region and the world safe and
    secure. In fact, Iran is the largest ballistic missile force in
    the Middle East. They can hit targets up to 2,000 kilometers
    away, including Israel, our good friend, and the thousands of
    U.S. troops in the region.
        Dan Coats, who, of course, is our Director of National
    Intelligence, reiterated that the community's assessment is
    that ``Tehran would choose ballistic missiles as its preferred
    method of delivering nuclear weapons, if it builds them.'' He
    also noted progress on Iran's space program could shorten a
    pathway to ICBM, because space launch vehicles use similar
    technologies.
        Dr. Ford, what is your assessment of Iran's ballistic
    missile program?
        Dr. Ford. Well, I certainly would not gainsay anything that
    Director Coats has said. I think you have hit the nail on the
    head, Senator, in pointing to that as a focus of enormous
    concern.
        Iran does have a very extensive missile program. It has
    been engaged in a very elaborate and fast-paced program of
    missile testing. It has been building out missiles across a
    range of capabilities, increasing the accuracy of those that
    they possess.
        And I should also point out they have been involved in
    proliferating missile technology, supplying missiles to
    Lebanese Hezbollah, for example, and to Houthis in Lebanon.
        This is not just a question of indigenous threats in Iran,
    but of the spread of such threats across the region, as a part
    of Iran's pattern of destabilizing behavior.
        Senator Young. So I would like to follow up with each of
    you. If you have a very brief response to the following
    question, I would be grateful.
        The proliferation of weapons out of Iran or the
    proliferation of material and expertise from, say, North Korea
    into Iran, are there additional things that we as a Nation
    should be doing to address those very important issues?
        Dr. Poblete. Briefly, Senator, there are a myriad of U.S.
    statutes that address not just the individual proliferation by
    rogue regimes but the collaboration between these rogue
    regimes. I would only add a point of caution.
        As the focus is, and rightly so, on increasing and imposing
    crippling pressure on the North Korean regime, it is critical
    that we not lose sight of Iran. It is troubling to see that
    many of our partners and allies who are hyper-focused on the
    North Korean threat, because they would be directly in the line
    of fire, so to speak, from Pyongyang, are also now shifting
    gears and are investing and engaging economically with the
    Iranian regime.
        You cannot delink the two. What benefits one ultimately
    benefits the other.
        Dr. Ford. Senator, to take Iran as an example, I think it
    is precisely those regional proliferation threats that are one
    of the multiple centers of focus for the new Iran strategy that
    the demonstration has just announced in October, and which the
    interagency is in the process of building out even as we speak.
        It is a critical part of that strategy to try to approach
    the range of Iranian malign acts, including missile
    proliferation, support for terrorist organizations' regional
    destabilization, such as support for the Assad regime and the
    Syrian civil war and those sorts of things.
        From the perspective of the ISN Bureau, if confirmed as
    Assistant Secretary, one of my more important roles would be to
    support counterproliferation work on precisely these sorts of
    areas.
        When I joined the State Department many years ago now at
    the Verification and Compliance Bureau, those were the early
    days of what is still known as the Proliferation Security
    Initiative. It was an effort to bring international partners
    into interdicting weapons of mass destruction-related shipments
    worldwide.
        Since those days and the very early days of PSI, the U.S.
    interagency has built up a very formidable interagency
    capability to impede progress on threat systems, using a full
    range of tools--diplomatic, financial, law enforcement, and so
    forth.
        I would be a proud inheritor of all the work that has been
    done in that respect and would certainly look for every
    available way to up our game, as it were, in order to impede
    those systems more effectively.
        Senator Young. I thank our witnesses.
        I thank the chairman for indulging me.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        I am very pleased to recognize my friend, the Senator from
    New Jersey, Senator Menendez.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Given the proliferation of concerns that we have seen over
    the past year regarding rogue regimes, developments of nuclear
    arsenals, increased ballistic missile testing, and potential
    violations of international agreements, I would say that these
    appointments are well long overdue.
        Let me extend a personal welcome to Dr. Poblete, who I have
    known for years, going back to my tenure in the House of
    Representatives when she served as the staff director for the
    House Foreign Affairs Committee for my friend Ileana Ros-
    Lehtinen. Congratulations on your nomination.
        Congratulations to you, Mr. Ford.
        As I noted, rogue nations and nonstate actors continue to
    present threats to the United States and its allies. And it is
    imperative that the United States continue to lead the world in
    combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and
    curtail the ability of nefarious actors to utilize some of the
    world's most dangerous tools.
        Now, I did not support the JCPOA. I do not believe that it
    was sufficient in its construction to prevent Iran from ever
    developing a nuclear weapon. And I am concerned about elements
    of it where there will be a lifting, in just a few short years,
    of some other elements that are incredibly important.
        However, I believe it is important for the United States to
    demonstrate leadership and reliability on the world stage. And
    as long as Iran is upholding its commitments under an
    agreement, which I did not think was a standard we should have
    agreed to, but as long as its holding it up, it serves our
    interests to continue to work with our international partners
    to ensure robust enforcement of the deal.
        So what I do want to ask you about is, how will you seek to
    engage with our international partners to curtail Iran's
    ability to stockpile and disseminate conventional arms and
    ballistic missiles to its proxy networks around the Middle East
    once the U.N. lifts the embargo and terminates restrictions on
    ballistic missile procurement and development?
        Dr. Ford. Senator, I very much share your concern at the
    proliferation challenges that we may well face once the
    restrictions of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, for
    example, and the arms provisions therein expire. That is
    becoming a major focus, as you will not be surprised to learn,
    of our Iran strategy now. And addressing that would be a major
    focus of concern, if I were confirmed as Assistant Secretary
    for the ISN Bureau.
        One of the hopes that we have by remaining, pursuant to the
    President's direction, remaining at the moment within the JCPOA
    is precisely to use that step of remaining within the deal in
    order to make sure that we maximize our ability to work with
    international partners to address a range of threats in the
    proliferation space and more broadly on Iran, and the issue of
    the dramatic buildup of Iranian missile and advanced
    conventional weapons capabilities, and its proliferation of
    these capabilities to other regional players, proxy forces, and
    terrorist organizations, for instance, will have to be a focus
    of that concern. It is our hope that we can work successfully
    with our partners to maximize pressure.
        Senator Menendez. They seem to be reticent. I have seen the
    Europeans through, in essence, their Foreign Ministers suggests
    that they are not interested in any other sanctions.
        The problem with this is that, if we wait for the lifting
    moment of these sanctions, it will be far too late. And so I
    hope that the administration, and through you, will take a
    robust set of actions to engage our partners to say we cannot
    wait for the moment of the twilight to ultimately engage with
    the advent of what comes next. And that needs to be taken
    advantage of now.
        And I think, actually, that as I suggested at a meeting at
    the White House with some of my colleagues, there is an
    opportunity to create leverage as a result of some of the
    President's actions to move in that direction.
        The longer we wait, the more difficult it will be, and the
    more consequential to Iran's destabilization of the region. So
    I hope to hear, for example--I am very proud of what the Senate
    did. I was one of the instruments of it, the sanctions
    legislation we passed.
        But I have not seen that legislation be robustly used by
    the administration. They need to use the very tools we gave
    them that passed 98-to-2. We do not get many things around here
    to pass 98-to-2.
        That means you have the support of the United States Senate
    and of the Congress, giving you tools which, up to date, I have
    to be honest with you, I have not seen it.
        So when you want to do something to Iran to curtail its
    nefarious activities, the wherewithal exists already. And so I
    would hope that we would do that. And I would like to get your
    response to that.
        And then, finally, on North Korea, I see we have not
    addressed China. And it seems to me that, on this much I agree
    with the President, China is clearly the pathway to do
    something as it relates to North Korea. They are the ones that
    hold the resources with North Korea to change their mind.
        But I am not quite sure what the administration's
    philosophy is here. First, I thought we were going to challenge
    China to do the right thing. Then we were going to cajole it to
    do the right thing. But now we seem to be embracing it without
    it doing anything.
        We could declare it a currency manipulator. We could
    sanction banks that are pursuing access to North Korean money.
    We could, ultimately, look at some of our trading statuses. But
    I have not heard a whimper about that.
        So talk to me about sanctions and how you are going to use
    them. Especially since the Secretary has closed the office of
    sanctions coordinator, what role is sanctions going to play in
    countering our adversary's abilities to proliferate dangerous
    weapons? And how are we going to approach China, so we can deal
    with the question of North Korea short of military
    confrontation?
        Dr. Ford. There is a lot to respond to there, Senator.
    Thank you.
        I think I would say that I completely share your concerns
    that we must not wait until it is too late. We must not wait
    until the expiration point of key restrictions on Iranian
    threat programs, for example, and the Security Council
    resolution, just as I think we should not wait to try to
    address the challenge of putting enduring limitations upon the
    size and scope of Iran's nuclear program in the years in which
    the JCPOA's limits on that program come to expire.
        So I completely agree. The time to start working on those
    things is now. And that is exactly why this is an important
    part of the Iran strategy that we are currently building out.
        So I hope that you will not be disappointed in seeing how
    we handle that. But rest assured, Senator, that we are
    committed. I am personally committed, would be thus as
    Assistant Secretary, if confirmed, to making sure that those
    processes of trying to work out those enduring solutions begin
    sooner rather than later in order to maximize our chances of
    success.
        With respect to sanctions on Iran, we have been, in the
    last 11 months, I think, very forward leaning on this going
    back to the very--it was in February or March, you may recall,
    the phrasing about putting Iran on notice. We have been working
    the targeteers at the Office of Foreign Asset Control at the
    Treasury Department virtually 24/7. We are making them work
    extraordinarily difficult hours and challenges to make sure
    that so-called sanctions packages are developed at the utmost
    speed.
        They are a low-density, high-demand force, as they say in
    the military, because there is an important demand for
    sanctions across the proliferation space with North Korea, with
    Iran, also with regard to human rights issues in Venezuela and
    elsewhere. But we are we are processing and using the sanctions
    tools, which we are delighted to have from Congress, as fast as
    it is possible to process those packages.
        I must say personally, Senator, when I joined the State
    Department back in 2003, I am proud of the role that we played
    at that time in being very forward-leaning on using
    proliferation sanctions to try to change the behavior of
    proliferation entities around the world. We felt it was
    important to confront proliferator-facilitating entities with a
    choice. They could continue to be involved with the bad guys,
    as it were, or they could continue to be involved with the
    world's largest economy here in United States. They could not
    do both at the same time. Forcing more of them to make more of
    those choices I think had a measurable impact at the time. We
    were very proud of that.
        And since those days, thanks to the work of this committee
    and others, the toolkit available for imposing sanctions has
    expanded considerably, as have the number of executive orders
    devoted to providing those tools to our foreign policy
    apparatus as well.
        So rest assured, I would be, and I think we are already,
    very firmly committed to using every tool available.
        And finally, with respect to China, I think it is safe to
    say that present policy continues to use a mix of cajoling and
    pressures. You will notice in the implementation of sanctions
    that Chinese entities have begun to appear amongst those who
    have been sanctioned for engagements with North Korea that
    ultimately facilitate the North Korean weapons of mass
    destruction and missile programs. They have no protected status
    anymore.
        This is a process of gradually working with Chinese
    interlocutors to get them to move in the way that they do need
    to move if there is going to be a solution here. And although I
    would freely agree that they are not where they need to be at
    this time, it is also true that they are doing a great deal
    more than they used to. It is still insufficient, but there has
    been some Chinese movement on this, which I think has greatly
    discomfited the North Koreans.
        It is not yet enough, but I should also point out that as
    we have been gradually successful in cutting back the other
    range of revenue streams into North Korea that have been used
    to facilitate the military program there, the relative role and
    influence of China has increased not by virtue of it having
    increased in aggregate terms, but in a percentage of what the
    North Koreans are able to get from the outside world.
        So China's leverage, in a sense, is now greater than ever,
    and we are working very hard to work with Chinese authorities
    to ensure that they live up to their responsibilities as an
    important power and a good citizen in the nonproliferation
    regime to put the pressure----
        Senator Rubio. Dr. Ford, I apologize. We are running out of
    time here. We are going to lose our folks.
        Senator Gardner?
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Ford, Ms. Poblete. Thank you very much for
    your service. Congratulations on the nominations. And I
    appreciate your willingness to perform the duties before you.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman, as well, for holding the hearing
    today.
        Mr. Ford, is it the Trump administration's position to seek
    complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the
    Korean Peninsula?
        Dr. Ford. That is our objective, Senator. That is correct.
        Senator Gardner. And we talked about in my office whether
    that was China's goal or not. Senator Menendez talked about
    China. What is China's goal, as it relates to the proliferation
    in North Korea?
        Dr. Ford. Well, Senator, speaking only personally and not
    on behalf of the intelligence community or anyone like that, my
    own view is that China is trying to figure out what its goal
    is.
        The working assumption for many of us working on these
    issues has been in the past that China's principal objective is
    to ensure stability in the peninsula and to avoid what they see
    as a kind of parade of horribles: were the Kim regime to
    collapse, were we to get into a war with the North Koreans, or
    whatever else it might be, and that they have hitherto
    concluded that it is better to remain as a kind of grumpy
    facilitator and enabler of the North Korean regime's weapons of
    mass destruction----
        Senator Gardner. But complete, verifiable, and irreversible
    denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is not China's goal?
        Dr. Ford [continuing]. I do not think it has been, but I
    think they are beginning to reconsider that and realizing that
    if they are, in fact, in favor of stability in the peninsula,
    the time is now for them to join us, because the status quo is
    not one that points toward stability. It points only toward
    increasing risk and danger and uncertainty.
        Senator Gardner. And I think when it comes to that
    proliferation, and the position that China is in right now, it
    is one reason why I was pleased, one of the reasons I was
    pleased, that we moved away from the failed doctrine of
    strategic patience to a new doctrine of maximum pressure.
        And I do believe we have put additional pressures on North
    Korea that were not in place over the past several years. I
    believe we have put pressure on China to help make sure we
    accomplish this CVID goal on the Korean Peninsula and to enlist
    their support in that goal.
        But I am concerned about the slow pace that we have taken
    with China. And again, the doctrine is and should be maximum
    pressure, not maximum cajoling. And so if we can continue the
    pressure on China to the level it should be, we know over 5,000
    businesses that are doing business right now with North Korea
    in China, start ratcheting that pressure up to a degree that we
    have not yet so far, then we will start to see more results as
    a result of the maximum pressure doctrine. So that is a
    discussion we can continue to have.
        How do we achieve the CVID goal then, the complete,
    verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization? How do we
    achieve that strategy? How do we achieve the strategy as it
    relates to China?
        Dr. Ford. Well, I think as I indicated a moment ago, one of
    the steps is to make it very clear through a range of tools to
    emphasize to the Chinese Government the degree to which their
    strategic interest is not, perhaps, what they once assumed it
    to be.
        China's strategic interest, I would argue, and I think that
    recent events are increasingly making this very clear, and I
    hope that they are coming to realize it, their strategic
    interest now is very much aligned with ours in making every
    step possible to ensure that the North Korean regime changes
    its strategic course and adopts a policy of ratcheting back
    rather than ratcheting up the WMD and nuclear threats that they
    present in the region.
        It seems clear to me that the status quo trajectory of the
    peninsula is downhill at an alarming and disturbing rate, and
    that China is now in a position of beginning to realize,
    perhaps not enough and not fast enough yet, but certainly the
    hope is that we can help them come to recognize that the
    circumstances are not what they were say 10 or 15 years ago,
    and that the way to ensure that all the parade of horribles
    they do not wish to see happen, the way to ensure that those
    things do not happen is not to remain as a facilitator, sort of
    a quiet enabler, of weapons of mass destruction and missile
    programs in the Kim regime, but, in fact, to join us in making
    sure that those threats are emphatically put back in the box so
    that the situation is brought back under control.
        Senator Gardner. Now, will you enter into negotiations with
    North Korea outside of the CVID, the complete, verifiable, and
    irreversible denuclearization parameters?
        Dr. Ford. I am sorry. I did not understand.
        Senator Gardner. Will you negotiate with North Korea
    outside of those parameters, the complete, verifiable, and
    irreversible denuclearization?
        Dr. Ford. I do not believe there is any anticipation of
    doing that. What Secretary Tillerson has said is that what we
    are looking for is some kind of an indication of North Korean
    seriousness to be finally willing to sit down and have that
    kind of a conversation. We have not seen that seriousness yet.
    And until such point as we do, we are endeavoring to steadily
    tighten the screws on the North Korean regime to incentivize
    finally making that choice.
        Senator Gardner. In your role of International Security and
    Nonproliferation, could you describe any cyber role that you
    might have?
        Dr. Ford. Well, to my knowledge, Senator, there has not
    been much of one for the bureau hitherto. However, it is one of
    the roles of the bureau to, essentially, scan the horizon,
    speaking metaphorically, for emerging threats and emerging
    areas that may be in need of better nonproliferation norms or
    new nonproliferation norms or institutions or practices in the
    future.
        I know that cyber issues are already emerging as one of the
    subjects for discussion within the Wassenaar Arrangement, which
    is an international dual-use and conventional technology export
    control standards regime. So cyber issues are emerging as a
    subject of increasing emphasis in the nonproliferation world.
        It is not a terribly well-developed discipline at this
    point, but certainly, if confirmed, one of my responsibilities
    at ISN would be to make sure that we had an appropriate handle
    on emerging technologies and challenges out there that may need
    to be addressed in the future in ways, perhaps, analogous to
    how we have tried to address chemical and biological,
    radiological, and nuclear nonproliferation over the years.
    There may well be new areas in which that is very relevant.
        Senator Gardner. Ms. Poblete?
        Dr. Poblete. Yes, thank you, Senator. I would like to start
    with the cyber issue.
        It is my understanding that the Arms Control, Verification
    and Compliance Bureau actually has had a role on the cyber
    issue. We have--the royal ``we''--the AVC Bureau has provided
    support to the cyber coordinator. In fact, the Nuclear Risk
    Reduction Center, which, as you know, is the 24/7, 365-day
    communications hub with respect to verification and compliance
    issues on a broad range of international agreements, was
    directly involved in the notification to the Russian Federation
    of information that we had available that the Russian
    Federation had, in fact, attempted to interfere with our
    elections.
        In addition to that, the Verification and Compliance Bureau
    using the history, the long history, in the implementation of a
    broad range of agreements has also been working with the
    interagency, and with our allied nations, to ensure that we are
    thinking about best practices, that we are thinking about
    emerging security challenges.
        In fact, the AVC Bureau, the Arms Control, Verification and
    Compliance Bureau, has an office in the bureau just dedicated
    to emerging security challenges. And beyond the cyber issue, it
    is also looking at space security and challenges from Russian
    aggression, from Chinese aggression, and attempts to deny
    unfettered access to space by responsible parties.
        And if I may go back to your question and Senator
    Menendez's references, while sanctions implementation and
    development is not in the AVC Bureau, you cannot de-link the
    AVC Bureau from ISN or from the rest of the T family, or from
    any discussion about sanctions.
        Number one, I believe that the AVC Bureau, by developing
    the evidence, confirming and verifying the evidence, builds the
    case to support a policy determination on whether or not to
    impose sanctions.
        Further, by leveraging the threat of sanctions, by
    leveraging the actual implementation and enforcement of
    sanctions, and not just sanctions specifically designed to
    address a particular bilateral or multilateral agreement, but
    that are targeting the other actors, the other parties to those
    agreements, can certainly help fortify and strengthen our own
    capabilities in ensuring that, one, we do have verifiable,
    permanent compliance with the range of commitments and
    agreements. But also, it serves our deterrence objectives, both
    nonproliferation, writ large, and, again, to deter rogue
    regimes or state parties to agreements not to continue their
    aggressive stance.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you, Dr. Poblete. We need to move on.
    I apologize.
        Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, both of you, for your willingness to serve.
        Both of you have identified the administration's belief
    that the JCPOA is insufficient in many respects, and the
    administration has made it clear they are seeking to strengthen
    or renegotiate the agreement. It has been a little hard for
    many of us in Congress to get a handle on exactly how the
    administration wants to go about this process, and so I want to
    ask you both about what the administration policy may be, what
    your recommendation may be to the administration or to
    Congress.
        To me, it seems as if there are four ways to go about
    changing the agreement, if you are of the opinion, as this
    administration is, that it needs to be changed. First, you
    could renegotiate with your partner, with the Iranians. Second,
    you could make changes to the agreement unilaterally, but in
    coordination with your European partners, make changes all
    together. You could make changes alone through executive
    actions of the administration. Or you could ask Congress to
    make changes to the agreement.
        And so I want to ask what your recommendation is going to
    be. I will ask you, Ms. Poblete, and then you, Mr. Ford, as to
    what the best course of action should be, if you desire to
    change the terms of this agreement. And most specifically, what
    is your recommendation to Congress? When the President failed
    to certify under INARA, it was unclear whether he was asking us
    to pass legislation that would change the terms of the
    agreement.
        So what is the best course of action to try to address
    insufficiencies that the administration has identified? And
    specifically, are you asking, are you going to be expecting to
    be working with Congress to pass legislation that would change
    the terms of the agreement?
        Dr. Poblete. Thank you, Senator.
        The focus of the AVC Bureau will be, and if confirmed, that
    will be my mantra, my overarching objective, is to whatever
    agreement we have, whether it is the existing JCPOA or a future
    agreement, that we are able to both unilaterally, with our
    allied partners in support of the IAEA, that we are able to
    verifiably confirm or not that Iran is in compliance with its
    obligations.
        Now as a point of personal privilege, in light of my
    background, particularly with respect to Iran, I always found
    it was most useful when there was unanimity of purpose,
    unanimity of mission, from the entirety of the U.S. Government.
    So while I would not have a role on the actual development of
    the administration policy, I would just be feeding the
    information to the policymakers, I certainly would prefer, if
    asked, and would recommend, if asked, and if confirmed, that we
    do work, that the executive branch does, in fact, work closely
    with the Congress, particularly with this committee.
        Senator Murphy. Mr. Ford, I want to ask one more question.
    So let me turn to you.
        What are you asking Congress to do here?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator.
        What the President said in his October 13th speech is, he
    directed us and the administration to try to work both with
    Congress and with international partners to move forward on
    these issues. And I guess you could sort of think of those as
    two parallel and complementary tracks.
        With respect to the congressional piece of it, there have
    been, actually, a series of ongoing discussions, still, with
    Congress on this topic, in the hope of finding a constructive
    way forward in a number of respects.
        One of them has to do with, as I mentioned before, the
    challenge of the so-called sunset terms of the JCPOA, the fact
    that in I think 8 to 13 years' time now, the restrictions upon
    the size of Iran's nuclear program will sunset, pursuant to the
    terms of the JCPOA.
        From a congressional legislative perspective, it may be
    possible to work with the Congress. We hope that it is possible
    to work with the Congress to change Iran's incentives with
    respect to the choices that it might make.
        Senator Murphy. But are you asking us to do something that
    would violate the terms of the agreement?
        Dr. Ford. Actually, in fact, Senator, we have been asking
    Congress--we have been working very hard to try to make sure
    that the Congress does not do anything that would cause Iran
    immediately to run afoul. We have been trying to resist the
    insertion of so-called poison-pill pieces into the legislative
    framework. The hope is to be able to find a way to incentivize
    Iran to make choices that keep us from having enduring
    proliferation problems in the future, but not to blow up the
    deal.
        Senator Murphy. Let me ask you one thing--thank you for
    that--one quick question on Iran's ballistic missile program.
        I was proud to support the sanctions bill here that levies
    new sanctions on Iran for their ballistic missile program. But
    let's be honest, Iran's ballistic missiles right now are not
    pointed at the United States. They are pointed at Saudi Arabia.
        Simple question: Do you believe that Saudi Arabia's
    military buildup contributes to Iran's motivation to continue
    to develop their ballistic missile program?
        Dr. Ford. I am confident that the Iranians would say so. If
    I were in Riyadh speaking personally, I would be very concerned
    by the path that Iran has taken over the last----
        Senator Murphy. But do you believe that is part of their
    motivation?
        Dr. Ford [continuing]. Frankly, I am not comfortable trying
    to get into the heads of Iranian leaders in that respect. I
    worry that there is an action-reaction dynamic in the Middle
    East, which is one of the reasons why I was so unhappy,
    personally, to see that the Iran deal, in fact, took the steps
    that it did to provide legitimacy to and international
    acceptance of Iranian production of fissile material, for fear
    that that would set in place a further action-reaction dynamic
    that would increase the proliferation pressures elsewhere in
    the region.
        So I think it is part of our challenge as a policy
    community to try to do what we can to put that cat back in the
    bag, as it were. And part of that will be working to provide
    the kind of solidarity against Iran that we hope to achieve by
    working with our international partners across the range of
    Iranian activity. Part of it will be bolstering our
    relationships with others in the region.
        Historically speaking, at least, I think it is the solidity
    of the U.S. security relationship that has over many decades
    since the dawn of the nuclear age been very important to
    helping persuade countries that might otherwise have considered
    indigenous weaponization that that is not necessary, and
    certainly not a wise choice, and that their needs can be met
    through other means.
        I hope we can continue to do that and meet these challenges
    in the Middle East as the years move forward, Senator.
        Senator Murphy. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
        I am very concerned to learn that the United States is
    engaged in active, ongoing discussions with both Saudi Arabia
    and Jordan on concluding 123 nuclear cooperation agreements.
    These agreements are essential for ensuring that nuclear
    technologies and expertise that can be used to make nuclear
    weapons do not spread and that nuclear cooperation with the
    United States is not used as a cover, as a hedge against or a
    leg up on one's neighbors.
        And that is especially true in the Middle East, which
    remains a volatile, contentious region plagued by religious
    rivalries and proxy wars. In Iran, we have experienced
    firsthand how incredibly difficult it is to curb nuclear
    proliferation once the ball is rolling inside of that country,
    and the deep, unshakable suspicion that remains about its
    intentions on this committee, across our country, and across
    the world.
        So even as we were moving forward on this effort to curb
    Iran's nuclear program, Saudi Arabia warned that the whole
    region ``could be plunged into a nuclear arms race,'' and that
    if Iran goes for a nuclear program, ``nothing could prevent us
    from doing it, too, not even the international community.''
        So that sounds like a recipe for trouble to me, and I would
    hate for the United States to be further exacerbating those
    tensions, especially in a part of the world blessed with such
    abundant solar and fossil resources that it could power the
    entire region's electricity needs alone, without ever having to
    deal with the complications of nuclear power.
        So the Atomic Energy Act requires the President to keep the
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee ``fully and currently
    informed of any initiative or negotiations relating to a new or
    amended agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation.'' It also
    mandates that Congress review the terms of any 123 agreement
    and give Congress the power to block these agreements.
        So it seems that, at this point, the Trump administration
    has forgotten this. So I will be sending a letter shortly to
    request a full and immediate briefing on these negotiations.
        But for now, I am going to ask just some questions to try
    to understand better what the current status of these
    negotiations is.
        Mr. Ford--and again, thank you both for your service to our
    country--yes or no, is the United States at present negotiating
    terms of a 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia and Jordan?
        Dr. Ford. Thank you, Senator. We are presently in
    discussions with both the Saudis and the Jordanians about 123
    questions. That is something that is not new. We have been in
    on-again, off-again discussions of that sort for some time,
    certainly predating the current administration.
        But the short answer is, there are discussions underway.
        Senator Markey. Did the Trump administration decide or did
    Saudi Arabia and Jordan approach the Trump administration to
    restart or revitalize the 123 negotiations after January of
    2017?
        Dr. Ford. Actually, the short answer is I do not know who
    spoke with whom first. I am afraid I do not know, Senator. I am
    sorry.
        Senator Markey. Can you describe to us at what stage these
    negotiations are right now?
        Dr. Ford. They are still very preliminary. To my knowledge,
    there has not been any engagement of technical experts at this
    point.
        Senator Markey. So you are saying, at this point, neither
    Saudi Arabia nor Jordan have proposed specific terms or
    responded to terms posed by the United States?
        Dr. Ford. I am, unfortunately, not at liberty to discuss
    these ongoing bilateral discussions in this forum. This is
    something that, perhaps, we would be able to discuss in a
    different context, Senator.
        Senator Markey. Does the Trump administration believe the
    gold standard, the commitment not to enrich uranium or
    reprocessed plutonium, is a requirement in order to conclude
    terms for 123 agreements with these countries?
        Dr. Ford. I would say, Senator, that it remains U.S.
    policy, as it has been for some time, to seek the strongest
    possible nonproliferation protections in every instance.
        Senator Markey. Is that the gold standard?
        Dr. Ford. Well, the strongest that has yet been achieved is
    the gold standard with the United Arab Emirates.
        Senator Markey. Is that your goal, to keep that standard?
        Dr. Ford. I would love to keep that standard in place, if
    we can, Senator.
        Senator Markey. Do you personally believe the gold standard
    is a requirement, in order to conclude a 123 agreement with
    these countries?
        Dr. Ford. It is not a legal requirement. It is a desired
    outcome.
        Senator Markey. Have Saudi Arabia or Jordan asked for terms
    more permissive than the gold standard?
        Dr. Ford. I would go back to my earlier comment, Senator,
    that it would be much easier to talk about ongoing bilateral
    negotiations in a closed forum.
        Senator Markey. If we agreed to anything less than the gold
    standard with Jordan or Saudi Arabia, how do you think the
    United Arab Emirates would respond? The United Arab Emirates
    has been an excellent partner in agreeing to the gold standard,
    but has a legal right under the terms of their 123 agreement to
    drop these nonproliferation provisions if others receive better
    terms. How do you think the United Arab Emirates would respond,
    if there was no gold standard negotiated with Saudi Arabia?
        Dr. Ford. I cannot speak for them, Senator, but I think you
    are quite correct that there is a provision in their 123
    agreement that would allow them to initiate new discussions
    about the terms of their deal were someone else in the region
    to have gotten a different one.
        Senator Markey. Do you believe the administration is
    meeting its requirement to keep Congress fully and currently
    informed about its current 123 negotiations with Saudi Arabia
    and Jordan?
        Dr. Ford. I believe that it is, and that at such point as
    it is possible to have more to say, we would be delighted to
    have that briefing in a closed context, Senator.
        Senator Markey. And if you are confirmed, would you commit
    to briefing this committee on the status of these negotiations
    in a classified, nonpublic setting within 30 days of your
    confirmation?
        Dr. Ford. I would, Senator. As a long-time Senate staffer,
    you can be assured that close cooperation and communication
    with this body, as well as with the House, would be an enduring
    priority of mine.
        Senator Markey. So my problem, Mr. Chairman, with this
    entire area is that there are now auctions in Mexico: 3 cents a
    kilowatt hour for solar--3 cents a kilowatt hour--below coal,
    below natural gas.
        So in Saudi Arabia, the one thing we do know is it is sunny
    365 days a year, and we know that the price of solar has
    completely plummeted. They also are flaring their own excess
    fossil fuels.
        So we are heading into a very dangerous area here. As our
    concern about nuclear proliferation continues to expand in that
    region, we have an agreement that keeps the Iranian program
    under control. But again, what has made it possible for them to
    move forward is the fact that they had already been given
    access to nuclear technology.
        If we continue down this pathway, then there is a recipe
    for disaster, which we are absolutely creating ourselves with
    our own policies. And so I just think it is very important area
    for us to pursue, and I think that this committee should be
    briefed immediately on the status.
        Senator Rubio. And the ranking member has a final question,
    too, but let me just ask real quick, in that vein, we talk
    about the UAE agreement as the gold standard for restraint. The
    JCPOA then happened and it allows Iran to retain and even grow
    its enrichment program.
        Is it your opinion that that agreement has made it harder
    to do more UAE-type deals or easier?
        Dr. Ford. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that the international
    agreement to allow Iran fissile material production capability
    has made it considerably more difficult to ask gold standard-
    type agreements, or, indeed, any type of limitations upon
    enrichment or reprocessing technology of others.
        Senator Rubio. All right.
        Ranking Member?
        Senator Cardin. I want to just very quickly comment on
    Senator Markey's and Senator Rubio's points, because I agree
    with both.
        But if we do not draw a line in the Middle East, it is
    going to be all-out proliferation. So I just will express my
    own view, but I think it is of many members of this committee
    and the Senate, that we need to maintain the UAE standards in
    our 123 agreements in that region. There are just too many
    other countries that could start proliferation issues that
    would be against our national security interests and the
    interests of the region.
        So I want to thank Senator Markey for raising that,
    because, yes, we get involved in the process, the earlier, the
    better.
        So as a former staffer here, I look forward to us getting
    engaged before decisions get beyond the point where our only
    option would be to vote against the 123 agreement.
        I want to get to another area, Dr. Ford, that you should be
    very comfortable with, and that is carrying out the intent of
    this committee and the United Sates Senate and Congress in the
    Russia sanction bill that we passed. You have commented on it.
    And I learned a little bit today, that that will come under
    your portfolio, if confirmed.
        And our law is pretty specific. They are mandatory
    sanctions. We give 180 days for improvements in the process by
    the Russian defense and intelligence sector. That expires on
    January the 29th.
        The dates are pretty specific. Are you committed to working
    with this committee and working with--I might tell you, the
    Banking Committee is also very interested in it, Senator Crapo
    and Senator Brown; Armed Services is very interested, Senator
    McCain and Senator Reed; as well as this committee, to make
    sure the law is carried out.
        Will you be working with this committee to make sure that
    that law, in fact, is carried out?
        Dr. Ford. If confirmed, Senator, absolutely, I would.
        The so-called CAATSA sanctions are a new area for me. It is
    not an area that my directorate at the NSC currently deals
    with, so I have been something of a newcomer to this as well,
    and I am trying to learn it as I go along.
        It is very important. I completely agree, it would be very
    important that these things be implemented and be implemented
    well and effectively.
        It is a very complex process. A list of Russian entities
    has been promulgated by the Secretary of State, I believe on
    October 27th or sometime thereabouts, pursuant to a delegation
    of authority that came from the President a month before that.
        So this is a very new and emerging area. It is the
    responsibility of the State Department to identify those who
    have engaged in significant transactions with entities that are
    listed on that list that corresponds to a number of entities of
    the Russian defense and intelligence sectors.
        And then I think it is also the responsibility, once a
    transaction of significance since the effective date of the act
    has been identified, to apply to them a series of at least five
    from a list of as many as 12 penalties to those engaged in
    those transactions.
        While all these determinations are going on, which are both
    complex factual and policy determinations, at the same time, it
    is part of Secretary Tillerson's direction that we would need
    to be coordinating very closely with international partners and
    with other stakeholders in the U.S. interagency to make sure
    that we work with international partners who engage or may have
    engaged or may in the future engage in transactions with
    Russian entities, in order to help them minimize any exposure
    they might have, help them understand how we are approaching
    these things.
        And this is an enormously complex process. It will take a
    lot of doing to put this into place. But I am certainly
    committed to trying to make this work as well as possible.
        Senator Cardin. Let me make this clear. We made it more
    complicated, basically, at the request of our international
    partners and the administration, so they had flexibility. But
    the intent was very clear, that these are mandatory sanctions
    and that they need to be enforced in a timely way.
        So I appreciate that we want to coordinate with our allies,
    and I agree with that. I would hope that some of the
    stakeholders would also include the Members of Congress who
    have been engaged in this process as you go through this
    process.
        But I would just urge you, that January 29th date we expect
    to be complied with. We are not looking for extensions of that
    date. And I would just urge you to be mindful that good faith
    here goes two ways, and there will be other legislation that
    will be considered in the future. And I can assure you that if
    this law is not complied with, some of the discretion that is
    included in this statute will not be included in future
    enactments.
        So it is of good faith, back and forth with the
    administration to have flexibility. But these are mandatory
    sanctions, and they must be applied, based upon Russia's
    behavior. And you have some discretion, but they have to be
    applied, if they have not complied with the law.
        Dr. Ford. Message clearly received, Senator.
        Senator Cardin. One last point on sanctions. Here, I have
    seen similar comments made by the administration about Turkey's
    acquisitions of Russian technology contrary to their NATO
    commitments, but also in violation of the Russian sanction law.
        I understand you may not be prepared to answer that
    question today. But this committee is going to be very
    interested in how we treat a NATO partner violating our Russia
    sanctions provisions, that they make it clear that this is
    mandatory sanctions and sanctions need to be applied, even if
    it is a NATO partner.
        Dr. Ford. The short answer is yes, that sounds like a very
    challenging determination under the statute, but rest assured
    that I fully understand the mandatory nature of the sanctions
    and that this would be a focus of great concern.
        As I mentioned earlier, I think it would be an important
    priority for me, if confirmed as Assistant Secretary, to make
    sure that the staffing and resources of the bureau were
    appropriately aligned to making sure that we are able to do
    that work to which you are referring, Senator.
        Senator Cardin. And, Dr. Poblete, I just want to underscore
    one additional area of concern that has not come out, and that
    is the Russia veto of the joint investigative mechanism under
    the chemical weapons inspection regime. That is going to
    present challenges as to how we enforce the prohibition on use
    of chemical weapons, particularly in Syria, without the
    inspection regime contemplated.
        I note that Ambassador Haley has commented on this, but I
    want to make sure that is on your radar screen, that you have
    an effective way to enforce the chemical weapons bans.
        Dr. Poblete. Absolutely, Senator. It has been on the
    administration's radar screen. It has been on my radar screen
    from the onset.
        I would like to point out that the United States has not
    given up on trying to hold the Syrian regime accountable. I
    would like to point out the meeting of the Executive Council of
    the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons that
    took place last week.
        And regrettably, the Russian Federation once again
    demonstrated that it is not a responsible partner and a
    responsible stakeholder internationally, partnering up with the
    Iranian regime to block even accountability at the OPCW
    executive council.
        We are currently engaged in the Conference of States
    Parties of the OPCW. That began yesterday. And I assure you
    that it is a priority for the administration to ensure that we
    have the necessary support and coalition to hold the Syrian
    regime accountable, because we understand that this is not just
    about the Syrian regime's actions, not just about the actions
    of nonstate actors within Syria. This is about sending a
    message to the world that the United States will not stand idly
    by and allow the use of chemical weapons in any theater in any
    scenario by any actor or nonstate actor.
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. And I thank both our witnesses
    again for their response today.
        Senator Rubio. Absolutely. Thank you both for being here
    today and for your service and your willingness to continue to
    serve. I think it has been a very good and informative hearing,
    and I really look forward to moving forward on the process.
        The record for this hearing will remain open for 48 hours.
    And for the members and their staff, the questions for record,
    we hope to have them in by close of business on Thursday.
        So without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
            to Dr. Yleem D.S. Poblete by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. The defense and protection of universal human rights has
    been an integral part of my professional trajectory.
        For me, there is a correlation between the manner in which foreign
    governments treat their people and the threats they pose to U.S.
    security interests and priorities. A regime which engages in violations
    of the fundamental freedoms of its people, other degrading and inhumane
    treatment, and demonstrates a blatant disregard for the survival and
    welfare of its citizens, will not be concerned about threatening its
    neighbors with missiles or undermining peace and security via the
    pursuit of nuclear, chemical, biological, radiological, advanced or
    destabilizing numbers of conventional weapons.
        As a longtime Congressional staff member, I have been involved in
    the development, negotiation, and implementation of such legislative
    initiatives as the North Korea Human Rights Reauthorization Act, the
    Iran Freedom Support Act, the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human
    Rights Act, the Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic
    Efforts) Act of 2008, and the Fourteenth Dalai Lama Congressional Gold
    Medal Act. In my capacity as staff of the House Foreign Affairs
    Committee, I exercised continued oversight over the implementation of
    such U.S. laws as the International Religious Freedom Act, the
    Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and the Middle East Partnership
    Initiatives; pressed foreign government officials on their human rights
    records; and worked to highlight the plight of religious and ethnic
    minorities around the world such as Christians in the Middle East, the
    Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan, and the Bah '! in Iran.
        I was fortunate to work on efforts against the lifting of sanctions
    or granting of PNTR to various countries due to ongoing human rights
    abuses and, in some instances, as in the case of the Russian
    Federation, to leverage the repeal of Jackson-Vanik and the granting of
    PNTR to help secure support, in the House of Representatives, for the
    inclusion and adoption of the Magnitsky Act in the final legislative
    package.
        In certain international fora, I worked on advancing the U.S.
    agenda-from ensuring international condemnation of the genocide in
    Darfur; lobbying against adoption of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel UN
    resolutions; convincing foreign ministers from the Middle East and
    North Africa to agree to an Inter-Arab Democratic Charter and support
    the Plan of Action of the Community of Democracies Ministerial; to
    blocking the Libyan, Syrian, and Iranian regimes from assuming
    leadership posts at UN bodies focused on human rights matters (or
    disarmament and nonproliferation).
        There are several ways to measure success in this arena but, on a
    personal level, the most rewarding was when former prisoners of
    conscience, thanked me because a resolution, a bill, a hearing, a
    statement I worked on in helped save their lives.

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

        Answer. Helping others realize their potential is a personal
    priority.
        When I think about my service on the staff of the House Committee
    on Foreign Affairs, one of the accomplishments I am most proud of is
    the myriad of other staff members who began as interns or fellows; whom
    I encouraged and supported to pursue advanced degrees; whom I helped
    advance in their careers; and who are actively engaged and succeeding
    in the national security arena. To this day, many seek my advice before
    pursuing new opportunities.
        As a Hispanic, I am a member of an underrepresented group at the
    Department of State. I look forward to the opportunity, if confirmed,
    to use my personal and professional experiences to help address the
    diversity gap which exists at the Department of State and help
    implement the Secretary's vision to convert the Department into a
    reflection of the American people-of our nation.
        If confirmed, I commit to engaging staff to identify professional
    goals and opportunities and to ensure that all personnel, including the
    Foreign Service and Civil Service, are afforded equal access to
    programs for career advancement and development.

        Question 3.  What steps will you take to ensure that each of the
    supervisors in the Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance
    are fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. I will lead by example. More specifically, I take the issue
    of workforce development very seriously and, if confirmed, one of my
    priorities will be to work with supervisors to identify young talent
    with diverse backgrounds, expertise and training and afford this next
    generation the opportunity to learn from skilled professionals in order
    to develop the full range of skills essential to the vital areas
    covered by the AVC Bureau.
        Together, Civil Service and Foreign Service personnel bring deep
    experience and knowledge to the Bureau. If confirmed, I will welcome
    the expertise of the Foreign Service Officers who add critical
    diplomatic skills and unrivaled connections with our foreign
    interlocutors. Military and other advisors on AVC staff contribute a
    needed perspective to the Bureau's work and help strengthen AVC's
    connections with the Department of Defense and other U.S. agencies.
    Conversely, they return to their agencies with a greater appreciation
    of the important and complementary role of AVC and the State Department
    in the field of national security.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. No.
        Question 7.  The latest NDAA conference report stripped all funding
    to the CTBT Preparatory Organization, except for money directed towards
    the International Monitoring System. The administration's budget
    request to Congress provided full funding to the organization. What
    impact do you believe cutting funding to CTBTO will have on U.S. global
    leadership on nonproliferation issues?

        Answer. The administration is in the process of reviewing its
    policy on a number of arms control and nonproliferation issues,
    including the CTBT. Section 1279E of the NDAA conference bill provides
    that no U.S. funds may be made available to the CTBTO Preparatory
    Commission (PrepCom), except for U.S. funds for the International
    Monitoring System (IMS) or U.S. funds used solely for analysis and
    dissemination of data collected under the IMS. As you noted, the
    President's FY 18 budget request fully funds the U.S. planned
    contribution to the PrepCom. I pledge that, if confirmed, I will work
    with Congress to ensure U.S. support for the PrepCom is consistent with
    U.S. law and supports U.S. leadership on nonproliferation issues,
    including international efforts to ensure our ability to detect nuclear
    tests by North Korea and potentially others in the future.

        Question 8.  President Trump has previously stated a desire to
    vastly increase the size of the U.S. nuclear force, with some sources
    articulating he wanted a tenfold increase in our nuclear forces. Do you
    agree with this statement and what impact would that have on strategic
    stability with Russia?

        Answer. Nuclear deterrence remains a foundational element of U.S.
    national strength and security and assures our Allies and partners that
    we can and will meet our extended deterrence commitments. To ensure the
    United States maintains an effective nuclear deterrent, President Trump
    directed the Department of Defense to conduct a new Nuclear Posture
    Review (NPR) to ``ensure that the United States nuclear deterrent is
    modern, robust, flexible, resilient, ready, and appropriately tailored
    to deter 21st century threats and reassure our allies.'' The Department
    of State is participating in the NPR which, when released, will
    establish U.S. nuclear deterrence policy, strategy, and posture for the
    next five to 10 years and guide modernization of the U.S. nuclear
    deterrent for the 21st century security environment. Both Russia and
    China are modernizing their nuclear forces, while North Korea continues
    to advance its nuclear and missile programs. The U.S. nuclear
    sustainment and modernization program is designed to provide a safe,
    secure, and effective nuclear deterrent; assure allies; and preserve
    strategic stability with Russia and China.
        The United States and the Russian Federation held a meeting in
    Helsinki, Finland on September 12 to discuss issues relating to
    strategic stability. The U.S. delegation was led by Under Secretary of
    State for Political Affairs Thomas A. Shannon, Jr. and the Russian
    delegation was led by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. The
    discussions provided both sides with an opportunity to raise questions
    and concerns related to strategic stability and to clarify their
    positions.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Dr. Yleem D.S. Poblete by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1.  Some have asserted that the United States should not
    remain in treaties to which other parties are in violation. Do you
    agree with this sentiment?

        Answer. I would say that it depends on the circumstances. If a
    particular treaty remains in the national security interests of the
    United States, the U.S. should work toward bringing the violating state
    party back into compliance with the treaty.

        Question 2.  Russia is currently testing the boundaries of a number
    of arms control treaties, including the Intermediate-range Nuclear
    Forces (INF) Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty. Do you believe these
    treaties are in the national security of the United States? Are they
    valuable even when they are under duress?

        Answer. The U.S. goal is to preserve the viability of the INF
    Treaty and other arms control agreements as a means of reducing threats
    to the United States and our allies.With regard to the Open Skies
    Treaty, approximately 95 percent of all Treaty flights take place
    without incident. The Treaty gives States Parties the ability to gather
    information through aerial imaging on military forces and activities of
    concern to them. It provides an opportunity to improve transparency
    among the States Parties. Our Allies and partners, over whom the great
    majority of flights take place, believe this transparency is an
    important confidence building measure in Europe, especially during
    times of increased tensions and uncertainty.

        Question 3.  How do we push Russia to bring Russia back into
    compliance with its obligations under these treaties and build
    consensus amongst our European partners about the importance of pushing
    Russia in that direction?

        Answer. Since the United States declared Russia in violation of its
    INF Treaty obligations in July 2014, Russia has refused to engage in
    any meaningful way, and it continues to move forward with the
    production and deployment of the violating system.
        The Trump administration reviewed the intelligence and the steps
    taken by the prior administration regarding Russia's violations of its
    INF Treaty obligations. The administration has engaged in consultations
    with Allies and has embarked on a strategy to press Russia to return to
    full and verifiable compliance with the Treaty. Although this is
    essentially a bilateral treaty, Allies have a common interest in full
    compliance.
        With respect to the Open Skies Treaty, the United States concluded
    earlier this year that Russia is not in compliance with some of its
    Open Skies Treaty obligations. The U.S. has developed and declared a
    set of initial responses that are compliant with our treaty obligations
    and reversible should Russia address its violations.
        Given that this is a multilateral Treaty process, we are working in
    close coordination with our Allies and partners, many of whom also
    greatly value the Treaty for the transparency it provides, particularly
    in this time of heightened tensions, to encourage Russia to return to
    full compliance with its obligations under the Treaty. Although Russia
    continues to facilitate numerous flights per year over most of its
    territory, its violations undercut the confidence building purpose of
    the Treaty and must be addressed

        Question 4.  Do you believe that the United States should exhaust
    all available tools, such as the dispute resolution mechanisms often
    included in these agreements, before deciding to walk away from them?

        Answer. Yes. Since entry into force of the Open Skies Treaty, the
    Unites States has been an active participant in the Open Skies
    Consultative Commission (OSCC) and its Informal Working Groups, which
    are charged with resolving questions that arise in the implementation
    of the Treaty. These mechanisms, augmented by bilateral meetings
    between U.S. and Russian experts, have worked in the past to resolve a
    number of issues. Not so, in recent years. The United States remains
    committed to working with our Allies and partners to consider next
    steps to bring Russia back into compliance with the Treaty.
        With regard to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty,
    the United States convened the Treaty's Special Verification Commission
    (SVC) in November 2016 for the first time since 2003 due to Russia's
    unwillingness to engage bilaterally. The United States will continue to
    use diplomacy, including bilateral engagements and the SVC, in an
    attempt to return Russia to compliance.

        Question 5.  The United States and Russia have been trading
    accusations about noncompliance with the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear
    Forces Treaty (INF). We have accused Russia of flight testing a ground-
    based cruise missile with a range prohibited by the agreement. In
    December 2017, the two countries held a meeting of the Joint
    Verification Commission, an implementation mechanism established by the
    treaty, to try to resolve the matter, and I understand another meeting
    of this body has been requested and will likely tale place soon.
        The administration has made a number of policy decisions regarding
    how to respond to Russia's violation of the 1987 INF Treaty but has yet
    to publicly describe its strategy. The Wall Street Journal reported on
    November 16 that the Trump administration has begun preliminary
    research on a new, road-mobile ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM)
    that if tested would violate the treaty. The report also indicated that
    the administration has informed Russia of the decision and that
    Secretary of Defense Mattis briefed NATO defense ministers on the
    approach during his recent visit to Brussels. Meanwhile, The Washington
    Post reported that same day that the administration has requested
    another meeting of the treaty's Special Verification Commission (SVC)
    to discuss our compliance concerns.

       On what basis does the administration believe that developing and
            possibly deploying a new U.S. GLCM will convince Russia to
            return to compliance with the INF Treaty? Doesn't the
            development of a new GLCM provide Putin a propaganda victory
            and a ``legitimate'' reason to blame the US for the collapse of
            the INF Treaty and begin deploying large numbers of illegal
            missiles without any constraints?

        Answer. Since the United States declared Russia in violation in
    July 2014, Russia has refused to engage in any meaningful way, and it
    continues to move forward with the production and deployment of the
    violating system. The U.S. continues to seek a diplomatic solution to
    Russia's violation, including continuing to respond to Russia's
    allegations of U.S. noncompliance and considering how best to change
    the current diplomatic deadlock.
        After reviewing the intelligence and the steps taken by the prior
    administration to seek Russia's return to compliance, the Trump
    administration has approved additional U.S. actions to pressure Russia
    to return to full and verifiable compliance. Should Russia return to
    compliance with the INF Treaty, the U.S. is prepared to reverse or
    cease these activities.
        With regard to any military steps, I would defer to the Department
    of Defense. However, the United States takes very seriously its
    commitments under the INF Treaty and complies with those obligations.
        These are steps the Russians are forcing us to take in an effort to
    save a framework that has helped preserve international security for
    decades.

        Question 6.  How did our NATO allies react to the news that the
    United States plans to develop a new road-mobile GLCM that if deployed
    would necessarily be placed in Europe? To your knowledge, are there any
    NATO or East Asian allies that would allow the United States to base a
    new road-mobile ground-launched cruise missile on their territory? If
    the development of a new GLCM becomes a controversial issue within the
    alliance, wouldn't that play into Moscow's efforts to divide the
    alliance and take the spotlight off its violation? ?

        Answer. The United States has closely consulted with Allies in
    Europe and the Asia-Pacific region and will continue to coordinate with
    them on this and other matters that affect our common security. Such
    consultations are held in confidence and we do not release their
    content. I want to highlight and reaffirm what NATO Secretary-General
    Stoltenberg said last month about the Treaty: ``it's extremely
    important that it is fully implemented, so we will continue to call on
    Russia to address the serious concerns in a substantial, transparent
    and verifiable way because the INF Treaty's important for all of us.''

        Question 7.  To help resolve the noncompliance issues, will the new
    administration consider offering transparency measures to address the
    Russian charge that U.S. SM-3 launchers in Europe can contain ground-
    launched cruise missiles?

        Answer. The United States is in compliance with its INF Treaty
    obligations. The U.S. takes these obligations seriously. Rather than
    address its own violation, the Russian Federation has raised baseless
    allegations against the United States in a clear attempt to deflect
    attention from Russia's INF-violating system. The U.S. has directly and
    substantively refuted these allegations with Russia on multiple
    occasions and provided our NATO Allies a detailed explanation of why
    U.S. systems are in full compliance with the INF Treaty.
        The Aegis Ashore missile defense system being deployed in Romania
    and Poland is only capable of launching air and missile defense
    interceptor missiles. These missiles are not subject to the INF Treaty.
    Further, the Aegis Ashore system has never contained, launched, or
    prepared for launch any INF-prohibited missile. Therefore, it is fully
    consistent with U.S. obligations under the INF Treaty.

        Question 8.  In testimony to the House Armed Services Committee in
    March, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Paul Selva
    stated that ``There are no military requirements we cannot currently
    satisfy due to our compliance with the INF Treaty.'' Do you agree with
    this statement?

        Answer. I have no reason to disagree with this assessment by the
    Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on military requirements.

        Question 9.  Over the past several years, the prohibition against
    chemical weapons use established by the Chemical Weapons Convention
    (CWC) has been violated multiple times in Syria. Although the joint
    U.S.-Russian-OPCW operation removed the bulk of Assad's chemical
    weapons arsenal and manufacturing capacity, United Nations Organization
    for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (UN-OPCW) inspectors have found
    that the Assad regime and elements of ISIS have used chemical weapons
    and they have done so since the Trump administration struck the
    Government military air base suspected of launching the deadly Sarin
    attack on a village in Syria earlier this year. Unfortunately, Russia
    has irresponsibly opposed efforts by the United States and other
    members of the United Nations Security Council to extend the mandate of
    the Joint Investigative Mechanism to help hold CWC violators in Syria
    accountable.

       What strategy do you believe the United States should pursue to
            ensure that all states, including Russia, Syria, and others,
            respect the CWC and allow the OPCW and UN members states the
            ability to hold violators accountable?

        Answer. The United States is pursuing a multifaceted strategy to
    ensure all States Parties comply with the CWC and deter future use by
    identifying and holding accountable those responsible for the use of
    chemical weapons. The United States continues to lead the effort with
    international partners. Action should be taken in cooperation with
    allies and partners, though the United States should be willing to act
    alone, if necessary. The United States will continue to engage
    diplomatically on chemical weapons issues at both the United Nations
    and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
    Beyond taking action at the United Nations Security Council, the use of
    General Assembly mechanisms, such as the International, Impartial and
    Independent Mechanism (IIIM) and the Commission of Inquiry on Syria,
    provide additional reinforcing support for attribution efforts. There
    are also other tools available, to include multilateral and domestic
    sanctions, to address CWC violations. Finally, the United States has
    sometimes provided financial support to ensure compliance with, and
    effective implementation of, the Chemical Weapons Convention. To name
    two examples, we did so for the removal of chemical weapons precursors
    from Libya in 2016 for destruction, and are now supporting the OPCW
    Fact Finding Mission, which is investigating suspected chemical weapons
    use in Syria.

        Question 10.  How will do you plan to deal with the demographic
    staffing issues in AVC since 50 percent of the Bureau is eligible to
    retire in the next 5 to 10 years? How will you bring new, young experts
    into the Bureau? How will you enhance gender and diversity balance? How
    will you attract new Foreign Service officers into the Bureau?

        Answer. I take the issue of workforce development very seriously
    and, if confirmed, one of my priorities will be to identify young
    talent with diverse backgrounds, expertise and training and afford this
    next generation the opportunity to learn from skilled professionals in
    order to develop the full range of skills essential to the vital areas
    covered by the AVC Bureau.
        It takes years of experience to build up the reservoir of talent,
    international reputation, and expertise. If confirmed, I will focus not
    only on today's portfolio, but on developing the skills for the future.
        Together, Civil Service and Foreign Service personnel bring deep
    experience and knowledge to the Bureau. If confirmed, I will welcome
    the expertise of the Foreign Service Officers who add critical
    diplomatic skills and unrivaled connections with our foreign
    interlocutors. Military and other advisors on AVC staff contribute a
    needed perspective to the Bureau's work and help strengthen AVC's
    connections with the Department of Defense and other U.S. agencies.
    Conversely, they return to their agencies with a greater appreciation
    of the important and complementary role of AVC and the State Department
    in the field of national security.

        Question 11.  AVC has a number of career civil servants in
    leadership positions. Do you plan to retain those leaders?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will meet with all the staff to gain their
    insight on AVC's needs, challenges and opportunities, relying heavily
    on their creativity, expertise, experience and international
    connections to assess and develop the policy course within the
    Department, the interagency and with the international community. I
    will seek to encourage a diverse and highly skilled workforce that
    brings in the best minds to contribute to U.S. arms control,
    verification and compliance.
        Question 12.  During your confirmation hearing, you indicated a
    belief that the Verification and Compliance bureau should be more
    involved in implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
    (JCPOA).

       Please describe the role you see your bureau playing in
            implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
            (JCPOA). Do you believe Iran is meeting its commitments under
            the JCPOA?

        Answer. The Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and
    Compliance is statutorily responsible for ``the overall supervision
    (including oversight of policy and resources) within the Department of
    State of all matters related to verification and compliance with
    international arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament
    agreements or commitments.'' (Public Law 106-113-Appendix G). If
    confirmed, I will work with my State Department colleagues on their
    ongoing efforts to ensure that all relevant aspects of the JCPOA are
    rigorously verified, that Iran's compliance is strictly assessed, and
    that any and all violations are addressed. In all aspects of the
    administration's efforts related to the JCPOA, I will work with my
    colleagues to ensure the Bureau's integral role is represented.
        As for whether Iran is currently meeting its JCPOA commitments, the
    President and the Secretary have been clear about their concerns
    regarding the JCPOA, including the need for Iran's strict compliance. I
    share these concerns. While the IAEA has reported that Iran continues
    to implement its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA, questions
    remain about authorities and access to Iranian military facilities. The
    administration has made clear that Iran's continuing malign activities
    in the region, including ballistic missile activities and support for
    terrorism, have undermined the expectations set out in the JCPOA that
    the deal would positively contribute to regional and international
    peace and security. The administration further concluded that the
    sanctions relief Iran received as part of the deal is not
    ``proportionate'' to the specific, limited-duration measures taken by
    Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program.

        Question 13.  Do you believe that Article VI of the Treaty on the
    Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) obligates parties to pursue
    disarmament measures in good faith? What does that mean to you? In your
    estimation, what are some ways that we can strengthen all three pillars
    of the NPT? If the United States decides to build new nuclear weapons,
    how do you think the rest of the world will respond?

        Answer. The administration is committed to the NPT in all its
    aspects, including Article VI. Adhering to this commitment in good
    faith entails pursuing effective measures that can help to create the
    security conditions that would facilitate further progress on nuclear
    disarmament. This approach looks at disarmament within the context of
    the overall security environment and is entirely consistent with the
    NPT.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with other NPT States
    Parties to maintain and strengthen the Treaty in all its aspects, while
    emphasizing the central role of nonproliferation in achieving the full
    benefits of the Treaty.
        With regard to international reaction to a hypothetical decision by
    the U.S., the administration remains in the process of conducting its
    Nuclear Posture Review, and I would not presume to speculate on the
    outcome of that review or the potential reaction to it. If confirmed, I
    look forward to ensuring that the United States remains at the
    forefront of international efforts to promote nonproliferation and
    effective measures that enhance our security and create the conditions
    that will allow for nuclear disarmament.

        Question 14.  Does the Trump administration believe the ``gold
    standard''--a commitment not to enrich uranium or reprocess plutonium--
    is a requirement in order to conclude terms for 123 agreements with
    Saudi Arabia or Jordan? If the United States agrees to anything less
    than the ``gold standard'' with Jordan or Saudi Arabia, how do you
    think the United Arab Emirates would respond?

        Answer. In addition to the legal requirements of Section 123 of the
    Atomic Energy Act, the United States has a longstanding policy of
    seeking to limit the spread of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR)
    capabilities around the world. The Trump administration remains
    committed to seeking the highest nonproliferation standards possible in
    123 agreement negotiations with both Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
        The ``Equal Terms and Conditions for Cooperation'' clause of the
    2009 U.S.-United Arab Emirates (UAE) 123 Agreement provides if the
    United States enters into a nuclear cooperation agreement with another
    non-nuclear weapon state in the Middle East with more favorable terms,
    the United States, at the request of the UAE, will consult with the UAE
    regarding the possibility of amending the U.S.-UAE Agreement. Since the
    United States has not entered into a civil nuclear cooperation
    agreement with a state in the Middle East since 2009, I cannot
    speculate on how the UAE would react to a hypothetical scenario.

        Question 15.  Twenty years ago, the United States was the first
    country to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which now has
    183 signatories. The commitment to conclude negotiations on the CTBT
    was critical to securing the indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995,
    and it has been essential to establishing a global norm against nuclear
    weapons test explosions, which are prohibited by the CTBT. Today only
    one state--North Korea--conducts nuclear test explosions.
        But the CTBT has not yet formally entered into force because the
    United States and seven other states have not yet ratified the pact.
    Nevertheless, Democratic and Republican administrations have supported
    the U.S. nuclear test moratorium in place since 1992 and the global
    monitoring system to detect and deter nuclear testing, and we have
    worked hard to prevent the resumption of nuclear testing by others.
        In September 2016, the UN Security Council passed a resolution
    (2310) that was endorsed by 42 countries, including Israel that calls
    on all remaining states to ratify the CTBT and support the global test
    monitoring system. Last year, the three U.S. nuclear weapons lab
    directors reported that they are in a better position to maintain the
    arsenal with their multi-billion system of science-based stewardship
    than they were during the era of nuclear weapons test explosions.

       Are you aware of any technical reason to resume testing to maintain
            the current warhead types in the U.S. nuclear arsenal?

        Answer. No, I am not.

        Question 16.  While the Trump administration may still be in the
    process of reviewing its policy on the CTBT, will the Trump
    administration support efforts reinforce the global norm against
    nuclear testing, including possible nuclear testing by North Korea, and
    will you pledge, if confirmed for this position, to take steps to
    strengthen the global nuclear test moratorium?

        Answer. The administration has repeatedly called for North Korea to
    cease its nuclear testing activities, and continues to work with our
    international partners to increase pressure on North Korea to do so. If
    confirmed, I commit to calling on nation states to declare and maintain
    national moratoria on nuclear explosive testing.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Dr. Yleem D.S. Poblete by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1.  The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is a cornerstone of
    both the efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to verify
    the activities of countries that have nuclear weapons through the use
    of international monitoring. I was pleased to hear that you support the
    continued moratorium on testing. However, the United States has signed
    but not ratified the treaty.

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

        Answer. The administration is in the process of reviewing its
    policy on a number of arms control and nonproliferation issues,
    including the CTBT. As such, the administration has not made a decision
    regarding ratification of the Treaty.The President's FY 18 budget
    request fully funds the U.S. planned contribution to the CTBTO
    Preparatory Commission (PrepCom), of whose budget, approximately 85
    percent is devoted to developing, operating, and maintaining the
    International Monitoring System and the systems which support it, such
    as the International Data Center. I pledge that, if confirmed, I will
    work with Congress to ensure our support for the PrepCom is consistent
    with U.S. law and supports U.S. leadership on nonproliferation issues,
    including international efforts to ensure our ability to detect nuclear
    tests by North Korea and potentially others in the future.

        Question 2.  The Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed
    with the Soviet Union in 1987, remains a landmark accomplishment, with
    both sides agreeing to eliminate an entire class of destabilizing
    nuclear weapons. I am dismayed at the recent evidence of Russian
    cheating on the INF treaty, but do not believe that the answer is to
    develop a new class of American intermediate range systems. Rather, I
    believe that we need to bring Russia back into compliance.

       What steps to you and the Department of State plan to take to
            incentivize Russia to come back into compliance with the INF
            treaty?
       What are your views on the development of a new American missile
            system of a range that would violate the terms of the INF
            treaty

        Answer. Since the United States declared Russia in violation in
    July 2014, Russia has refused to engage in any meaningful way, and it
    continues to move forward with the production and deployment of the
    violating system.
        The Trump administration has reviewed the intelligence and the
    steps taken by the prior administration to seek Russia's return to
    compliance. Following this review, the Trump administration has
    approved additional countermeasures as part of U.S. efforts to pressure
    the Russian Federation to return to full and verifiable compliance.
    Should Russia return to compliance with the INF Treaty, it is my
    understanding that the U.S. is prepared to reverse or cease these
    activities.
        With regard to the military steps, I would defer to the Department
    of Defense. However, I would emphasize that the United States takes
    very seriously its obligations under the INF Treaty and complies with
    those obligations.
        These are steps the Russians are forcing us to take in order to
    save not only the INF Treaty itself, but also the broader arms control
    framework that has preserved international security for decades. The
    goal for the United States is to preserve the viability of the INF
    Treaty by pressuring Russia to return to full and verifiable compliance
    with its INF Treaty obligations.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
          to Dr. Christopher Ashley Ford by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Probably the most important single contribution I have made
    to promoting human rights and democracy was the role I played in
    helping establish the Office of the Prosecutor at the Special Court for
    Sierra Leone (SCSL) in Freetown, Sierra Leone, in the autumn of 2002.
        The SCSL was established by agreement between the Government of
    Sierra Leone and the United Nations in the wake of the Sierra Leone
    Civil War of 1991-92. The civil war had been a terribly brutal
    struggle, leaving over 50,000 people dead and involving grotesque human
    rights abuses. Human Rights Watch, for instance, reported that rebel
    forces in Sierra Leone ``systematically murdered, mutilated, and raped
    civilians,'' and these forces became particularly notorious for
    intimidating the civilian population by amputating civilians' ``hands,
    arms, legs, and other parts of the body.''
        The SCSL was established after the war ended in order to prosecute
    ``persons who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations
    of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law'' during the
    war. I was asked by the incoming Chief Prosecutor of the SCSL, David
    Crane, to join a group of international lawyers helping him establish
    the Office of the Prosecutor as the new court was being set up in
    Freetown.
        At the time, I was working for Senator Richard Shelby as Minority
    Counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). I took
    leave from this position in October 2002, however, in order to help Mr.
    Crane set up the prosecutor's office. (U.S. law--specifically 5 U.S.C.
    Sec. Sec. 3353 & 3382--permits federal employees, with their employer's
    permission, to be temporarily detailed to qualified international
    organizations in order to make U.S. Government expertise available to
    them.) I worked at the SCSL for about three weeks as an appellate
    litigation advisor to the prosecutor.
        The SCSL was an important innovation in international humanitarian
    law. While purely international war crimes tribunals already existed
    (e.g., the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia),
    the SCSL was at the time an entirely unique model--a ``hybrid'' court
    established by agreement between a sovereign state and the United
    Nations as a new experiment in how to bring to justice those who had
    brutalized innocent civilians with crimes against humanity. And indeed
    the court was able to break new legal ground in holding such
    perpetrators to account. To date, I believe, proceedings have concluded
    against 21 persons, and eight are still serving sentences for their
    crimes. Most significantly, the SCSL successfully prosecuted former
    Liberian President Charles Taylor, the first African head of state to
    be convicted of war crimes.
        Because of the need to return to my duties at the SSCI, I was
    unable to stay in Freetown for longer. Nevertheless, I am proud of the
    role I played in helping establish the prosecutor's office, and thus in
    helping the Special Court find its footing and begin its important work
    in bringing war criminals to justice.
        Question 2.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the Foreign Service?

        Answer. I am committed to enabling professional and personal
    success for all staff under my direction. The Bureau of International
    Security and Nonproliferation is staffed through various employee
    categories, including foreign service, civil service, contractors,
    military detailees, and interns. If confirmed, I pledge to support
    communities of interest in each category in order to better understand
    their unique concerns and to solicit advice for how best to strengthen
    an inclusive, diverse, and supportive working environment for all.

        Question 3.  What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors in the Bureau of International Security and Non-
    Proliferation are fostering an environment that is diverse and
    inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I pledge to work with supervisors and staff
    to strengthen all aspects of management within the bureau, including
    fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive. I will
    encourage all supervisors to continue advancing their skills as
    managers and leaders through training and developmental activities. I
    will also ensure bureau staff are aware of all channels for employees
    to report concerns without fear of retribution.

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

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

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

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

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

        Answer. No.

        Question 7.  The ISN Bureau plays a leading role in preventing the
    advancement of North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile program.

       If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure the international
            community is complying with UN Sanctions regimes?

        Answer. All members of the international community are obligated to
    fully implement the United Nations Security Council Resolutions
    (UNSCRs) on North Korea. The UNSCRs are designed to impede North
    Korea's access to weapons technologies and to block sources of the
    revenue needed to advance its unlawful nuclear and ballistic missile
    programs. The Department devotes substantial resources to support UNSCR
    enforcement activities, and the bureau I have been nominated to lead,
    International Security and Nonproliferation (ISN), plays a leading role
    initiating diplomatic and economic actions to promote and ensure strict
    implementation.
        Over the past year, the Department of State, with strong
    interagency support--including with my own strong support and
    encouragement from the Weapons of Mass Destruction and
    Counterproliferation Directorate at the National Security Council,
    which I have had the privilege of heading since January 2017--has
    conducted multiple rounds of engagement with countries around the world
    to strengthen UNSCR implementation. ISN has engaged, for instance, with
    a range of countries seeking to provide any sort of service to, or to
    be the jurisdiction of record for, a company owning a DPRK-associated
    vessel in order to press them to comply with UNSCR sanctions. The
    Bureau has also targeted DPRK WMD procurements and worked aggressively
    to detect and disrupt suspected North Korea's arms transfers and to
    sever the underlying political and commercial relationships from which
    they result. ISN actively participates in ongoing interagency processes
    through which the U.S. Government employs a broad range of diplomatic,
    economic, financial, law enforcement, and other tools to ensure UNSCR
    enforcement and impede progress on North Korea's nuclear and missile
    programs. If confirmed, I will ensure that this important work to
    impede and counter DPRK efforts continues, and will actively seek ways
    in which to improve the effectiveness of such activity. I will
    vigorously promote compliance with Security Council resolutions in
    regions where North Korea is known to operate, and will work with
    countries around the world to ensure robust implementation of the
    resolutions.

        Question 8.  How can the U.S. verify that these sanctions regimes
    are effective?

        Answer. United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs) on the
    DPRK contain the strongest set of provisions against Pyongyang yet, and
    end a strong message to North Korea that the international community
    stands united in condemning Pyongyang's continued violations of its
    UNSC obligations and demands the immediate cessation of its unlawful
    nuclear and ballistic missile programs. As countries have improved
    their implementation of these sanctions, the revenue streams upon which
    the North Korean regime depends to fund its weapons of mass destruction
    and missile programs have been increasingly constricted, placing the
    regime under unprecedented stress, while broad international
    counterproliferation cooperation has also limited North Korean access
    to financing, technology, and materials relevant to these threat
    programs.
        We have seen a number of governments take important steps to
    implement the UNSCRs and--in so doing--exert pressure on the DPRK. For
    example, Angola recently announced it had deported DPRK forced
    laborers, Uganda ordered the DPRK to withdraw two proliferation-related
    officials, and Sudan committed to sever arms and commercial ties with
    the DPRK in accordance with UNSCR obligations.
        Overall, the comprehensive UN sanctions regime against North Korea
    now bans over 90 percent of that country's publicly reported exports,
    including coal, textiles, seafood and other items assessed in 2016 at a
    total of $2.7 billion. Since China's ban of coal imports in February,
    the DPRK has forfeited an estimated $805 million in revenue from coal
    exports at current market prices. On August 14, the Chinese Government
    issued a notice announcing a comprehensive ban on the import of coal,
    iron, iron ore, lead, and lead ore from the DPRK, effective August 15
    in compliance with UNSCR 2371. Regional Chinese authorities also
    tightened restrictions on the import of seafood coming from North Korea
    after adoption of UNSCR 2371.
        Furthermore, in light of the immediate and urgent DPRK threat, the
    State Department has led the administration's maximum pressure campaign
    by calling on all countries and working with international partners to
    persuade them to take steps above and beyond UNSCR requirements. We are
    encouraged by the strong measures countries across the world have done
    to answer this call. In Africa, for instance, Equatorial Guinea
    announced the termination of its trade relations with DPRK companies.
    In Asia, Singapore followed the Philippines' lead in terminating trade
    with North Korea. Multiple governments have signaled their concern by
    expelling DPRK officials, thus reducing the size of the DPRK's
    diplomatic presence and downgrading diplomatic relations--which has an
    important signaling effect in addition to its concrete impact in
    reducing North Korea's ability to use diplomatic personnel in illicit
    WMD-related procurement and revenue-generating smuggling activities.
        In addition to individual countries' announced actions, the UN
    Panel of Experts (POE) gathers, examines and analyzes information from
    States regarding the implementation of the UNSCRs, investigates
    violations, and prepares and publishes reports on its findings. The POE
    is an important tool in drawing attention to violations as well as
    reports of implementation, compliance, and activities by UN Member
    States. If confirmed, I will continue to press countries to comply with
    the UNSCRs, provide reports to the POE, and support the POE's efforts
    to monitor UNSCR implementation and investigation violations.
        In short, the UNSCR sanctions regime against North Korea has been
    effective in imposing unprecedented costs and pressures upon the DPRK
    regime, and powerfully supports U.S. and international efforts to bring
    about the end of destabilizing threats from Pyongyang's WMD and missile
    programs. The ISN Bureau has been at the forefront of this work, and if
    confirmed, I will work diligently to ensure that this critical activity
    continues and that we remain constantly active in trying to improve its
    effectiveness further.

        Question 9.  In your estimation, do you believe there is a military
    solution to the North Korea issue?

        Answer. While the State Department has made clear our preferred
    approach of resolving the North Korea matter peacefully, the President
    has said repeatedly that all options are on the table. We are
    constantly reviewing our current posture to better counter the DPRK's
    evolving threat, and we remain firmly committed to seeking a negotiated
    solution if we can. Diplomatic options remain viable and open, and
    indeed it is the purpose of our current campaign to maximize North
    Korean incentives to engage in the kind of negotiations that would be
    necessary in order to roll back its nuclear and missile programs. As
    Secretary Tillerson recently underscored, the United States remains
    committed to finding a peaceful path to denuclearization and to ending
    belligerent actions by North Korea. If confirmed, I will work with our
    allies and partners to deepen cooperation to this end, and to hold
    nations accountable to their commitments to isolate the regime.
        To be clear, however, both Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis have
    unequivocally stated that ``any attack by the DPRK will be defeated,
    and any use of nuclear weapons will be met with an effective and
    overwhelming response.''

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
           to Dr. Christopher Ashley Ford by Senator Edward J. Markey

        Question 1.  The President has threatened to ``tear up'' the Iran
    nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In your
    current White House role, you are one of the Senior Directors directly
    responsible for advising the President on this issue and- if
    confirmed--you will lead a bureau that plays an important role in
    ensuring Iran is complying with its nuclear commitments under the
    JCPOA. Do you believe the JCPOA is in the U.S. national security
    interest? Is Iran is in compliance with its commitments under the
    nuclear deal?

        Answer. The President and the administration have been clear about
    our concerns regarding the JCPOA. While we share the assessment of the
    International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran continues to implement its
    nuclear-related commitments, we have made clear that Iran's continued
    malign activities in the region, including ballistic missile activities
    and support for terrorism, have undermined the expectations set out in
    the JCPOA that the deal would positively contribute to regional and
    international peace and security. This does not mean that the
    administration believes it is impossible to fix the flaws of the JCPOA
    or that it is time for us to leave the deal. Indeed, pursuant to the
    President's direction and following a review of our policy toward Iran,
    we are continuing to implement our JCPOA commitments, and will continue
    to ensure that Iran strictly implements its own. The President has
    requested that Congress work with the administration to address the
    JCPOA's flaws, including through amending and strengthening the Iran
    Nuclear Agreement Review Act, while continuing to hold Iran accountable
    to its commitments under the JCPOA, and he has directed his
    administration to work with international partners to meet long-term
    Iranian proliferation challenges and prevent Iran from acquiring the
    capability rapidly to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear
    weapon. If confirmed, I would work diligently with international
    counterparts, with U.S. interagency partners, and with the Congress to
    ensure that the strongest possible protections are put in place, on an
    enduring basis, to deny Iran any viable pathway to nuclear weapons.
        Question 2.  Why have the President and other members of his
    administration said that Iran is violating the agreement? Are all other
    parties to the agreement and the International Atomic Energy Agency
    (IAEA)--the world's international nuclear watchdog--wrong in continuing
    to affirm that Iran is complying with its nuclear commitments under the
    JCPOA?

        Answer. The President and the administration have been clear about
    our concerns regarding the JCPOA. While we share the assessment of the
    International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran is implementing its
    nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA, we continue to be
    concerned that Iran has tried to push limits in the deal and, in the
    past, has exceeded some limits, such as those related to heavy water.
    In addition, Iran's continued malign activities in the region,
    including ballistic missile activities and support for terrorism, have
    undermined the expectations set out in the JCPOA that the deal would
    positively contribute to regional and international peace and security.

        Question 3.  If Iran is violating the deal as the President has
    claimed, why hasn't the United States engaged the dispute resolution
    process laid out in the text of the JCPOA? Some members of the
    administration, including Secretary Mattis, believe it is in the
    national security interest of the United States to remain in the JCPOA.
    Given this, should the United States be trying to exhaust every tool
    available to us--including the JCPOA's built-in dispute resolution
    mechanism--before walking away?

        Answer. The administration has not announced an intention to end
    participation in the JCPOA at this time, and we continue to uphold our
    JCPOA commitments while working with Congress and international
    partners to improve how we meet long-term Iranian proliferation
    challenges. While we do so, we will continue to hold Iran strictly
    accountable to its nuclear-related commitments under the deal. The
    United States continues to engage Iran directly and in cooperation with
    our P5+1 partners to ensure technical implementation of the deal is
    strictly enforced. While to date we have not deemed it necessary to
    invoke the dispute resolution mechanism contained in the JCPOA, we
    recognize it is a tool available to us as appropriate.

        Question 4.  If the United States leaves the JCPOA or continues
    trying to unilaterally change the terms of the agreement either through
    legislation or the threat of re-imposing U.S. sanctions, what do you
    think the implications are for our relationships with other parties to
    the JCPOA such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China,
    Iran and the European Union? Do you think such a step will impact the
    credibility of the United States with these parties and other countries
    around the world? How do you think such a move by the United States
    would impact international nuclear nonproliferation efforts and efforts
    by the United States to negotiate arms control and nonproliferation
    agreements with other countries like North Korea that pose a threat to
    U.S. national security interests?

        Answer. The administration has not announced an intention to end
    participation in the JCPOA at this time, and we continue to uphold our
    JCPOA commitments. While we do so, we will continue to hold Iran
    strictly accountable to its nuclear-related commitments under the deal.
    The President has requested that Congress work with the administration
    to address the JCPOA's flaws, including through amending and
    strengthening the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA). Our allies
    in Europe strongly support the JCPOA and want the United States to
    remain in the deal, and we have made clear that our efforts to
    strengthen INARA are a domestic matter outside the JCPOA. Our European
    partners have signaled a willingness to cooperate with us to address to
    address Iran's malign actions outside the JCPOA and long term Iranian
    proliferation challenges, as well as to continue to work together
    elsewhere where international support remains crucial, such as in
    addressing the threats presented by North Korea.

        Question 5.  Under a proposed re-organization of the State
    Department, the Iran Nuclear Implementation team at the State
    Department, which had previously reported directly to the Secretary,
    would be placed under the ISN bureau you are nominated to lead. Do you
    believe this is the right place for this team? What are your plans for
    this critical office and how do you intend to manage parts of this
    agreement that don't fall within your bureau's purview, such as the
    sanctions issues and engagement with the United Nations?

        Answer. Based upon my previous experience at the State Department
    and my serving on the National Security Council staff, I am a firm
    believer in the principle that the American people are best met when
    organizations and personnel with deep functional and technical
    expertise are able to employ that expertise to address functional and
    technical challenges in foreign and national security policy, in close
    and collaborative coordination with their counterparts who specialize
    in broader regional affairs. The ISN bureau has unique technical
    expertise that provides an important locus for coordinating the strict
    implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with
    Iran and developing improved ways to ensure that enduring constraints
    are placed upon Iran's ability to present nuclear and missile
    proliferation challenges in the future. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with senior leadership in the Department and key bureaus and
    offices including the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, the Bureau of
    Economic and Business Affairs, and the Bureau of International
    Organizations, among others, to coordinate with our friends and allies
    in supporting this strict implementation of the JCPOA and to address
    Iran's destabilizing activities.

        Question 6.  North Korea is one of the most pressing foreign policy
    challenges the United States faces right now. Do you believe
    denuclearization should be a pre-condition for any negotiations with
    North Korea? What is the administration's strategy for rolling back and
    eliminating North Korea's nuclear weapons program? During your
    confirmation proceedings, you indicated that strengthening sanctions on
    North Korea is one of your top priorities if confirmed. How do you plan
    to do this? What do you believe is missing from our current sanctions
    regime against North Korea?

        Answer. U.S. policy is to achieve the complete, verifiable,
    irreversible denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. We have long
    made clear that we will not negotiate our way back to talks, and our
    current maximum pressure campaign is designed to incentivize a North
    Korean decision finally to engage seriously on rolling back the
    destabilizing nuclear and missile threats it presents. We aim to
    demonstrate that North Korea will not achieve the security or
    prosperity it seeks until it changes its current course and returns to
    serious and meaningful talks aimed at denuclearization. The
    administration has made clear North Korea's flagrant violations of
    international law and its disregard for international norms will not
    lead to acceptance as a nuclear-armed state.
        In 2017 alone, North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test and
    more than 20 ballistic missile launches in violation of its
    international obligations and commitments. Its most recent launch was a
    likely intercontinental ballistic missile, highlighting the direct
    threat that Pyongyang seeks to present to the American homeland. North
    Korea's words and actions continue to demonstrate that it is not
    willing or interested in engaging in serious talks on denuclearization
    at this time. As Secretary Tillerson stated earlier this year, when the
    time comes for talks, it will not be enough for the DPRK to stop its
    program where it is today. North Korea must be prepared to come to the
    table ready to chart a course to ``cease and rollback'' its nuclear
    program.
        In order to help bring this about, we are working hard to
    strengthen sanctions against North Korea, for both multilateral and
    U.S. sanctions play a critical role in our maximum pressure campaign
    strategy to counter the threat posed to the United States by the DPRK's
    prohibited nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
        If confirmed, I will continue to push for strong multilateral
    sanctions against the DPRK at the United Nations. The current sanctions
    regime is unprecedentedly strong, and we will seek more sanctions as
    needed in order to contribute to bringing North Korean threats under
    control. We will also continue to work with partners around the world
    to improve the effectiveness of sanctions implementation, in order to
    ensure that these measures work as well as possible to choke off the
    DPRK's access to revenues, technology, and materials that can support
    development and maintenance of its nuclear and missile programs. We
    continue to press countries around the world to fully implement all UN
    Security Council Resolutions against North Korea--including UNSCRs
    2270, 2321, 2356, and 2371--and to harmonize their domestic sanction
    regimes with our designations on North Korean and third-country
    entities. Since April, we have asked countries around the world to cut
    diplomatic and economic ties, including bilateral trade, with the DPRK.
    In every bilateral relationship we have around the world, we have made
    clear that we expect to see countries reduce these ties, or face
    consequences.
        We are also aggressively using the United States' own
    nonproliferation and DPRK-specific sanctions authorities to target a
    range of North Korean activity, and these efforts will expand as we
    begin implementing the Countering America's Adversaries Through
    Sanctions Act to impose new restrictions on the DPRK and to designate
    individuals and entities that enable the DPRK's illicit activities.
    These actions send a strong signal to the DPRK and third-country
    facilitators that we are watching their activities and will hold them
    accountable. On September 21, moreover, the President announced
    Executive Order 13810, imposing additional restrictions on North Korea
    and expanding the scope of U.S. sanctions authorities, including
    targeting funds the DPRK generates through international trade to
    support its nuclear and missile programs and weapons proliferation.
        If confirmed, I will lead an ISN team that is staffed with
    experienced sanctions and interdiction experts who devote their time to
    leading State operational efforts to detect, prevent, disrupt, stop,
    and/or sanction arms and WMD transfers, related financial transactions,
    sanctions evasion, and other illicit activities. As is widely known,
    the DPRK is very adaptive and skilled at using deceptive practices to
    evade sanctions, so our sanctions posture must therefore also
    continuously adapt to meet this challenge. To maintain our edge, it is
    usually best that we not telegraph specific moves before they occur,
    for this can give the DPRK more time to seek ways around them. If
    confirmed, however, I will ensure that our efforts remain squarely
    directed at the DPRK threat and that we adapt and evolve our approaches
    in order to ensure their ability to meet counterproliferation needs,
    and I will work diligently to improve the effectiveness of this work
    wherever possible.

        Question 7.  Is the United States at present negotiating terms of a
    123 agreement with Saudi Arabia and Jordan? Did the Trump
    administration decide to--or did Saudi Arabia and Jordan approach the
    Trump administration to restart or revitalize--123 negotiations after
    January 2017? Has the United States engaged in discussions on a new 123
    agreement, renewal of a 123 agreement, or modification of an existing
    123 agreement since the start of the Trump administration?

        Answer. The United States has been in negotiations with Saudi
    Arabia on a 123 agreement since 2012, and with Jordan since 2008. While
    both these negotiations have remained open, it has been more than a
    year since any substantive discussions on the respective 123 agreement
    texts have occurred. Separately, administration officials have spoken
    to Saudi counterparts in general terms regarding the Kingdom's nuclear
    power plans and its interest in pursuing U.S. nuclear technology,
    including U.S. legal and regulatory requirements for export of U.S.
    nuclear materials, equipment, and technology. Given the sensitive
    nature of those engagements, it is not possible to say more about these
    contacts here, but the Department would be happy to provide a closed
    briefing for committee staff on the substance of those discussions.
        When the Trump administration came into office, it began a review
    of all ongoing 123 agreement negotiations and civil nuclear cooperation
    policy. That review is ongoing. The United States is also in
    negotiations with the United Kingdom and Mexico on 123 agreements.

        Question 8.  Please describe in as much detail as possible the
    status and tenor of any of the above negotiations.

        Answer. Negotiations with Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom,
    and Mexico are ongoing, cordial, and cooperative. Given the sensitive
    nature of 123 agreement-related engagements, it is not possible to say
    more here, but the Department would be happy to provide a closed
    briefing for committee staff on the substance of those negotiations.

        Question 9.  Does the Trump administration believe the ``gold
    standard''--a commitment not to enrich uranium or reprocess plutonium--
    is a requirement in order to conclude terms for 123 agreements with
    Saudi Arabia or Jordan? If the United States agrees to anything less
    than the ``gold standard'' with Jordan or Saudi Arabia, how do you
    think the United Arab Emirates would respond?

        Answer. In addition to the legal requirements of Section 123 of the
    Atomic Energy Act--which include important nonproliferation protections
    such as requirements for materials and facilities security, as well as
    a prohibition upon enrichment or reprocessing of U.S.-origin material
    without U.S. consent--the United States has a longstanding policy of
    seeking to limit the spread of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR)
    capabilities around the world. The Trump administration remains
    committed to seeking the highest nonproliferation standards possible in
    123 agreement negotiations with both Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
        The ``Equal Terms and Conditions for Cooperation'' clause of the
    2009 U.S.-United Arab Emirates (UAE) 123 Agreement provides that if the
    United States enters into a nuclear cooperation agreement with another
    non-nuclear weapon state in the Middle East with more favorable terms,
    the United States, at the request of the UAE, will consult with the UAE
    regarding the possibility of amending the U.S.-UAE Agreement. Since the
    United States has not entered into a civil nuclear cooperation
    agreement with a state in the Middle East since 2009, I cannot
    speculate on how the UAE would react to a hypothetical scenario.

        Question 10.  The Atomic Energy Act (AEA) requires the Executive
    branch keep Congress through this committee ``fully and currently
    informed of any initiative or negotiations relating to a new or amended
    agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation.'' The AEA also requires
    Congress to review the terms of any 123 agreement and gives us the
    power to block any 123 agreement. How do you interpret this
    requirement? Do you believe the administration is meeting these
    requirements in its current 123 negotiations with Saudi Arabia and
    Jordan? If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for International Security
    and Nonproliferation, will you commit to fully briefing this committee
    on the status of these negotiations in a classified or non-public
    setting within 30 days of your confirmation?

        Answer. The Department is committed to honoring its statutory
    obligations. In accordance with the AEA, the State Department briefs
    the appropriate committees before commencing negotiations on a 123
    agreement. Beyond those statutory notifications, the Department also
    offers periodic briefings as negotiations progress.
        The administration has fully met all legal requirements in
    consulting with Congress regarding longstanding 123 agreement
    negotiations with Saudi Arabia and Jordan. If confirmed, I am committed
    to keeping the committee fully abreast of the status of all 123
    agreement negotiations, and would be pleased to personally brief the
    committee in a classified setting within 30 days of my confirmation.

        Question 11.  Do you believe the United States Government is
    providing adequate funding to the International Atomic Energy Agency
    (IAEA)? Do you believe the United States should increase its
    contributions to the IAEA?

        Answer. The United States works closely with the IAEA and other
    member states to ensure the IAEA has the resources it needs to carry
    out its important work. For the IAEA's 2018 regular budget (as in
    previous years), the United States joined a consensus agreement in the
    IAEA Board of Governors on a revised budget level that was requested by
    the IAEA Director General. The United States contributes 25.5 percent
    of the IAEA regular budget, by far the largest share of any IAEA
    member. In addition to the assessed regular budget, the Department of
    State annually provides approximately $90 million in voluntary
    contributions to support activities that advance U.S. priorities. If
    confirmed, I will look at U.S. contributions to the IAEA to ensure we
    are providing adequate funding.

        Question 12.  Are you aware of any technical reason to resume
    testing to maintain the current warhead types in the U.S. nuclear
    arsenal?

        Answer. No, I am not aware of any technical reason to resume
    nuclear explosive testing at this time to maintain current warhead
    types in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

        Question 13.  While the Trump administration may still be in the
    process of reviewing its policy on the CTBT, will the Trump
    administration support efforts reinforce the global norm against
    nuclear testing, including possible nuclear testing by North Korea, and
    will you pledge, if confirmed for this position, to take steps to
    strengthen the global nuclear test moratorium?

        Answer. The administration has repeatedly called for North Korea to
    cease its nuclear testing activities, and continues to work with our
    international partners to increase pressure on North Korea to do so. If
    confirmed, I will continue to call on all states to declare, observe,
    and maintain national moratoria on nuclear explosive testing.

        Question 14.  What is the policy of the United States regarding the
    criteria that should be used to evaluate membership bids from non-NPT
    member states to the NSG? Please be specific and please explain how
    such an approach will strengthen rather than weaken compliance with the
    goals and principles of the NSG and of the NPT?

        Answer. The United States believes that the factors for
    consideration of applications contained in the Nuclear Suppliers Group
    (NSG) Procedural Arrangement are sufficient for participation from any
    government. The State Department is working closely with NSG
    Participating Governments (PGs) to identify a path forward on the issue
    of possible membership for states that are not party to the NPT, and if
    confirmed I will continue this effort.
        The NSG and global nuclear nonproliferation regimes are
    strengthened when all major suppliers of nuclear technology abide by
    stringent export control regulations and cooperate in crafting the NSG
    Guidelines that influence the formation of those domestic regulations.

        Question 15.  How would Indian membership in the NSG build on the
    nonproliferation commitments it already made, and has not fully met, on
    the eve of the NSG's September 2008 decision to exempt India from the
    NSG's longstanding requirement for full-scope IAEA safeguards? Be
    specific and use examples.

        Answer. India is a responsible actor in the field of civil nuclear
    power and nuclear nonproliferation. India's likemindedness with Nuclear
    Suppliers Group (NSG) Participating Governments (PGs) is demonstrated
    by the large number of bilateral and multilateral nonproliferation
    commitments and the large number of bilateral nuclear cooperation
    agreements it has signed. Once India becomes an NSG member, it would
    commit to abide by the NSG Guidelines for transfers of nuclear and
    dual-use items, as well as its previous bilateral and multilateral
    nonproliferation and nuclear cooperation commitments.

        Question 16.  As you know, Section 104 of the Henry Hyde U.S.-India
    Peaceful Nuclear Cooperation Act of 2006 requires an annual
    implementation and compliance report regarding a number of issues
    relating the arrangement. This report must, among other things, contain
    an estimate of the rate of production in India of fissile material for
    nuclear explosive devices and whether imported uranium has affected the
    rate of production of nuclear explosive devices. The law requires that
    the report shall be unclassified but may contain a classified annex.

       Can you confirm that there has been no finding of material
            noncompliance by India with any commitment made by India
            pursuant to this section of the Hyde Act and that India has not
            increased its rate of production, or capacity to produce,
            fissile material for nuclear weapons or other unsafeguarded
            purposes?

        Answer. Every year since the Hyde Act passed into law, the
    Department of State has provided a report on the nuclear activities of
    India. In the 2017 report, in Part 1: Section 104(g)(1), as amended:
    Information on Nuclear Activities of India, the Department wrote that
    there has been no finding of material noncompliance by India with any
    commitment made pursuant to the Hyde Act.
        In Part 2: Section 104(g)(2), as amended: Implementation and
    Compliance Report, the Department wrote that (SBU) ``Both India and
    Pakistan continue to produce fissile material that can increase their
    nuclear weapons stockpiles.''

        Question 17.  Will you commit to keeping my office and the
    committee ``fully and currently informed'' regarding implementation and
    compliance with this agreement? Will you provide a written copy of each
    annual report as required by Section 104 of the Hyde Act?

        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to keeping your office and the
    committee ``fully and currently informed'' regarding implementation and
    compliance with the Hyde Act and will provide a written copy of each
    annual report as required.

        Question 18.  Do you believe that Article VI of the Treaty on the
    Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) obligates parties to pursue
    disarmament measures in good faith? What does that mean to you? In your
    estimation, what are some ways that we can strengthen all three pillars
    of the NPT? If the United States decides to build new nuclear weapons,
    how do you think the rest of the world will respond?

        Answer. Article VI of the NPT obligates all States Party to pursue
    negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation
    of the nuclear arms race and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on
    general and complete disarmament under strict and effective
    international control. The administration is committed to the NPT in
    all its aspects, including Article VI, and is committed to encouraging
    other States Party to fulfil their commitments too. Adhering to this
    commitment in good faith entails pursuing effective measures that can
    help to create the security conditions that would facilitate further
    progress on nuclear disarmament. This approach, which looks at
    disarmament within the context of the overall security environment,
    seeks to address disarmament as a real-world policy problem and is
    entirely consistent with the NPT, the Preamble of which expressly
    envisions easing tensions and strengthening trust among states ``in
    order to facilitate'' disarmament.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with other NPT States Party
    to maintain and strengthen the Treaty in all its aspects, while
    emphasizing the central role of nonproliferation in achieving the full
    benefits of the Treaty. The widespread benefits of the peaceful use of
    nuclear energy and technology are a great success story of the NPT,
    which is only possible because of a strong nonproliferation regime. We
    will continue to highlight this success and seek opportunities to
    promote building further capacity in this area, consistent with global
    nonproliferation obligations.
        With regard to international reactions to a hypothetical decision
    to build new nuclear weapons, the administration remains in the process
    of conducting its Nuclear Posture Review, and I cannot speculate on the
    outcome of that review or the reaction to it. If confirmed, I look
    forward to ensuring that the United States remains at the forefront of
    international efforts to promote nonproliferation and effective
    measures that enhance our security and create the conditions that will
    allow for nuclear disarmament.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Dr. Christopher Ashley Ford by Senator Cory Booker

        Question 1.  One of the most dangerous developments of recent years
    has been the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Since the
    1998 tests, India and Pakistan have both deployed increasingly
    sophisticated nuclear weapons on a range of platforms. A nuclear war in
    South Asia could easily lead to millions of casualties and the United
    States needs to do everything in its power to prevent such a conflict:

       What are the ISN bureau plans to improve strategic stability in
            South Asia to move India and Pakistan away from the precipice
            of nuclear war?
       What are your ideas for slowing or ending the arms race in South
            Asia?

        Answer. In line with the President's South Asia strategy, we
    continue to encourage restraint in Pakistan's military nuclear and
    missile programs, and to urge Pakistan and India to reduce tensions and
    the risk of conflict. At every opportunity, we raise with India and
    Pakistan the need to engage with each other to ratchet down tensions.
    We do this in informal and in formal discussions, such as by
    encouraging both countries to engage in dialogue, to enact new
    confidence building measures, to adhere to self-imposed nuclear testing
    moratoria, not to mate nuclear warheads and delivery systems, to avoid
    development or deployment of types of weapon or delivery system that
    could destabilize their relationship, to improve nuclear security in
    order to ensure that non-state actors cannot acquire access to nuclear
    weapons or materials, and to exercise restraint aimed at improving
    strategic stability.

        Question 2.  One of the great challenges we face today is the
    spread of dual use technology that enables nuclear or other WMD
    proliferation. In some cases countries lack the capacity to enforce
    their United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 obligations to
    prevent such proliferation. In other cases, countries ignore the
    proliferation activities of their national companies. We need to do
    everything possible to prevent proliferation:

       Given the role of the Export and Related Border Security Program in
            improving countries capacities to meet their UNSCR 1540
            obligations and prevent proliferation, do you have plans to
            expand that program to other countries where we currently do
            not have an EXBS advisor?

        Answer. U.S. capacity-building assistance has made important
    contributions to the global nonproliferation regime for many years. The
    EXBS Program currently works in 67 countries, including advanced
    technology suppliers and key transit/transshipment hubs. To support
    cost-effective program implementation and maintain ongoing liaison with
    host governments, EXBS employs 24 in-country advisors, some of whom
    have regional responsibilities. EXBS recently established two regional
    advisor positions for the Middle East and North Africa to support
    expanded assistance to this region. In South Asia, where EXBS has
    robust programming but few advisors, EXBS has been working to increase
    in-country support beginning with the addition of a regional EXBS
    advisor in Colombo, Sri Lanka, in 2016. In countries without an EXBS
    Advisor, EXBS utilizes locally-employed staff, partners with other U.S.
    Government agencies, or engages contractors to execute program
    activities. The EXBS program also periodically reviews export control
    and border security challenges and requirements in key regions of the
    world in order to ensure that its efforts are appropriately focused and
    prioritized upon the greatest needs. If confirmed, I will review our
    overseas EXBS staffing and other programs to ensure we are doing all we
    can to prevent proliferation.

        Question 3.  In the case of countries that willfully ignore
    proliferation by their companies (we can discuss specifics privately or
    in closed session), will you commit to bringing more pressure on them
    to prevent proliferation of dual use technologies?

        Answer. Yes. The Department of State closely monitors such activity
    and works closely with U.S. interagency and foreign partners to address
    such concerns, including by promoting effective implementation and
    enforcement of export controls and UNSC Resolutions, and using tools
    such as interdiction and the use or threat of sanctions to prevent
    shipments of proliferation concern. If confirmed as Assistant
    Secretary, I will ensure that we continue to do all we can to encourage
    countries to abide by their international obligations to halt
    proliferation to programs of concern and to contribute ever more
    effectively, even beyond what U.N. Security Council resolutions
    require, to choking off proliferators' sources of funding, technology,
    and materiel. Where proliferation-facilitating activity occurs, I will
    recommend sanctions against the entities involved when warranted and
    consistent with U.S. legal authorities, in order to spotlight deficient
    export control practices, constrain their ability to conduct business,
    incentivize improved behavior in the future, and signal to all other
    entities that might be considering such misbehavior that involvement
    with proliferation activity entails great cost and risk.

        Question 4.  Starting in 1967, one of the ways that the regions of
    the world have sought to prevent proliferation is to create nuclear
    weapons free zones. The nuclear weapons states can adhere to these
    treaties via protocols. Under those protocols, the United States and
    other NWS would pledge not to use nuclear weapons against, or place
    nuclear weapons in NWFZ regions. The Obama administration in 2011
    submitted the protocols to the nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZs) in
    Africa and the South Pacific to the Senate for ratification and in 2015
    it submitted the Central Asian protocol to the Senate as well:

       What is the Trump administration's view of the value of NWFZs?

        Answer. The United States supports, in principle, nuclear-weapon-
    free zones (NWFZs) that are consistent with U.S. national security
    interests, are developed in accordance with the guidelines adopted by
    the United Nations Disarmament Commission and are vigorously enforced,
    and evaluates them on a case-by-case basis. The United States believes
    that NWFZs can play an important role in the international non-
    proliferation regime by complementing and reinforcing the Treaty on the
    Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

        Question 5.  Does the Trump administration support the ratification
    of these protocols?

        Answer. U.S. policy on these protocols is under review.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m. in
    Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Rubio [presiding], Young, Menendez,
    Murphy, and Kaine.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Rubio. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will
    come to order.
        This is a nominations hearing for Rear Admiral Kenneth
    Braithwaite, who is the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to
    Norway; the Honorable Carlos Trujillo, who is the nominee to be
    the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American States; the
    Honorable Brock D. Bierman, who is the nominee to be the USAID
    Assistant Administrator for Europe and Eurasia; and Mr. Lee
    McClenny, who is the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to
    Paraguay. And we thank all of you for being here today and for
    your willingness to serve our country.
        Today these four nominees are here for very different
    positions, but all are important and are all influential areas
    of U.S. foreign policy. Each of you will have a critical role
    in advancing U.S. policy and objectives in your respective
    posts abroad and here in the United States.
        The Organization of American States describes itself as the
    oldest multilateral regional organization in the world. The
    main pillars of the OAS include democracy promotion, the
    protection of human rights, economic and social development,
    and regional security cooperation.
        Article 1 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter states--
    and I quote--the peoples of the Americas have a right to
    democracy and their governments have an obligation to promote
    and defend it. Democracy is essential for the social,
    political, and economic development of the peoples of the
    Americas. End quote.
        It is critical to empower the OAS to fulfill its mission as
    stipulated in that article 1 of the Inter-American Democratic
    Charter and do so by working closely with our regional allies.
    Efforts to continue OAS engagement and security cooperation are
    indispensable to the stability of the region.
        Sadly here in our own hemisphere, we still have dictatorial
    regimes that deprive citizens of their most fundamental rights.
        In Cuba, the Cuban people have not been able to freely
    elect their leaders in 65 years and live under an oppressive
    regime.
        In Venezuela, the erosion and now cancellation of democracy
    and freedom is truly tragic and catastrophic and has led to a
    humanitarian disaster.
        In Nicaragua, we recently saw shocking reports of
    executions carried out by the military, including against
    innocent civilians.
        Our hemisphere clearly still has many challenges to
    overcome before the democratic ideals of the OAS charter can
    fully be realized for all the people of the Americas.
        Moving on to Paraguay, we see a nation that plays a key
    role in joint efforts to promote and strengthen democracy,
    security, and counternarcotics. Under the leadership of Admiral
    Tidd, Commander of the U.S. Southern Command, the United States
    has supported efforts to fight transnational crime and
    counterterrorism in Paraguay. We must continue to build on our
    partnership with Paraguay, which is vulnerable to illicit
    trafficking of narcotics, weapons, illegal goods, and people.
        The tri-border area where Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay
    meet is a place where illicit financing for criminal
    organizations and terrorists exists, terrorists including
    Hezbollah, and this has long been a concern. The U.S. needs to
    work with all three countries that share a responsibility for
    the tri-border area to better secure borders, reduce illicit
    trafficking, and improve counterterrorism monitoring.
        Although Paraguay has made extensive progress in fighting
    corruption, it is still ranked 123 out of 176 in the
    Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index for the
    year 2016.
        The U.S. is also an important trading partner for Paraguay.
    We should look for new ways to expand our trade relationship
    and help Paraguay grow their economy and strengthen their
    government institutions.
        Norway is one of our closest and most active security
    allies, especially given that its population is only 5 million
    people, or roughly the same size as where I live in south
    Florida. As a founding member of NATO, Norway has fought with
    us in conflicts ranging from the Balkans to the present day
    operation in Afghanistan. It is also an important contributor
    to the fight against ISIS, putting boots on the ground in
    Jordan to help train Syrian freedom fighters.
        Beyond our security alliances, Norway shares our concerns
    about Russia's aggression and interference, particularly given
    that long border that the two countries share.
        Norway is an important contributor in other regions,
    including in our own western hemisphere. Oslo, for example, has
    pledged $22 million over 3 years to fund humanitarian demining
    in Colombia to support the peace process.
        And lastly, the United States Agency for International
    Development plays a critical role in promoting American
    interests and values abroad by supporting the advancement of
    freedom, human dignity, and development. In particular, USAID's
    Bureau for Europe and Eurasia is working to foster resilient
    and democratic societies, strengthen economic growth, and to
    support European-Atlantic integration. We have seen countries
    in the region such as Croatia and Montenegro graduate--that is
    in quotes--``graduate'' from U.S. foreign assistance. This is
    the objective. Our foreign assistance is critical towards
    building sustainable economic and security partnerships that
    not only improve the lives of citizens of these countries but
    also are in our own national security interests.
        As Vladimir Putin's malign influence continues to spread
    throughout the region, particularly in nations already
    suffering from rampant corruption and organized crimes, the
    United States must be engaged and proactive in securing our
    interests and in promoting peace and prosperity throughout
    Europe and Eurasia.
        Although USAID's challenges can be overwhelming, especially
    with increased Russian activities in the region, the Bureau for
    Europe and Eurasia that you will be overseeing, if confirmed,
    is more important than ever.
        So in closing, all of these positions have a key role to
    play in American foreign policy, and I thank you and I thank
    your families for your commitment to your country and your
    willingness to serve it.
        And now I turn to the ranking member.

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

        Senator Menendez. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And let me congratulate all our nominees on their
    nominations.
        I continue to be concerned about the slow pace of
    nominations from the President and the vacancies at the State
    Department, at USAID, and at critical posts overseas. So I
    welcome this opportunity to hear from nominees for the western
    hemisphere and for positions that stretch the definition of the
    western hemisphere far beyond even my imagination.
        But we welcome you here, all. And we are happy that the
    committee is actually serving as a vehicle for moving your
    nominations.
        While you have been nominated to serve in a range of
    positions, you are all signing up for the same fundamental
    duty: to serve the interests of the United States of America,
    the American people, and to promote our foreign policy
    objectives through diplomacy and development.
        As a 25-year veteran of both the House and the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee, I can think of no other position
    that is more significant in terms of both national security and
    national interests than the positions that our diplomats serve
    abroad and our development people serve as well. So it is a
    high calling.
        I also appreciate your families because these positions are
    a sacrifice not only of yourselves but of your families, and we
    appreciate that reality as well.
        And while we have several nominees beyond the normal
    jurisdiction of the committee, let me just say the OAS, as a
    longtime observer and someone who considers himself a Latin
    Americanist, is an incredibly important position. It is a
    position for which I believe we need vigorous leadership in an
    institution that also needs greater reforms. I am proud to have
    sponsored legislation that was signed into law in 2013 that
    urged management reforms at the OAS. And I am pleased to see
    that the OAS has taken some of these reforms on, including its
    strategic vision plan that aligns with parts of the law, but I
    think we can agree that probably more can be done. So I look
    forward to hearing from you in that regard.
        Also, the hemisphere--while we enjoy overwhelmingly
    democracy, there are challenges. And there is a backward slide.
    And I am really concerned about what happens at the OAS as an
    institution to move particularly the democratic charter of the
    OAS as a vibrant document, one that is living in its purpose,
    not simply as part of an overall aspirational goal versus
    something that is being pursued. And so I appreciate that.
        I appreciate the AID work. I have long been a supporter of
    USAID. I think the development work we do is an important part
    of our national security and diplomacy interests and that
    without it, I think we cannot achieve many of the goals that we
    seek to achieve in the world. So I look forward to hearing from
    you.
        And Norway. You know, it is one of those places in the
    world where often when we do not have trouble, so we do not
    talk about that country. But it is an incredibly important
    country. It has one of the largest sovereign wealth funds in
    the world and also incredibly important in terms of the
    challenges that we have with Russia. So I look forward to
    hearing from you very much so in that regard, as well as with
    Paraguay.
        As we are trying to develop this hemispheric further
    consolidation of democracy in the process. It may be in some
    people's minds a small country. I think it is an important
    country as it relates to that overall effort.
        So I look forward to hearing from all of you. I will save
    the bulk of my time for questions.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the
    witnesses' testimony.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you to the ranking member. And you are
    right that the scope is broader. This is actually a hearing of
    the full committee being chaired and co-chaired by two Cuban
    Americans, which is a trend. Three would be a conspiracy.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. But Senator Cruz is not a member of the
    committee.
        All right. So let us begin with the nomination of Rear
    Admiral Kenneth Braithwaite. I am sorry. Let us begin with the
    nomination of Mr. Bierman. And Ambassador Pamela Smith, who
    served in the Foreign Service for over 30 years, including a
    stint as our U.S. Ambassador to Moldova, is here, and I would
    like to recognize her to introduce Mr. Bierman.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. PAMELA SMITH,
                   FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO MOLDOVA

        Ambassador Smith. Thank you very much, Senator Rubio,
    Senator Menendez. It is a great honor to be here to introduce
    Brock Bierman.
        He is really ideally suited to be USAID's Assistant
    Administrator for Europe and Eurasia. In over 30 years in the
    Foreign Service, I have not met anyone whose talents,
    experience, and dedication better match the demands of this
    challenging job.
        Brock was chief of staff for the same bureau when we first
    met in 2003 when I was Ambassador to Moldova. With his hard
    work in Washington, our outstanding USAID mission helped that
    friendly, struggling little country cope with the grueling
    transition from East to West and from communism to democracy
    and a market economy, a journey that is regrettably not yet
    complete. I could not have been more impressed with Brock's
    pragmatism, tenacity, and sensitivity to the dynamics of the
    complex political environment.
        I could also see that while his heart and some family roots
    were in Moldova, his results-oriented approach made him just as
    effective in the entire region.
        Brock brings not just 5 years of success in the same bureau
    he has been nominated for. He also is committed philosophically
    to foreign assistance as a key tool of foreign policy as a
    national security priority. With Russia playing, as you said,
    an aggressive and pernicious role in the region and with
    violent extremism and destabilizing floods of refugees on the
    rise, we need people working there with seasoned expertise,
    people like Brock who can gauge trends and use our assistance
    to help consolidate democracy and combat the fracturing of the
    West.
        Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, 12 of the 24 country
    programs receiving assistance from USAID's Bureau of Europe and
    Eurasia have graduated, as you noted, and joined the Euro-
    Atlantic community through such institutions as NATO and the
    EU. I spent much of my career in the Balkans, and believe me,
    this is an astounding track record. The next 11 countries will
    be much harder, but it seems to me that someone who knows the
    region, the bureau, the agency, and the Administrator well has
    the best chance to build on this success.
        Brock and I have stayed friends since our time advancing
    U.S. interests in Moldova. I just want to share a few more
    words about him.
        His engagement in the region preceded his first assignment
    in USAID and continued after he left the agency. This region is
    his personal passion. You should know that he served three
    terms as a State legislator in Rhode Island, and thus grasps
    the special relationship between government institutions and
    legislative bodies. He has also owned and operated several
    small businesses and has sat on many nonprofit boards and
    commissions. He knows how things work, how to make them work,
    and he has developed people skills that suit many
    circumstances.
        His experience outside the beltway also gives him a unique
    ability to think outside the box. Importantly, he thoroughly
    believes in bipartisanship. Our friendship would not exist
    otherwise. His work with you will prove this immediately.
        We are lucky to have someone of Brock's caliber put forward
    for this important position. He has my unqualified endorsement.
    He will serve the United States well and honorably, and I urge
    you to support his nomination. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you so much.
        So let us begin. Mr. Bierman, thank you for being here and
    your willingness to serve and you are recognized.
        By the way, for all the nominees, your opening statements
    are already in the record. So it will not be held against you
    if you abbreviate it. It will not be held against you if you
    skip them. I am not asking you to, but obviously, the shorter
    they are, the more time we will have to interact with all of
    you. So just a suggestion. It will not count against you.
        But anyway, thank you for being here, and you are
    recognized, sir. Thank you.

       STATEMENT OF HON. BROCK D. BIERMAN, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE AN
        ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR
                       INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

        Mr. Bierman. Thank you and good morning, Mr. Chairman,
    Ranking Member, and members of the committee. Actually I can
    take out the sentence about full statements being entered
    because I did shorten it.
        Well, I just want to say I am grateful for the opportunity
    to testify before you today as President Trump's nominee to be
    Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia
    at USAID. I would like to thank President Trump, Administrator
    Green, and Secretary Tillerson for their support.
        I would also like to thank Acting Assistant Administrator
    Margot Ellis, who is here today, who has led the bureau since
    January, and her staff who were invaluable as I prepared for my
    hearing. Having spent more than 5 years working in the Europe
    and Eurasia Bureau from 2002 to 2007, it has been wonderful to
    reconnect with many former colleagues.
        And of course, I want to thank Pamela Smith, Ambassador
    Smith, for her kind introductory remarks. Ambassador Smith's
    work in Moldova has demonstrated the importance of American
    leadership, and she has been a mentor of mine since we met.
        Most importantly, I want to thank my family, my wife and
    best friend of more than 30 years Lisa, who is sitting behind
    me, and my children Allison and Robert, who are sitting behind
    my wife. They are the most important inspiration, and without
    their love and support, I would not be sitting here today.
        I want to start out by telling you that I am a second
    generation American. My grandfather came to the United States
    in 1906 from what now is the Republic of Moldova. He quickly
    learned what it meant to live in this country and what made our
    country great. He understood the importance of our democratic
    systems and volunteered to serve his new country during the
    First World War. Upon returning from the war, he served his
    community as a leader and philanthropist.
        And to quote one of America's leading historians, David
    McCullough, in his recent book ``The American Spirit,'' he
    said--and I quote--``history is about who we are and what we
    stand for, and it is essential to our understanding of our role
    and what it should be in our time.'' In many ways, I sit here
    today as a direct result of who we are as a country. My
    grandfather exemplified the American spirit, which I believe
    defines this nation and is at the heart of what USAID does.
        In 1997, while serving in the Rhode Island State
    legislature, I participated with an exchange program with the
    American Council of Young Political Leaders, a nonpartisan
    organization that introduces next generation leaders to
    politics and governance of other countries. Knowing that my
    grandfather lived within the Russian Empire, I decided to
    participate in the Russian exchange program, and interacting
    with Russian legislators at the time not only gave me a new
    perspective on my job as a State legislator but also was the
    beginning of my passionate interest in the region.
        I returned to Eastern Europe in 1999 when Senator John
    Chafee made it possible for me to join the International
    Republican Institute as a volunteer trainer in Ukraine. While
    traveling from Kyiv to Odessa, I shared my own experience with
    democracy and helped Ukrainians of all parties learn more about
    our system of government.
        In 2002, I was privileged to serve as chief of staff for
    the Europe and Eurasia Bureau, and while at USAID, I developed
    a region-wide initiative that brought young people together
    from different political parties to talk about problems facing
    the region and how to solve those problems. If confirmed, I
    look forward to continuing these efforts.
        While at AID, I was also proud to support opportunities for
    professional development and training of our staff. If
    confirmed, I will support every member of the Europe and
    Eurasia Bureau through professional development, capacity
    building, and training.
        Now, as you know, Ambassador Green has said USAID's
    objective is to end the need for foreign assistance. And I am
    excited to advance this priority. If confirmed, I look forward
    to working with you. I look forward to working with
    Administrator Green and the dedicated staff in the E&E Bureau
    to support U.S. national security interests.
        I also think that Administrator Green's priority to respect
    the taxpayers' investment in foreign aid is critical. If
    confirmed, I look forward to ensuring USAID's programs in
    Europe and Eurasia are effective and efficient while also
    demonstrating how USAID's work brings stability and prosperity
    overseas, which in turn benefits neighborhoods across America.
        I also look forward to spending time listening to my
    colleagues both here in Washington and in the field, as their
    perspectives will be vital to developing a successful course of
    action.
        The challenges of Europe and Eurasia look a lot different
    now than they did when I was previously at USAID. The
    challenges cannot be overstated. The region has been hit with a
    major economic recession. Russia's malign influence is a
    serious problem. Russia has violated the territorial integrity
    of Georgia and Ukraine and is interfering with the internal
    affairs of several other countries in the region. In many ways,
    our efforts to counter this pervasive undercurrent will also
    serve to prevent the spread of violent extremism in Europe and
    Eurasia. As Administrator Green has stated, terrorist groups
    often feed on frustration and despair. The American spirit and
    the ideals that it reflects is our most valuable export. It
    serves as a counter to this frustration and despair.
        The Europe and Eurasia Bureau faces other critical
    challenges such as government corruption, weak economies,
    fragile democratic institutions, and the energy dependence on
    Russia. I look forward to exploring those topics in greater
    depth today and working with your staff to answer any questions
    you might have. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    you to address these critical issues.
        And in closing, I wish to thank the committee for their
    dedication to the American spirit. Thank you.
        [Mr. Bierman's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Brock Bierman

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee, I am
    grateful for the opportunity to testify before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Europe
    and Eurasia (E&E) at the U.S. Agency for International Development
    (USAID). I would like to thank President Trump, Administrator Green,
    and Secretary Tillerson for their support, and for the confidence they
    have placed in me.
        I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Acting
    Assistant Administrator Margot Ellis, who has led the Bureau since
    January, her staff, and the staff within the Legislative and Public
    Affairs Bureau all of whom were invaluable help as I prepared for this
    hearing today. Having spent more than five years working within the
    Europe and Eurasia Bureau from 2002-2007, it has been wonderful to
    reconnect with so many knowledgeable professionals, many of whom were
    colleagues during my first appointment. And of course, I thank my good
    friend Ambassador Pamela Hyde Smith for her kind introductory remarks;
    Ambassador Smith's work in Moldova demonstrated the importance of
    American leadership, and she has been a mentor ever since.
        Most importantly I want to thank my family--my wife and best friend
    of more than 30 years Lisa, my daughter Allison, and my son Robert.
    They are my most important inspiration and without their love and
    support, I would not be sitting here today.
        I am a second-generation American on my father's side, as my
    grandfather came to the United States as part of the mass immigration
    of the late 19th early 20th century. He immigrated to this country
    during a turbulent time in Russian history, and came from what is now
    the Republic of Moldova. He came to America with the hopes and dreams
    to make a better life for himself and his family. And although I never
    knew my grandfather, my father told me that he quickly learned what
    made our country great. After only a few short years in America, he
    understood the importance of our democratic systems, and volunteered to
    serve his new country during World War I. Upon returning from the war
    and throughout his life, he served as a community leader and
    philanthropist.
        David McCullough said it best in his recent book, The American
    Spirit. To quote him, ``History, I like to think, is a larger way of
    looking at life. It is a source of strength, of inspiration. It is
    about who we are, and what we stand for, and it is essential to our
    understanding of what our role should be in our time. History, as can't
    be said too often, is human. It is about people and they speak to us
    across the years.'' In many ways, I sit here today as a direct result
    of who we are as a country. My grandfather exemplified the American
    Spirit, which I believe defines this nation, and is at the heart of
    what USAID does.
        In 1997, while serving my second term in the Rhode Island State
    Legislature, I was chosen along with another colleague to participate
    in an exchange program with the American Council of Young Political
    Leaders (ACYPL), a non-partisan organization that introduces next
    generation leaders to the politics, governance, policy-making, and
    cultures of countries around the world through on-site exchanges.
    Knowing that my grandfather lived within the Russian Empire, I decided
    that this was the country and region I wanted to get to know better.
    Participating in the ACYPL program in Moscow and interacting with
    Russian legislators not only gave me a new perspective that made me a
    better legislator, but it was also the beginning of my passionate
    interest with the Europe and Eurasia region.
        My understanding of the region further deepened when I returned to
    the region in 1999, this time to Ukraine as a volunteer trainer for the
    International Republican Institute, (IRI). A former U.S. Senator, John
    Chafee, had encouraged me to run for public office and serve in the
    State Legislature. Senator Chafee was a dear friend and mentor, and his
    influence made it possible for me to join IRI as a trainer. While
    traveling from Kyiv to Odessa, I enjoyed the opportunity to share my
    own democratic experiences and help Ukrainians of all parties learn
    more about our system of government.
        Three years later, in 2003, I was privileged to serve as Chief of
    Staff for the Europe and Eurasia Bureau under Dr. Kent Hill, and spent
    the next five years dedicating my life to USAID's mission. During that
    time, I helped Dr. Hill advance the Bureau's top priorities, and
    specifically assisted with improving the Bureau's outreach and
    communications. I also worked to develop a region-wide initiative that
    brought young people together from all of our partner countries, and
    from different political parties to talk about difficult problems that
    were facing the region and how to develop solutions they could apply
    from the local to regional levels. Youth programming was a top priority
    then, as it is again today, and, if confirmed, I look forward to
    deploying that experience to continue these efforts.
        I was also involved with the Bureau's Trafficking in Persons
    initiatives, and served as a member of the State Department's
    Trafficking in Persons Task Force. Further, I am proud of my work to
    support capacity-building within the Bureau to create opportunities for
    professional development and training for our staff. If confirmed, I
    look forward to supporting every member of the Europe and Eurasia
    Bureau through professional development, capacity building, and
    training.
        Although some of the same overall issues remain today, the
    challenges in Europe and Eurasia look a lot different now than they did
    when I previously served at USAID. The scale of challenges that are
    facing Europe and Eurasia is hard to overstate. Since my previous
    tenure with USAID, the region has been hit with a major economic
    recession. Russia has violated the territorial integrity of Georgia and
    Ukraine, and continues to have a military presence in Moldova. At the
    same time, Russia is interfering with the internal affairs of several
    other countries in the region. Putin's propaganda is exploiting ethnic
    divisions in the Balkans, furthering democratic backsliding throughout
    the Balkans.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with Administrator Green
    and the dedicated staff in the Europe and Eurasia Bureau to continue
    USAID's tradition of supporting U.S. national security interests, with
    the aim of eventually transitioning countries in the region from U.S.
    assistance, along a positive path that will reduce these threats.
        Administrator Green has set a clear path forward for USAID, and I
    am excited to advance his priorities. Clearly, USAID's objective to end
    the need for foreign assistance should be a goal the Agency keeps in
    mind during its strategic planning and budgeting, and as it works with
    our host countries. USAID's host countries do not believe in
    everlasting assistance either, but look forward to the day when they
    can stand on their own and be respected contributing partners in the
    world community. Increasing USAID's investments with local
    organizations to build capacity is a key part of this process.
        I also think that the Administrator's priority to respect the
    taxpayers' investment in foreign aid is critical. If confirmed, I look
    forward to shaping USAID's programs in Europe and Eurasia in an
    effective and efficient manner, by using more innovative award
    mechanisms, while also educating our public on how USAID's work brings
    stability and prosperity overseas, which in turn benefits neighborhoods
    across America. Finally, I look forward to spending some time listening
    to my colleagues both here in Washington and those in the field, and
    learning from their experiences. Their perspective will be vital to
    developing a successful course of action.
        As mentioned earlier, Russia's malign influence is a serious
    problem throughout the region, one that has developed since my last
    appointment. In 2014, I saw firsthand the open cooperation between
    Moldovan politicians and Russian government officials during the
    parliamentary elections. Many countries in the region are vulnerable to
    Russian influence because of their weak economies, corrupt public
    officials, and fragile democratic institutions. With assistance from
    the U.S. Government and USAID, I believe we can support countries that
    are committed to pursuing the Euro Atlantic path, and help them build a
    bright future of self-sufficiency, rather than dependence.
        Since my first visit to Russia 20 years ago, I have had the
    opportunity to meet with many Russian citizens and talk openly about
    their hopes and dreams. It never ceases to amaze me how similar we all
    are on so many levels. I know that, on a personal level, many Russians
    share our vision for open democracy, fair and free elections, and a
    future in which all citizens have a chance for a better life. I believe
    we must remember that it is the Government of Vladimir Putin, rather
    than the people of Russia, that is trying to undermine our work with
    democracy and governance in the region.
        In many ways, the efforts we must undertake today to counter this
    pervasive undercurrent will also serve to prevent the spread of violent
    extremism in Europe and Eurasia. We are all aware of the alarming rise
    of violent extremism which has led hundreds to travel to fight
    alongside ISIS. As Administrator Green has stated, terrorist groups
    often feed on frustration and despair. The American Spirit, and the
    ideals which this reflects, of equality, rights, and consent of the
    governed, is our most valuable export, and serves as a counter to this
    frustration and despair.
        Although I touched on several of these issues earlier, I could go
    on about other critical issues, such as prevalent government
    corruption, border security, mass migration, human rights violations,
    energy dependence on Russia, lack of open markets and youth
    unemployment. I look forward to exploring those topics in greater depth
    today, and to answering any questions you might have.
        In closing, I wish to thank the committee again for your dedication
    to the American Spirit we all share. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you to further our shared goals and address the critical
    issues facing the Europe and Eurasia region. Thank you.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Admiral Braithwaite, thank you for being here.

    STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL KENNETH J. BRAITHWAITE, USN (RET), OF
           PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
    PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE KINGDOM
                               OF NORWAY

        Mr. Braithwaite. Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Menendez,
    and distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor and
    a privilege to appear before you today as the President's
    nominee to be United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    Norway. It is almost impossible for me to capture in 5 minutes
    the words to adequately define how I feel, should I be
    confirmed, to be able to once again serve our great nation and
    the people of the United States. I would like to thank
    President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for their confidence,
    their faith and trust in me to serve as our nation's envoy to
    Norway. I can think of few greater honors than to be the
    principal representative of the United States to such an
    important strategic ally.
        I would also like to thank several mentors who have guided
    me directly and indirectly as I have developed in my service to
    our nation: my first commanding officer, Admiral Tom Lynch,
    former Superintendent of the Naval Academy; Ambassador Ryan
    Crocker, who I served under in Islamabad; Ms. Uschi Keszler,
    U.S. Olympian and my life coach who is with me today; and my
    best friend, Mr. David Urban, a West Point graduate and proof
    that the Army and the Navy can get along well.
        Finally and most especially, I would not be here without my
    wife Melissa and our two children, Grace and Harrison, who are
    with me today to support me hopefully once again in service to
    our nation together. I am reminded, as Senator Arlen Specter
    told me so many years ago when I worked for him, that the
    reason we serve is to ensure that our children and our
    children's children inherit the same great country that we
    received from those who went before us. After 31 years in the
    uniform of our nation, I intend, with your approval, sirs, to
    once again do all I can to uphold that sacred responsibility.
        Our relationship with the Kingdom of Norway is truly a
    special one for so many reasons. Built upon a shared commitment
    to the idea that freedom is a sacred privilege that must be
    protected vigilantly, Norway has stood closely by the United
    States in many conflicts since its independence from Sweden in
    1905. Norway was one of the first nations to stand with us in
    Afghanistan following the attacks of September 11th of 2001
    and, as the chairman noted, continues to contribute troops to
    NATO's Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan.
        As a founding NATO ally, Norway is the key guardian of our
    northern flank of this important alliance, standing watch over
    a vast Arctic frontier. Norwegians have demonstrated time and
    again their commitment to ensuring that regional aggressor
    nations do not threaten ours or our allies' interests. As a
    young naval officer during bilateral carrier battle group
    operations in the fjords and later as a senior officer
    operating upon the Baltic Sea in joint fleet exercises, I
    personally witnessed, sir, the Norwegian military's incredibly
    impressive capabilities at sea and ashore. They are, without
    doubt, a highly valued and greatly trusted ally.
        Norway also shares our faith in a strong market-based
    economy. Norwegians have established one of the most secure
    markets in the world, and only earlier this year, their
    national sovereign wealth fund reached an unprecedented
    achievement by surpassing $1 trillion. This stability affords
    them the opportunity to look towards new and innovative
    technologies and other investments seeking partner nations such
    as the United States with which to pursue greater economic
    strength.
        Looking to the future, should you confirm my nomination, I
    would seek to pursue three principal objectives for the United
    States and our partnership with Norway.
        First and foremost, I would seek to reaffirm that our
    commitment to NATO remains as strong as ever. The President and
    Secretary Tillerson, along with Secretary Mattis, have stated
    repeatedly that we stand behind article 5 and fully recognize
    the importance of a strong and adequately funded North Atlantic
    Treaty Organization.
        Secondly, I would seek to strengthen even further our
    investment and trade ties. I would work with U.S. businesses to
    seek opportunities to expand into growing Norwegian markets by
    exploring ways for Norwegian businesses to work in
    collaboration with U.S. companies in markets here and abroad.
        And finally, I would do everything in my power to work
    closely with the Norwegian Government to ensure the safety and
    security of Americans abroad, whether engaged in business,
    academic exchange, research collaboration, or the pleasure of
    just traveling to such a wonderful nation as Norway. All free
    peoples are at risk of terrorist attacks today across the
    globe. So working closely with Norwegian security agencies, I
    would seek to extend an umbrella of safety over our respective
    nations.
        As I close, I am reminded of something my father said to me
    as a young boy. My dad, Private First Class Kenneth J.
    Braithwaite, Sr., was severely wounded, shot in the head in
    France shortly after landing in the very first wave upon the
    beaches of Normandy on June 6th of 1944. He loved our country
    and all it stood for and was the first person, along with my
    mother Sylvia, to instill in me a sense of pride in our nation
    and a sense of duty and service above self. I asked him once
    how he did it, how he exited that landing craft that morning
    with enemy bullets hitting all around him. He said simply, it
    was my duty, son.
        My father, although humble to a fault, was proud to have
    served to ensure our American dream could persevere. He told me
    as a young boy that anything was possible in America if you
    applied yourself and worked to realize your dream. He and my
    mother were very proud when I went off to the U.S. Naval
    Academy, both having never had the opportunity to attend
    college, nor being able to really afford to send me. I cannot
    help but reflect upon my father's life, that his sacrifice and
    duty to our nation is today realized, his son, here before you,
    nominated to be the United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of
    Norway. In America, the home of the free and the land of the
    brave, anything is possible.
        Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, I am honored to be
    here and I look forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Braithwaite's prepared statement follows:]

           Prepared Statement of Rear Admiral Kenneth J. Braithwaite

        Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Menendez and distinguished members
    of the committee, it is an honor and a privilege to appear before you
    today as the President's nominee to be United States Ambassador to the
    Kingdom of Norway. Words cannot adequately define how I feel, should I
    be confirmed, to be able to once again serve our great Nation and the
    People of the United States. I would like to thank President Trump and
    Secretary Tillerson for their confidence, faith and trust in me to
    serve as our Nation's envoy to Norway. I can think of no greater honor
    than to be the principle representative of the United States to such an
    important strategic ally.
        I would also like to thank several mentors who have guided me
    directly and indirectly as I have developed in my service to our
    country; my first commanding officer Admiral Tom Lynch, former
    Superintendent of the Naval Academy; Ambassador Ryan Crocker under whom
    I served in Islamabad; Ms. Uschi Keszler, U.S. Olympian and my life
    coach who is with me today; and my best friend, Mr. David Urban, a West
    Point graduate and proof that the Army and the Navy can get along well.
    Each of these individuals and so many others contributed to my
    development and continue to offer advice and guidance as I prepare with
    your support to serve again.
        Finally and most especially, I wouldn't be here without my wife
    Melissa and our two children, Grace and Harrison, who are with me today
    to support me hopefully once again in service to our nation. I am
    reminded, as Senator Arlen Specter told me so many years ago when I
    worked for him, that the reason we serve is to ensure our children and
    our children's children inherit the same great country that we received
    from those who went before us. After 31 years in the uniform of our
    nation, I intend with your approval to once again do all I can to
    uphold that sacred responsibility.
        Our relationship with the Kingdom of Norway is truly a special one
    for so many reasons. Built upon a shared commitment to the idea that
    freedom is a sacred privilege that must be protected vigilantly, Norway
    has stood closely by the United States in many conflicts since its
    independence in 1905. Norway was one of the first nations to stand with
    us in Afghanistan following the attacks of September 11th, 2001, and
    continues to contribute troops to NATO's Resolute Support Mission
    alongside us today. Nearer to my Navy roots, the Norwegians have
    deployed naval assets to support anti-piracy efforts in Operation Ocean
    Shield off Somalia in alignment with their belief as a maritime nation
    of the importance of open sea-lanes of communication. And today Norway
    is one of our strongest Allies in NATO, fully committed to supporting
    this important strategic alliance in both manpower and materiel.
        As a founding NATO ally, Norway is the key guardian of the Northern
    Flank of this important alliance, standing watch over a vast arctic
    frontier. Norwegians have demonstrated time and again their commitment
    to ensuring that regional aggressor nations do not threaten our or our
    Allies' interests. As a young Naval Officer during bilateral carrier
    battle group operations in the fjords and later as a senior officer
    operating on the Baltic Sea in joint fleet exercises, I personally
    witnessed the Norwegian Military's incredibly impressive offensive and
    defensive capabilities at sea and ashore. They are without a doubt a
    highly valued and greatly trusted ally!
        Norway also shares our faith in a strong market-based economy.
    Norwegians have established one of the most secure markets in the world
    and earlier this year their national sovereign wealth fund reached an
    unprecedented achievement by surpassing one trillion dollars. This
    stability affords them the opportunity to look towards new and
    innovative technologies and other investments, seeking partner nations
    with which to pursue greater economic strength.
        Looking to the future, should you confirm my nomination, I would
    seek to pursue three principal objectives for the United States in our
    partnership with Norway.
        First and foremost, I would seek to reaffirm that our commitment to
    NATO remains as strong as ever. The President and Secretary Tillerson,
    along with Secretary Mattis, have stated repeatedly that we stand
    behind Article 5 and fully recognize the importance of a strong and
    adequately funded North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I would
    personally deliver that message through routine engagement with the
    Norwegian government and public.
        Secondly, I would seek to strengthen even further our investment
    and trade ties. I would work with U.S. businesses to seek opportunities
    to expand into growing Norwegian markets by exploring ways for
    Norwegian businesses to work in collaboration with U.S. companies in
    markets here and abroad. I believe Norway is in an unprecedented period
    in its history of market expansion, and I am confident the United
    States could further assist and benefit from such a relationship.
        Finally, I would do everything in my power to work closely with the
    Norwegian government and its respective security agencies to ensure the
    safety and security of Americans abroad, whether engaged in business,
    academic exchange, research collaboration, or the pleasure of traveling
    to such a wonderful country as Norway. All free peoples are at risk of
    terrorist attacks today across the globe. Therefore, I would work
    diligently to ensure our security agencies are working closely with
    Norwegian security agencies to extend an umbrella of safety over our
    respective nations.
        As I close, I am reminded of something my father said to me as a
    young boy. My dad, Private First Class Kenneth J. Braithwaite, Sr., was
    severely wounded, shot in the head in France shortly after landing in
    the very first wave upon the beaches of Normandy on June 6th 1944. He
    loved our country and all it stood for and was the first person along
    with my mother Sylvia to instill in me a sense of pride in our nation
    and a sense of duty and service above self. I asked him once how he did
    it--how he exited that landing craft that morning with enemy bullets
    hitting all around him. He said simply, ``It was my duty son.'' My
    father, although humble to a fault, was proud to have served to ensure
    our American dream could persevere. He told me as a young boy that
    anything was possible in America if you applied yourself and worked
    hard to realize that dream. He and my mother were very proud when I
    went off to the U.S. Naval Academy, both having never had the
    opportunity to attend college, nor being able to really afford to send
    me. I can't help but reflect upon my father's life, that his sacrifice
    in duty to our nation is today realized, his son, here before you,
    nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Norway. In
    America, the Home of the Free and the Land of the Brave, anything is
    possible.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member Menendez, and distinguished
    members of the committee, thank you for your time. I would be honored
    to learn from your comments and to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you very much, sir.
        Representative Trujillo?

    STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS TRUJILLO, OF FLORIDA, TO BE PERMANENT
         REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
      ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR

        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you, Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member
    Menendez, and members of the committee. It is an honor to
    appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the
    United States Permanent Representative to the Organization of
    American States. I want to thank the President for his
    confidence in me and the opportunity, with your approval, to
    represent the American people during a critical period in the
    history of the Western Hemisphere.
        Before I begin, I would like to take an opportunity to
    express my gratitude to those who have supported me along the
    way: my wife Carmen, who is present today, along with our four
    children, Carlos, Isabella, Juan Pablo, and Felipe, along with
    my mother and in-laws--my mother, Georgina Fernandez, and in-
    laws Consuelo and Hector Mira, who are also present; my father
    Ruben Trujillo, who is watching from home; my step-parents,
    Hector and Jamais; and my grandparents, Manuel and Alba
    Fernandez, and Rubin and Mirtha Trujillo.
        I know today is a remarkable day for my grandparents. They
    arrived in this country exactly 50 years ago from Cuba with
    nothing. This country has been our safe harbor and our greatest
    blessing. For me to stand here before this august body is a
    testament to the American dream and the power of education and
    hard work.
        By way of background, I am currently the Special Advisor at
    the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. That job has uniquely
    prepared me for the challenges that come ahead. In addition, my
    mix of public, private, and professional experience has given
    me a set of skills that I hope to be able to employ on behalf
    of the United States of America and in service to its people.
        I have served as a prosecutor fighting for dignity and
    justice for all.
        I have also served on the board of directors of the fourth
    largest public hospital in the country, the Jackson Memorial
    Public Health Trust. There I learned that people from all over
    the world still strive for a better and higher quality of life.
        I have served as a State legislator elected four terms in
    one of the largest States in the nation. There I served as the
    Chairman of the Florida House of Representatives'
    Appropriations Committee, which oversees an $83 billion budget.
    My experience working in a legislative body and negotiating
    delicate, confidential, and immensely important matters will
    only complement my service to the United States in this
    honorable capacity to which I have been nominated.
        In my private life, I am a graduate of Spring Hill College
    and the Florida State University College of Law. I have built a
    small and successful business. Along with my partners, I
    founded and managed a mid-sized Hispanic-owned law firm with
    more than 50 employees. We have weathered the storms of
    recession and strife, and I have learned much about the
    importance of tact, tenacity, integrity, and perseverance which
    has served me throughout my career in public service.
        If confirmed, it will be an honor for me to advance U.S.
    foreign policy interests throughout the OAS, a noble
    organization that remains the preeminent multilateral forum for
    our region, the Americas.
        OAS and the Inter-American system were created to promote
    democracy and the rule of law in the Americas; to promote and
    protect human rights and fundamental freedoms; to advance the
    security of our citizens; foster economic development and
    prosperity; and to uphold the practices, purposes, and
    principles set forth in the Charter of the Organization of
    American States, the American Declaration on the Rights and
    Duties of Man, and the Inter-American Democratic Charter, in
    accordance with the United States Constitution. These
    instruments embody the shared democratic values that make the
    Americas unique and make our own country great. If confirmed, I
    pledge to do my utmost to ensure that the OAS lives up to its
    legacy as it confronts today's daunting challenges.
        I will also work to make sure American taxpayers are
    getting a fair return for their investment in the OAS by
    working to build a stronger, more efficient, and more effective
    organization. Through tough but good faith negotiations with
    member states, we can achieve a broader, more sustainable
    financial base for the OAS that does not depend so heavily on a
    single country, in keeping with the objectives outlined in the
    Organization of American States Revitalization and Reform Act
    of 2013.
        If confirmed, I look forward to leading the U.S. mission to
    the OAS in advancing the above-mentioned goals. I believe that
    my past experiences have prepared me, if confirmed by the
    Senate, to serve more effectively as the United States
    Permanent Representative to the Organization of American
    States. I am cognizant of the difficulties that have
    historically and currently face the region. If confirmed, I
    promise to work closely with you, with the executive branch,
    and all those concerned in advancing the goals of the American
    people.
        Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, it
    is an honor to appear before you today, and I look forward to
    your comments, humbly ask for your support, and look forward to
    answering your questions. Thank you.
        [Mr. Trujillo's prepared statement follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Carlos Trujillo

        Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Menendez, and members of the
    committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as President
    Trump's nominee to be the United States Permanent Representative to the
    Organization of American States. I want to thank the President for his
    confidence in me and for the opportunity--with your approval--to
    represent the American people during a critical period in the history
    of the Western Hemisphere.
        Before I begin, I would also like to take an opportunity to express
    my gratitude to those who have supported me along the way: my wife
    Carmen and our four children; Carlos, Isabella, Juan Pablo and Felipe,
    who are with me here today. My family watching at home, my parents
    Georgina and Ruben, my step-parents Hector and Jamais, and grandparents
    Manuel and Alba Fernandez, and Ruben and Mirtha Trujillo.
        I know that today is a remarkable day for my grandparents who came
    to the United States of America with nothing. This country has been our
    safe harbor and our greatest blessing. For me to stand before this
    august body is a testament to the American dream and the power of
    education and hard work.By way of background, I am currently the
    Special Advisor at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. That job has
    uniquely prepared me for the challenges that come ahead.
        In addition, my mix of public, and private, professional
    experiences has given me a set of skills I hope to be able to employ on
    behalf of the United States of America and in service to its people.
        I have served as a prosecutor--fighting for dignity and justice for
    all. I have also served on the Board of Directors of the largest public
    hospital in the country, the Jackson Memorial Public Health Trust.
    There, I learned that people from all over the world will strive for a
    better and higher quality of life.
        I have served as a State Legislator, elected to four terms, in one
    of the largest states in the nation. There, I served as Chairman of the
    Florida House of Representatives' Appropriations Committee, which
    oversees an $83 billion budget. My experience working in a legislative
    body and negotiating delicate, confidential, and immensely important
    matters will only complement my service to the United States in this
    honorable capacity to which I have been nominated.
        In my private life, I am a graduate of Spring Hill College, and the
    Florida State University College of Law. I have built a small and
    successful business. Along with my partners, I founded and manage a
    mid-sized Hispanic-owned law firm, with more than 50 employees. We have
    weathered the storm of recession and strife, and I have learned much
    about the importance of tact, tenacity, integrity and perseverance
    which has served me throughout my career in public service.
        If confirmed, it will be an honor for me to advance U.S. foreign
    policy interests through the OAS, a noble organization that remains the
    preeminent multilateral forum for our region, the Americas.
        The OAS and the Inter-American system were created to promote
    democracy and the rule of law in the Americas; to promote and protect
    human rights and fundamental freedoms; to advance the security of our
    citizens; foster economic development and prosperity; and to uphold the
    practices, purposes, and principles set forth in the Charter of the
    Organization of American States, the American Declaration on the Rights
    and Duties of Man, and the Inter-American Democratic Charter, in
    accordance with the U.S. Constitution. These instruments embody the
    shared democratic values that make the Americas unique, and make our
    own country great. If confirmed, I pledge to do my utmost to ensure
    that the OAS lives up to this legacy as it confronts today's daunting
    challenges.
        I will also work to make sure American tax payers are getting a
    fair return for their investment in the OAS by working to build a
    stronger, more efficient and more effective organization. Through tough
    but good-faith negotiations with other member states, we can achieve a
    broader, more sustainable financial base for the OAS that does not
    depend so heavily on a single country, in keeping with the objectives
    outlined in the Organization of American States Revitalization and
    Reform Act of 2013.
        If confirmed, I look forward to leading the U.S. mission to the OAS
    in advancing the above- mentioned goals. I believe that my past
    experiences have prepared me, if confirmed by the Senate, to serve
    effectively as the U.S. Permanent Representative to the Organization of
    American States. I am cognizant of the difficulties that have
    historically, and currently, face the region. If confirmed, I promise
    to work closely with you, others in the Executive Branch and all those
    concerned with advancing the goals of the American people.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Menendez, and members of the
    committee, it is an honor to appear before you today. I welcome your
    comments, humbly ask for your support, and look forward to answering
    your questions.

        Senator Rubio. We were just commenting. You were a whole
    minute under on your statement. Very good.
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you.
        Senator Rubio. Just a joke.
        Mr. McClenny?

    STATEMENT OF M. LEE McCLENNY, OF WASHINGTON, A CAREER MEMBER OF
    THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
             STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF PARAGUAY

        Mr. McClenny. Good morning, Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member
    Menendez.
        It is an honor for me to be selected by Secretary Tillerson
    and nominated by President Trump to be the next Ambassador to
    the Republic of Paraguay. I am deeply pleased to enjoy the
    invaluable support of my family and friends and colleagues,
    some present here today, and most especially the support of my
    wife Katherine who is following today's proceedings from our
    posting in Caracas, Venezuela.
        Mr. Chairman, I have been privileged to serve our nation
    for some 30 years as a career Foreign Service officer, working
    to achieve our foreign policy goals and national security
    objectives. My nine overseas postings have been predominantly
    in the western hemisphere.
        Paraguay today is one of our most like-minded partners in
    this hemisphere. It is clear that the Paraguayan people take
    the view, as we do ourselves, that sustained prosperity and
    long-term stability and security are inextricably linked to
    democratic governance and transparent and efficient
    institutions. If confirmed for this position, I pledge to
    continue our ongoing efforts to strengthen our mutually
    advantageous ties with Paraguay, to continue to assist Paraguay
    with its efforts to build durable and independent institutions,
    to grow a strong and resilient economy, improve government
    transparency, and weed out corruption. These elements will
    strengthen Paraguay as a bilateral and regional partner and
    build support for critical U.S. priorities in this region,
    including fighting money laundering and financial crime,
    strengthening intellectual property rights protections. If
    confirmed, I pledge to continue to support Paraguay's pursuit
    of transnational criminal organizations that abuse that
    nation's territory to commit a range of crimes, including
    contributing to the financing of known terrorist groups and
    trafficking in narcotics, weapons, counterfeit goods, and
    people.
        Paraguay has a steadily expanding open-market economy and
    progressive trade policies that make it increasingly attractive
    to the U.S. and to other international firms. Paraguay actively
    seeks involvement from U.S. companies in the country's growing
    role as a manufacturing and logistics hub for the much larger
    economies of Argentina and Brazil. We export some $2 billion
    worth of goods to Paraguay each year, and we enjoy a strongly
    positive bilateral trade balance. Paraguay's agricultural
    sector produces many of the same products as the United States,
    notably soy and beef cattle, but this creates opportunities for
    the export of advanced U.S. technology, agricultural services,
    and other synergistic trade relationships. Paraguayans admire
    the high quality of U.S. products, and a sustainably growing
    and inclusive Paraguayan economy will continue to increase
    demand for U.S. goods and services. If confirmed, I will work
    to expand our trade for the benefit of both nations. Paraguay's
    economic success advances U.S. economic success.
        Our two nations have a long history of strong people-to-
    people ties, especially through the more than 5,000 Peace Corps
    volunteers who have served there since the program began in
    1966. If confirmed, I will also support the Peace Corps program
    in Paraguay, as well as our embassy's flourishing programs to
    support English language teaching and learning, science
    education, and higher educational exchanges. These programs are
    especially valuable to reach the 44 percent of Paraguay's
    population that is younger than 25 years of age. They will also
    help strengthen people-to-people ties, foster mutual
    understanding, and encourage greater engagement between our two
    nations.
        I look forward to, if confirmed for this position, to
    working closely with Congress to advance our national interests
    by further strengthening our positive relationship with the
    Republic of Paraguay as that nation builds its economy,
    strengthens its democratic institutions, confronts
    international criminal and terrorist actors, and plays an ever
    larger role on the international stage, including especially
    leading in regional and international efforts to defend human
    rights and democracy in Venezuela.
        I would be delighted to respond to any questions you may
    have. Thank you very much.
        [Mr. McClenny's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Lee McClenny

        Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Menendez, it is an honor to be
    selected by Secretary Tillerson and nominated by President Trump to be
    Ambassador to the Republic of Paraguay. I am deeply pleased to enjoy
    the invaluable support of my wife, Katherine, as well as that of my
    family, friends, and colleagues. Many of them expressed a desire to be
    present to witness this important Constitutional process, but the
    pressures of time, distance and commitments to work mean only a few
    have been able to be present today.
        Mr. Chairman, I have been privileged to serve our nation for some
    30 years as a career Foreign Service Officer, working to achieve our
    foreign policy goals and national security objectives. My nine overseas
    postings have been predominantly in the Western Hemisphere, including
    my current assignment leading the staff of our embassy in Caracas,
    Venezuela.
        Paraguay is one of our most like-minded partners in the hemisphere.
    It is clear that the Paraguayan people take the view, as we do
    ourselves, that sustained prosperity and long-term stability and
    security are inextricably linked to democratic governance and
    transparent and efficient institutions. If confirmed for this position,
    Mr. Chairman, I pledge to continue our ongoing efforts to strengthen
    our mutually advantageous ties with Paraguay. We will continue to
    assist Paraguay with its efforts to build durable and independent
    institutions, grow a strong and resilient economy, improve government
    transparency, and weed out corruption.
        These elements will strengthen Paraguay as a partner and build
    support for critical U.S. priorities. These include fighting money
    laundering and financial crime while strengthening intellectual
    property rights protections. We will support Paraguay's pursuit of
    transnational criminal organizations that abuse Paraguay's territory to
    commit a range of crimes, including contributing to the financing of
    known terrorist groups and trafficking in narcotics, weapons,
    counterfeit goods, and people.
        Paraguay has a steadily expanding open-market economy and
    progressive trade policies that make it increasingly attractive to U.S.
    and other international firms. Paraguay actively seeks involvement from
    U.S. companies in the country's growing role as a manufacturing and
    logistics hub for the much larger economies of Argentina and Brazil. We
    export $2 billion worth of goods to Paraguay each year, and enjoy a
    strongly positive bilateral trade balance. Paraguay's agricultural
    sector produces many of the same products as the United States, notably
    soy and beef cattle, creating opportunities for the export of advanced
    U.S. technology, agricultural services, and other synergistic trade
    relationships. Paraguayans admire the high quality of U.S. products,
    and a sustainably growing and inclusive Paraguayan economy will
    continue to increase demand for U.S. goods and services. If confirmed,
    I will work to expand our trade for the benefit of both nations.
    Paraguay's economic success advances U.S. economic success.
        Paraguay and the United States have a long history of strong
    people-to-people ties, especially through the more than 5,000 Peace
    Corps Volunteers who have served there since the program began in 1966.
    If confirmed, I will also support the Peace Corps program in Paraguay,
    as well as the embassy's flourishing programs to support English
    language teaching and learning, science education, and higher education
    exchanges. These programs are especially valuable to reach the 44
    percent of the Paraguayan population that is younger than 25 years of
    age. They help strengthen people-to-people ties, foster mutual
    understanding, and encourage greater engagement between our two
    nations.
        I look forward, if confirmed for this position, to working closely
    with Congress to advance our national interests by further
    strengthening our positive relationship with the Republic of Paraguay
    as that nation builds its economy, strengthens its democratic
    institutions, confronts international criminal and terrorist actors,
    and plays an ever larger role on the international stage.
        I would be delighted to respond to any questions you may have.

        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        I am going to defer my opening questions to the ranking
    member, Senator Menendez.
        Senator Menendez. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you all for your statements.
        Let me ask all of our nominees this question. A simple yes
    or no would suffice. It is a question that I have asked of
    every nominee that has been before us. And without commenting
    on the potential impact, do you believe that Russia interfered
    in the 2016 presidential elections?
        And I ask because in our own hemisphere, as Mr. Trujillo in
    a visit with me yesterday noted, there are going to be at least
    six countries that are going to be holding elections in the
    hemisphere. We know that Russia has ramped up various
    activities there. Obviously, for your portfolios, Rear Admiral
    Braithwaite and Mr. Bierman, this is quite salient. So I am not
    asking whether or not they actually created an impact. I am
    asking whether or not you believe that they actually sought to
    interfere. So a yes or no would suffice.
        Mr. Bierman. Yes.
        Mr. Braithwaite. Yes, sir. As you know, the Norwegians
    moved to a paper ballot in September because of that concern.
    Thank you for the question.
        Mr. Trujillo. Yes, Senator.
        Mr. McClenny. Yes, Senator. I also see their involvement
    and influence in Venezuela where I serve currently.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you. I appreciate that because if
    we understand that they are a challenge, then we have to think
    about how we deal with that challenge.
        Now, Mr. Trujillo, I want to thank you for stopping by
    yesterday. I appreciate our conversation. And let me pick up on
    some of the OAS institutional questions that I have.
        You noted to me yesterday that one of your priorities was
    restoring credibility to the OAS, specifically noting that some
    Caribbean countries who have failed to condemn the current
    human rights and humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, for example,
    is an issue.
        So tell me and the committee how do you plan to engage with
    these countries. What specific tools in our diplomatic arsenal
    do you believe will be most effective at motivating other
    countries to stand up for the Inter-American Democratic
    Charter?
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        You know, I think it is extremely important for these
    countries to realize the importance of the humanitarian side of
    what is happening in Venezuela.
        I also think it is very important for the congressional
    support. I have reviewed the Humanitarian and Defense of
    Democracy Act in Venezuela that was sponsored by Senator Rubio
    and Senator Cardin. I think the energy independence for the
    Caribbean countries will ultimately help us accomplish that
    goal. But ultimately, I think it is very important for them to
    understand the importance of the humanitarian side, the
    importance of democracy and how important that is to the United
    States and to the region.
        Senator Menendez. I hope you will look at other tools of
    diplomacy that we have in our universe. Although you are not
    going to be a bilateral representative to any of these
    countries, obviously, in a multilateral institution, there are
    still opportunities, working with your colleagues throughout
    the hemisphere, to think about the other elements of American
    diplomacy, the use of aid, trade, international opinion, and
    sometimes, when it is appropriate, the denial of that aid or
    trade at the end of the day. So I would like you to think about
    some of those.
        I want to ask you do you believe that high level
    representation of the United States in international
    organizations is important.
        Mr. Trujillo. Yes, I do, Senator.
        Senator Menendez. And I appreciate that answer because
    Secretary Tillerson has yet to attend a ministerial level
    meeting of the OAS, and that sends a hemispheric impression.
        Now, I know that when we spoke yesterday, I asked you
    whether you had met with the Secretary, and that is not the
    case.
        By the way, have any of you met with the Secretary as it
    relates to the nominations that you have received?
        Mr. Braithwaite. No, sir.
        Mr. McClenny. No, sir.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Bierman?
        Mr. Bierman. No, I have not.
        Senator Menendez. So I hope that if you are confirmed, will
    you recommend to the Secretary that at some point he personally
    participate in critical OAS meetings?
        Mr. Trujillo. I will, Senator.
        Senator Menendez. Let me ask you about the reform bill that
    we passed in 2013, which I referenced in my opening comments. I
    authored and passed that legislation into law, which urges
    management reforms of the OAS. And as I said, their 2014
    strategic vision aligns with parts of that law, but I think we
    can do more.
        Do you think the State Department has developed a
    successful strategy as it relates to pursuing OAS reform? How
    would you evaluate the State Department's implementation of the
    law, and what components--I do not know if you are familiar
    with the law. I know I mentioned it to you yesterday--of reform
    would you specifically focus on beyond obviously pursuing a
    more vigorous response of countries of the Democratic Charter?
        Mr. Trujillo. Well, I think, Senator, what is really
    important is just the governance of the institution from a
    managerial perspective. The United States contribution should
    not exceed 50 percent as far as the U.S. mission to the OAS.
    Their response in Cancun--they were very successful in
    achieving that. It is a 5-year glide path. We are hopeful to
    reaching it. If I am confirmed, I will definitely towards being
    successful in accomplishing those goals. But the financial
    integrity, aside from the charter, but the financial and the
    governance of the institution is of foremost importance.
        Senator Menendez. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, but if
    there is no one else, I do have one other question for you, and
    then I would like to turn to one of our other nominees.
        Now, I have spent the better part of a quarter of a century
    in Congress trying to improve our immigration laws and the
    lives of immigrants in their communities. And unfortunately, in
    the past few years, we have seen a surge of Central American
    migrants fleeing violence, oppression, and poverty. And when I
    engage with ambassadors from Central American countries, their
    primary focus is protecting their citizens, not only from the
    challenges they have at home, but from immigration orders that
    tear families apart and potentially incur other devastating
    consequences.
        In 2015, you authored what I would consider a draconian
    bill in the Florida legislature that would have made not
    complying with the deportation order a felony, punishable up to
    30 years in prison. So I want to give you a chance on the
    record because I know this is going to be pursued by others,
    and so I figured in fairness to you, I want to give you a
    chance on the record to give me a sense of what you meant by
    that bill because when you deal with the ambassadors of these
    countries, they are going to know this and they are going to
    say to themselves, you know, you want me to vote in a certain
    way. Some of these countries, Mexico, Guatemala, and others in
    Central America, are good partners with us at the OAS. So this
    is going to be a bit of a challenge, and I want to hear what
    your intent was and how you are going to deal with that.
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I would not have supported that bill in the form it was
    drafted. It was poorly drafted and it never captured my
    original intent. My original intent for that bill was to codify
    the federal statute of illegal reentry post deportation, post
    all of due process being exhausted.
        As far as dealing with other ambassadors at the OAS, if I
    am confirmed, I think I would discuss my body of work in the
    State legislature. I supported KidCare. I supported a permanent
    resident of the United States being able to practice law in the
    State of Florida. I supported in-State tuition. So overall the
    comprehensive work that I did towards immigration reform, given
    the confines of being a member of the State legislature, I
    would definitely discuss that with them.
        Senator Menendez. Well, it speaks volumes about the need to
    make sure, which I know we agonize here with what we introduce
    being what our intent was. And so if you are to be confirmed as
    the Ambassador to the OAS, what resolutions we pursue and how
    they are drafted are going to be incredibly important. So I
    hope that that is an experiential factor that you will take
    with you to the institution.
        Mr. Bierman, I appreciate your past service.
        According to USAID and the E&E Bureau, it seeks to promote
    resilient and democratic societies, strengthen economic growth
    and energy security, support European-Atlantic integration to
    realize a region that is whole, free, and at peace.
        Now, I would argue, in the face of ongoing Russian military
    aggression and disinformation campaigns aimed at eroding
    democratic institutions and western alliances, this mission has
    never been more important.
        Now, the question I would like to get a sense from you, do
    you feel that you are going to have the resources necessary to
    carry out your mandated duties? The request for fiscal year
    2018 of the budget would eliminate--eliminate--not reduce--
    eliminate assistance for Eastern Europe and Central Asia. I do
    not know how those proposed cuts serve the national interest of
    the United States. And I know you are not there to have been an
    advocate of what the budget is. But, if confirmed, that
    statement that I read about a core mission is going to be very
    difficult to pursue without the resources, for example, Ukraine
    that is suffering under direct military occupation by Russia.
    So give me a sense of how you are going to meet that challenge.
        Mr. Bierman. Well, thank you very much, Senator, for that
    question. And thank you to the entire committee for their work
    on this specific issue. I think Senator Cardin's work
    specifically in addressing the increasing resources in our
    region has been critical in our efforts over the last 2 years.
    As you can see, we have had a significant increase since 2015.
        Senator Menendez. You had an increase but the budget calls
    for an elimination.
        Mr. Bierman. Well, I have not had a chance to actually work
    on those specific details, but I do look forward to working, if
    I am confirmed, specifically within the administration and
    being an advocate for foreign assistance and its value and then
    working again with your committee to try to address those
    specific issues.
        I also would very quickly just like to thank you for your
    question earlier about Russian influence in elections because
    it is having an impact in every country, not just covertly but
    openly. I was in Moldova in 2014, and I saw open campaigning of
    President Putin with at least one specific political party. So
    it is an open campaign, as well as a covert campaign.
        And I also want to thank you for your question regarding
    working with our partners. I think it is very important. I am
    looking forward to working with my European partners in the EU
    specifically on resources and how we can work together to have
    a larger impact on our role.
        But I do think that, if confirmed, I am looking forward to
    working with you and the committee specifically on how to
    address the resource issue in our area.
        Senator Menendez. Well, I appreciate that answer. And I
    will close on this, Mr. Chairman. The rest of my questions I
    will submit for the record.
        Earlier this month, a ``Washington Post'' article opened
    with a disheartening headline. And I appreciate the chairman
    who has been supportive of some of my efforts when we were
    marking up here on USAID. This is the headline: The Developing
    World Will Have Fewer American Engineers, Economists, Teachers,
    and Health Workers to Help Prepare for the Future,'' referring
    to the abrupt cancellation notices to 178 people previously
    accepted into Foreign Service positions.
        So one of the questions I was going to ask you, but you
    preempted it, is if you are confirmed, hopefully you will be an
    advocate internally for--and I supported Ambassador Green to be
    the Administrator. I want to see every dollar used used wisely.
    I want to see every dollar used used effectively. But if we do
    not believe as we work to that goal of never needing foreign
    assistance again--but we are not there by any stretch of the
    imagination. If we do not believe that this is a critical
    element of U.S. foreign policy, then we are incredibly short-
    sighted.
        So I hope that you will use your experience to explain how
    this is actually a force multiplier and an opportunity.
        Mr. Bierman. If I might, I would like to say that the
    Europe & Eurasia Bureau specifically has been a model for
    success. 11 of our countries are now members of the EU,
    countries that we had missions in.
        As you probably heard through my statement, I am an
    historian by nature, and in the same book that David McCullough
    wrote, he mentioned that in order to chart a path forward, we
    have to have an understanding of the past. And in many ways
    sometimes I think it is like planting cut flowers. If there is
    no root, there is no foundation, there is no understanding of
    the past, then it is not going to last. So I think it is
    important that we have a strong foundation in Europe & Eurasia,
    and I am looking forward to working with you and the committee
    on that.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you.
        And, Mr. Trujillo, your sons have made me feel very at home
    because they are doing what my kids used to do when I used to
    talk. [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. They are lovely.
        All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. We will see now if they wake up when I talk.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Rubio. I want to follow up on a question that the
    ranking member asked. Who is the highest ranking State
    Department official that any of you have met with in
    preparation for and anticipation of your nomination with regard
    to this posting?
        Mr. Bierman. I have met with Administrator Green, and we
    have had several discussions specifically, by the way, I will
    say on working with our European partners. So it actually
    addresses the ranking member's question earlier, but I have met
    with Ambassador Green and had substantive comments with him.
        Senator Rubio. Admiral?
        Mr. Braithwaite. Deputy Secretary Sullivan, sir.
        Mr. Trujillo. Kevin Sullivan over at the OAS.
        Mr. McClenny. Officials within the Bureau of Western
    Hemisphere Affairs, and I will be meeting with Under Secretary
    Shannon later today.
        Senator Rubio. This question is kind of more open-ended. I
    will give you an opportunity to expand on your opening comments
    for each of you, and in fairness, since you have gone last
    every time, Mr. McClenny, we will start with you. Plus you have
    a pretty tough post right now, so I think you deserve a little
    benefit here given your current challenges that you face in a
    very difficult posting.
        What is the greatest central challenge, if confirmed, in
    your new assignment, in your new post?
        Mr. McClenny. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I think the greatest challenge will be continuing the
    policy of engagement that we have manifested, that we have
    executed over the recent years to carry Paraguay's own efforts
    forward on the areas of judicial transparency, fighting
    corruption, fighting transnational criminal organizations, as
    well as terrorist financing.
        I think in your remarks, sir, you made reference to
    something that has been a constant and returning, recurring
    issue of concern in the western hemisphere, and that is
    activities of an illegal and terrorist nature taking place or
    emanating from the tri-border region. I agree completely with
    the comments you made that this is a problem that has been--it
    is a problem that we have been observing closely and we have
    been working against for a number of years. There is a lot of
    smoke. It continues to be a source of a great deal of concern
    for all of us. It will require work, if confirmed, on the part
    of myself and the staff in the embassy in Asuncion but also for
    the my colleagues across the border in Argentina and in Brazil.
    I pledge to pay very close attention to what is going on in the
    tri-border region because it is an area of great concern and it
    has been for many years.
        Senator Rubio. And just to expound on that for a second--
    and I apologize to the other nominees. We will get to you in a
    moment on the same question.
        When you talk about the tri-border region, for those who
    may not be familiar with what exactly--you were actually
    referring to Hezbollah. A lot of people think about Hezbollah
    as a threat in the Middle East, and to the extent that their
    engagement in the western hemisphere exists, it has largely
    been viewed as a fundraising mechanism, a place where they
    conduct illicit activities to raise money and send back.
        But just today there was an open source report in one of
    the press outlets about an increasing concern about Hezbollah
    scouting and surveiling and preparing contingency plans for
    activities against the United States and its interests in the
    western hemisphere and potentially having carried out those in
    the past in the western hemisphere.
        In the case of a conflict either with Hezbollah and/or
    Iran, they would serve as a proxy, in essence. If the U.S.
    entered into some sort of conflict, the Iranians could order
    Hezbollah to conduct asymmetrical attacks both against the
    homeland and in the western hemisphere against U.S. interests
    in a way that gives them a level of deniability publicly, but
    we would know. And it would be a price that they would want us
    to know that we would have to pay.
        So particularly with the threat of Hezbollah, it is your
    view that Hezbollah poses both--that they pose both, obviously,
    a financial threat but also a potential operational threat?
        Mr. McClenny. It is my view, based on the information that
    I have seen, sir, that there is an actual financial fundraising
    threat that is ongoing, current, and requires attention, and
    that there is a potential for an operational threat in the
    future. I have not seen any information to indicate that
    Hezbollah is operationally active in the tri-border region at
    this point in time, but completely agree with your view that
    this is something that must be watched very closely.
        Senator Rubio. Representative Trujillo, the same question
    on the broader challenge.
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator.
        I think the broader challenge is the backward slides in
    democracy. If you look at the situation in Venezuela where they
    have gone over the last 15 years and how that has spilled out
    over the region, it is something that will continue to affect
    the region for years to come, the humanitarian issues, the lack
    of democracy, the lack of elections, corruption. I think when
    you look at the Panama Papers and Odebrecht and how that
    corruption starts really challenging people's trust in a
    democratic system, I think that is definitely a challenge
    facing the region. And going forward is the elections, as
    Senator Menendez mentioned, over the next year, the six, maybe
    seven elections that will take place, the outcomes of those
    elections and making sure that not only are they democratic in
    nature and fair and transparent but also those leaders govern
    democratically once they are elected.
        Senator Rubio. Admiral?
        Mr. Braithwaite. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would have to say the Arctic, sir. And specifically, the
    Arctic is a top strategic foreign policy priority for the
    Norwegians and the United States in our partnership with them,
    but specifically the remilitarization of the region by the
    Russians. As you know, sir, the Russians have reinstituted
    strategic bomber flights along the Norwegian coast. They have
    reestablished both land and closer to my roots, naval forces on
    the Kola Peninsula, including their brand new Borei class
    ballistic missile submarine.
        So I think that our challenges are going to be to assure
    the Norwegians that we are there. We have created a number of
    interoperability opportunities with us with the Joint Strike
    Fighter and the P-8 Poseidon aircraft. With my roots as a
    former antisubmarine warfare pilot who spent a lot of time
    hunting then Soviet submarines, I think that is going to be at
    the forefront, if I were confirmed, during my time in Oslo
    working very closely with the Norwegian Government and keeping
    eyes on our friends in Russia.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Bierman?
        Mr. Bierman. As I mentioned earlier, Russian malign
    influence is going to be a top priority along with fighting
    violent extremism.
        But on a micro level, I think youth unemployment is of
    great concern specifically in the Balkans. Some of our
    countries are seeing a better than 50 percent unemployment rate
    between the ages of 18 and 25, and I think that that is a
    serious issue and it raises issues beyond unemployment.
        I also think that open media and a free media is something
    of great concern and a top priority.
        And lastly, I think decentralization is very important as
    we work with local communities to try to involve the local
    communities in governance and open and fair elections.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. By the way, to Mr. Trujillo and McClenny, he
    speaks Spanish very well. He is very tricky about that, but he
    does speaks very well. But we are going to do this in English
    today.
        Senator Kaine. He is overstating mi abilidad.
        But thank you all and congratulations on your nominations
    for these important positions. Let me just ask each of you a
    couple of questions.
        Mr. Trujillo, first to you. The Inter-American Commission
    on Human Rights. It has long been considered one of the crown
    jewels of the OAS and it has been a critical forum to focus on
    human rights issues, and it often is a target because of that
    focus and it is a target from folks on both the left and the
    right.
        What is your assessment of the commission at this point,
    and what steps will you take to make sure that it is defended
    and appropriately funded, especially at a time when the
    administration is proposing some pretty significant budget cuts
    and being seen by objective observers as deemphasizing human
    rights issues as part of the portfolio of the administration?
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        I think the Human Rights Commission is extremely important.
    The most important thing is that it is autonomous. It cannot be
    controlled by a member state. It cannot be controlled by the
    organization. It really has to be an organization that stands
    for justice and stands for human rights.
        My goal and my commitment is making sure that they have the
    adequate funding to carry out their mission. Obviously,
    Venezuela and other members in the OAS are trying to undermine
    their objectives. My goal, if I am confirmed, is to advocate
    making sure that they are properly funded, they are autonomous,
    and they are able to carry out their mission.
        Senator Kaine. Can you talk a little bit, using Venezuela
    as an example, what more might the OAS be able to do? What
    could you do? What could the United States do to help them be
    more vigorous in trying to promote human rights and more
    peaceful resolution of challenges within Venezuela?
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I think one thing that they have done--Secretary Almagro,
    having the hearings over the last 3 months and analyzing
    violations of human rights and having those forums in which
    dissidents could come and express their concerns and ultimately
    trying to build a case in which those people are referred to
    The Hague Commission for prosecution--I think it is an
    exceptional step forward from the OAS and their prerogative.
        As I mentioned earlier to Senator Menendez, I think the
    ability of the OAS to really stand by their charter, if they
    really believe in the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and
    hold Venezuela accountable, making sure that they are held
    accountable for violating the charter. And I think as the
    United States, I think the sanctions are very effective, the
    sanctions that we have passed against high level officials. I
    think it is very important for us to try to deliver
    humanitarian aid. Obviously, it is being blocked by the
    Venezuelans, but I think it is of foremost importance for
    people to have access to water and food and medicine. They are
    human rights that should always be upheld.
        Senator Kaine. I understand that Senator Menendez has
    already asked about this, but I am concerned about it as well.
    As a member of the Florida State legislature, you had
    legislation that would have charged undocumented immigrants
    with felony penalties under State law if they reentered the
    United States after deportation. And I am wondering about that.
    There are penalties for reentering under immigration law. What
    was your thinking about trying to, in addition, make that a
    State felony?
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        The way it was originally drafted was never my intention.
    My intention was to capture the illegal reentry and codify the
    federal statute. I was a prosecutor for 4 years in Miami, and
    one thing that was always a bit concerning were individuals
    with final ICE deportation holds being released. So they were
    people who were afforded due process, were released from either
    county jail or from State prison, transported back to our local
    facilities, a 48-hour ICE hold, and ultimately they were
    released back into the residence.
        Senator Kaine. And they would be released because ICE would
    determine--they would be notified, but they would determine
    that there was no need to deport the individuals?
        Mr. Trujillo. They were released--sometimes there were
    issues with communications between ICE and the county jails or
    the Department of Corrections. There were multiple issues with
    the communications between the interagencies.
        Senator Kaine. I am just curious. When I was Governor, we
    had a very standard practice. If somebody was in a jail or
    prison who was there and was undocumented, we would let ICE
    know before release. And we would let ICE make the decision
    about whether somebody needed to be deported or whether there
    was some other sort of process that needed to be engaged
    against them. And that was something we did as a matter of
    course. ICE usually, after checking someone's record, decided
    not to do anything, and somebody would be released.
        But I am just curious. What exactly was your intention then
    in making that a separate State-level felony if ICE had
    determined that the individual posed no safety threat?
        Mr. Trujillo. My intention was that if the person was
    forcibly removed from the United States, not a person who
    voluntarily leaves and returns, a person who is forcibly
    removed, has exhausted all due process, has a final deportation
    order and is removed, if they reenter and commit a new offense,
    they will be held for the additional crime of illegal reentry
    as to the State statute. As far as the ICE issue in Florida,
    there was some disconnect based on communication in which
    individuals could only be held under State law for 48 hours.
    After 48 hours, they have to be released. If not, their
    attorneys could file a writ of habeas corpus and have them
    released. So that was the issue I was trying to address.
        Senator Kaine. Mr. McClenny, let me ask you a question
    about Paraguay. It is a significant transshipment point for
    cocaine and all the attendant challenges, corruption, limited
    government resources, affect on the public safety system.
        I notice in budget submissions--well, first let me ask you
    this. What is your assessment of the steps that the Government
    of Paraguay is taking to increase the capacity to interdict
    illicit drugs?
        Mr. McClenny. Thank you for the question, Senator Kaine.
        The Paraguayan Government is a strong partner and a good
    partner in the efforts regionally and bilaterally to interdict
    drug traffic shipments, as well as to interdict movements of
    money that are associated with drug trafficking. There are
    clear shortcomings in ability and technology and equipment and
    supplies and a variety of other things. Interagency and embassy
    programs are working to address those shortcomings. They have
    been over a number of years, and we will continue to do those.
    If confirmed, I pledge that we will continue to work hard on
    these important issues.
        Paraguay is a transshipment country for cocaine but it is
    also a source country for marijuana that circulates largely in
    South America. That is another subject of focus for them and
    something that is a lower priority for the United States but
    still an important counternarcotics priority.
        Senator Kaine. Mr. Chair, I have one more question, if I
    could continue before maybe going to Senator Murphy, on
    Paraguay.
        I notice that Trump administration has proposed eliminating
    USAID development assistance to Paraguay. I have not visited
    Paraguay, but what I know about the country would suggest that
    there are still some very significant development needs where
    USAID could be helpful. And over the years, USAID I think has
    played a pretty important role working in tandem with the U.S.
    embassy and other American officials in Paraguay.
        How would the elimination of USAID development assistance
    affect the relationship?
        Mr. McClenny. Again, thank you for the question.
        USAID has a long and proud history of work in Paraguay and
    a significant record of achievements working with Paraguayan
    counterparts to advance our interests and goals in a variety of
    development ways.
        You are correct that the current budget request for
    development assistance funds is zero for next year and zero for
    the year after that. This will have an impact on the programs
    that we are able to do on the ground. There is money, however,
    in the pipeline. We will continue to use those funds. We will
    use the resources that are provided to us the very best we can
    to achieve the goals that we can in the country.
        In general terms with regard to the bilateral relationship,
    we have a strong relationship with Paraguay, and I do not think
    the zeroing out over time of these funds will fundamentally
    affect that relationship.
        Senator Kaine. You have had a long career in the State
    Department and served in many positions, others in Latin
    America as well. But as a general matter, the USAID portfolio
    in these countries is an important and productive part of the
    American relationship with the countries. Would you not agree?
        Mr. McClenny. I absolutely would agree, sir. Currently
    where I serve in Venezuela, it is an important aspect. It is an
    important arrow in our quiver. It is an important tool in our
    toolbox. It has been in all of the Latin American countries
    where I have served.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Rubio. Senator Murphy?
        Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to all four of you for your willingness to serve.
        Mr. Bierman, I wanted to ask you a few questions about
    future USAID investments in Europe and Eurasia. I think many of
    us have a hard time understanding the set of funding priorities
    being sent to us by the administration with respect to the
    challenges that we face in this region. There is no doubt that
    we need additional military capacity, and we have stepped up to
    the plate through the Europe Reassurance Initiative. But many
    of the challenges that we face in the region are not
    conventional military challenges, and there are massive soft
    power plays being made by our adversaries in the region, which
    cannot be met if this Congress were to adopt the draconian
    funding cuts being proposed by the administration.
        I will not ask you to opine on that budget, but I want to
    ask you about two specific challenges.
        First, the Balkans. I think you might have briefly touched
    on this, but I want you to do a little bit deeper dive here.
    Russia, Turkey, and the Gulf States have initiated massive soft
    power offensives in the Balkans, and much of this coming just
    in 2017. The Russians have significantly doubled down in the
    Balkans over the last 10 months, having watched the United
    States telegraph a withdrawal from that region in part because
    of the budgets that have been submitted.
        Do you think the United States is currently doing enough in
    the Balkans to match these efforts, and what could we be doing
    better or differently?
        Mr. Bierman. Just to qualify, I have not been involved with
    the budgetary talks, but I do look at my role as an advocate
    for the agency and our mission. I am a believer, having spent 5
    years under the previous Bush administration, in the same
    bureau, and I wanted to come back to this specific job in this
    specific administration to help guide the principles of
    development.
        Look, I completely agree with what you are saying. I think
    we have got some serious issues in the Balkans specifically, as
    I mentioned earlier, with youth unemployment. I think we have
    got some backsliding with democracy. We have got some issues
    with ethnic tensions, and I do believe that the Russian malign
    influence is a serious problem not just covertly but openly.
        I think that our way forward is to work openly with the
    governments, to work openly with democracy and governance, with
    our efforts to supply energy independence through the entire
    region. I think we can also work with economic development. We
    have got some great programs specifically in the Balkans.
        I know that specifically in Serbia, for instance, we have a
    program that has worked with the Serbian Ministry for
    Construction on helping Serbia jump their permitting process,
    and since our work in this particular area, they have jumped
    103 places which has spurred construction by 20 percent. That
    impacts Russian malign influence by giving people hope for the
    future and that their direction is in a Euro-Atlantic path.
        Senator Murphy. Then let us move to Ukraine for a moment.
    USAID is involved there in a number of different ways. But our
    funding pales in comparison to the amount of very quiet money
    that is being put into Ukraine through Russian sources. Talk a
    little bit about what we can be doing more of in Ukraine maybe
    specifically with an eye towards some of the anticorruption
    programming that is still desperately needed at the local level
    as much as at the national level.
        Mr. Bierman. Well, there definitely is still work to be
    done, but we actually have made a great deal of progress with
    our e-asset declaration system with the Ukrainian Government
    and officials. It has opened transparency and it has given
    people confidence in their government.
        But we have also had a tremendous amount of success with
    the ProZorro program, which costs about $2.2 million, and we
    have leveraged more than $1.25 billion, and that basically is
    an e-procurement system that allows open and transparent
    bidding on various e-commerce throughout the government. And we
    have provided technical assistance and I think continued
    technical assistance, not just at the ministry level but also
    at the local level. I talked about this earlier. It is very
    important that we make every Ukrainian understand that they can
    be involved with their government from the grassroots all the
    way to the national level. And if confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you, Senator, and the committee on how we can be
    effective in our programs and fight the influence from Russia.
        Senator Murphy. Well, I appreciate your testimony. I hope
    that you will end up being an advocate for increased funding in
    these accounts. I think in Ukraine, we need to come to the
    realization that Putin does not want to militarily own Ukraine.
    He wants to create enough confusion and dissension within the
    ranks that he economically and politically breaks that country
    such that it decides that the fight in the east is not worth
    the hassle and they should come to some accommodation with
    Moscow. That means that it is that political and economic
    support for the country that is in many ways even more critical
    than the military support that we provide to them, and that
    happens through USAID. It cannot happen if we continue to have
    an administration that does not believe in the mission. But I
    am glad that you are signing up for the job.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Menendez?
        Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two very
    quick questions and then a comment.
        First to Mr. McClenny, let me just say as the only career
    nominee here today, I want to thank you for your service, and I
    appreciate those who are committed to the Foreign Service of
    the United States and have committed their lives to it. I think
    you promote America's interests abroad up front. So it is
    incredibly important.
        I have a specific question as to your post-to-be. Human
    trafficking is something that both the chairman and I and the
    chairman of the full committee have a great passion about. We
    have passed legislation that I thought was incredibly
    important. I am concerned in different parts of the world about
    human trafficking, and I am concerned about it in Paraguay.
        Could you speak to that in terms of one of your core
    missions?
        Mr. McClenny. Thank you, Senator Menendez, for the
    compliment on my service and also for the question about
    trafficking in persons in Paraguay.
        Yes, trafficking in persons is a serious issue, a real
    issue in Paraguay. We produce an annual report on developments
    in the subject matter in Paraguay. The most recent report makes
    it very clear that there remain very serious concerns in
    prosecution of individuals who have been accused of such
    crimes, in prevention of further crimes being committed, and
    also in protection of victims of these crimes.
        The Paraguayan Government, however, under President Cartes
    has recognized that this is an issue and is taking some steps
    and is working with us to advance on this. Not enough has been
    done. This clearly remains a priority and is something that we
    need to address going forward.
        Senator Menendez. And so can I glean from you a commitment
    to the committee that if you are approved, that you will make
    one of your core missions and you are not going to equivocate
    on it as it relates to other issues we may be concerned with in
    Paraguay?
        Mr. McClenny. If confirmed, sir, you have my firm pledge
    that this will be one our priorities.
        Senator Menendez. Thank you for that answer.
        I have a question for every nominee that I have asked since
    I have been on the committee, when I was the chairman of the
    full committee and now I still believe is incredibly important
    because sometimes people forget.
        If you are confirmed--this goes to every nominee--will you
    commit that if the committee or its members reach out to you
    and seek to get insights from your posts and positions, that
    you will share them freely with them? We can down the line.
        Mr. McClenny. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Trujillo. Yes, Senator.
        Mr. Braithwaite. Yes, sir. I consider it my duty.
        Mr. Bierman. Absolutely.
        Senator Menendez. And then finally just a quick comment.
    Admiral, you are extraordinarily competent for this position,
    but you sort of like have an inside track here with me because
    your wife is a Jersey girl. [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. And she was a Catholic schoolteacher in
    New Jersey. So that to me is really valuable. So I just want
    you to know that in addition to your competency, that does not
    hurt.
        I appreciate Mr. Bierman's commitment to the agency. It is
    incredibly important for me. If I am going to support somebody,
    I want to make sure they are supporting the agency they are
    assigned to.
        I appreciate, as I said to Mr. McClenny, the career
    commitment.
        And I generally have an affinity for Cubans even when they
    are Republican. [Laughter.]
        Senator Menendez. So thank you all for your commitment to
    be willing to serve. I may have some questions for the record.
    I would just urge you to respond to them as quickly as possible
    as the committee considers your nominations.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        We are headed for the finish line here unless anybody else
    shows up, but I do want to touch on a couple more topics.
        Mr. McClenny--and I am going to paraphrase from the
    Congressional Research Service. Paraguay is a significant
    transshipment point for Andean cocaine. Drug traffickers
    exploit its porous borders and extensive waterways. Paraguay
    has increased its capacity to interdict drugs and to conduct
    drug eradication and demand reduction activities. Their
    congress has supported cooperation with the U.S. on
    counternarcotics. They expanded their budget for a primary
    counternarcotics agency.
        Here is an article from earlier this year in the Miami
    Herald.'' In June of 2017, a Paraguayan man was charged in
    federal court in Miami with conspiring to smuggle cocaine
    through the Ciudad del Este Airport with the intent to sell it
    in the United States. The individual charged had been
    extradited to the U.S. by the Paraguayan Government on
    suspicion of using drug trafficking to raise funds for a
    Hezbollah network.
        In light of all of this, I do not ask you to opine on its
    wisdom because I do not want to put you in that predicament.
    But I do want to ask you, the President's 2018 foreign aid
    request for Paraguay would reduce our assistance to $400,000.
    That is a 95 percent cut compared to 2016, and this funding is
    primarily for military training and traditional development
    programs.
        Would that sort of cut, if enacted, which I do not believe
    it will be, but if it does, will it make it harder or easier
    for us to work with Paraguay to confront these challenges if we
    had a 95 percent cut like that?
        Mr. McClenny. I do not think it will make it harder for us
    to work with them because there is a willingness on the part of
    their government to work with us. But it will make it harder
    for us to make an impact and make a difference in this regard.
    Clearly, we would all rather have more rather than less. There
    are finite limits.
        I can pledge to you though, Senator, if confirmed for this
    position, that we will wisely steward the resources that we are
    given to make as much of an impact as we possibly can.
        Senator Rubio. And Representative Trujillo, on the OAS--and
    I think that the ranking member alluded to this. One of the
    things that undermines any international organism is the
    inability to take action. And it has been very frustrating to a
    lot of people to see 20 members representing I think it is like
    90 percent of the GDP of the western hemisphere vote to condemn
    what has happened in Venezuela, which is a direct violation of
    the very reason why the OAS exists, and that is to protect
    democracy. And the inability of get a handful of smaller
    nations to come on board for a variety of reasons--in the
    Caribbean, St. Vincent and Grenadine, Dominica, St. Kitts and
    Nevis have all voted to support Venezuela against efforts by
    the other countries to confront them. And then you have had a
    series of abstentions from places like Haiti and the Dominican
    Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada, et cetera.
        This is very frustrating. And in particular, it is
    frustrating when you view this list and you see in the case of,
    for example, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, nations who
    receive significant assistance from the United States but have
    chosen, for a variety of reasons, primarily financial in my
    opinion, to line up on behalf of a dictatorship and basically
    call into question the very purpose of the OAS so they cannot
    take collective action.
        And so I guess my question is in regards to that, how do
    you balance between maintaining friendly relationships and not
    wanting to be the threatening power that goes in and tells them
    we are going to cut off your money unless you vote with us and
    at the same time justifying to the American taxpayer why we
    continue to pour money into the coffers of governments who in
    turn go to international organisms and vote against us in
    violation, for example, of the democracy they enjoy and of the
    very purpose of the organization in which the serve.
        I guess the central question is if the OAS is not able to
    take collective action against such clear-cut violations of the
    democratic order, why do we have an OAS. Is that not a central
    long-term challenge?
        Mr. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator. I think it is the
    greatest challenge. The countries siding with Venezuela is the
    biggest challenge that undermines the entire goal of the
    organization, an organization that is committed to democratic
    values, that is committed to security, that is committed to
    human rights, in which you have a country that clearly cannot
    be a bigger violator of those three pillars and countries
    within the organization that support them. I think that is
    central and it is the biggest challenge I will face.
        I think one thing that the Senator brought up--and
    obviously it is under Congress' purview--but the ability to
    influence trade and influence economic sanctions and influence
    aid, I think those are great tools in our toolbox that we can
    ultimately bring out, if necessary, in order to have some of
    these countries reconsider their position.
        Senator Rubio. Admiral, a more open-ended question. But
    Norway, obviously because it shares a 120-mile land border and
    a 14-mile maritime border with Russia--they are up close to
    this issue and have been historically for a very long time
    throughout the Cold War and beyond. Both from your military
    background and now entering the diplomatic world, is there
    anything that Norway does that we can learn from, anything they
    do particularly well with regards to Russia? Are there any
    lessons to be learned about how they deal with Russia that
    could be applied to the broader European theater and/or the
    United States?
        Mr. Braithwaite. Thank you, Senator, very much for the
    question.
        Norway is in a much different situation, of course, than
    the United States is. They are not a super power. They are not
    viewed by the Russians as a great threat. They, in fact, have
    been a good neighbor to the Russians working through Arctic
    Council initiatives. Of course, they share fishery interests.
    There is border patrol, search and rescue.
        But as you well know, sir, the Norwegians are very wise to
    the ways of Russia, their interests. As Senator Menendez had
    indicated earlier, their interests around the globe can be
    suspicious.
        The Norwegians engage directly. I believe the United States
    could probably be a little more direct. And perhaps there is a
    way that we could partner with the Norwegians. I think the
    Arctic Council, sir, is a good start. There are numerous
    interests there, both on behalf of the Russians as well as the
    United States, as well as every member of the council. And I
    would intend, if so confirmed, sir, to continue that, be very
    proactive in our engagement with the Arctic Council and our
    relationship with Norway, sir.
        Senator Rubio. Finally, Mr. Bierman, my question for you is
    kind of a variation of the same question I asked Mr. McClenny,
    and that is, if you look at the President's fiscal year 2018
    budget request for assistance to Europe and Eurasia, it was
    significantly less than the fiscal year 2016's actual funding.
    And it comes at a time in which Putin--and I do not say Russia.
    I say Putin because Russian people are not doing this. It is
    Putin who has made this decision--are increasingly trying to
    interfere in the Western democratic order particularly in
    Europe.
        And so in the context of that and of the necessity to be
    helpful to our allies in the region, I am not asking you to
    opine on the wisdom. That is a policy determination. I am not
    trying to get you cross with the administration. But I guess my
    view is if such a reduction in funding--would it be helpful--
    and I think I know the answer, but would it be helpful or
    hurtful to our efforts to increase our ability to cooperate and
    assist allies in the region in need of that assistance?
        Mr. Bierman. Well, thank you very much for that question,
    Senator.
        Again, although I have not worked directly with this
    administration and the agency on the budget, I do look forward
    to working with you specifically as we move ahead.
        And I am not trying to avoid that question. I think it is a
    matter of making the argument as to why assistance and
    development matters. And I look forward to making that
    argument, to looking historically as to our successes. We have
    seen some great successes. We want to make sure that our
    investment in the past is an investment that continues into the
    future. And I am excited about that opportunity, and I can tell
    you you have my commitment.
        Senator Rubio. Well, to all the nominees in the different
    contexts of the two that are going to particular countries and
    to you, Mr. Bierman, that is going to be involved in a
    programmatic effort in a larger region, and of course, Mr.
    Trujillo, who is going to be, hopefully, representing us in a
    broader multinational forum, the challenge when it comes to
    aid--the fundamental question a lot of Americans ask--first of
    all, they think it is like 30 percent of our budget when it is
    less than 1 percent. But the others are of the perception that
    foreign aid is charity, that we are doing this like a charity
    contribution. And the harder argument, the one we need to make
    is that these contributions that we make, appropriately
    channeled--we do not want the money being corruptly used--
    actually has both national security and soft power elements to
    it. This is good for America to do this. It is actually cheaper
    than the alternative. If we could help Paraguay, if we could
    help Central America, if we could help these nations confront,
    for example, transnational crime and the flow of illicit drugs,
    we could save, theoretically, a lot of money on the back end
    fighting that when it reaches the homeland.
        So it is a challenge that all of you will face, perhaps a
    little bit less in Norway, though certainly in the military
    scope and the wisdom of NATO, it is relevant. And it is one
    that I hope all of you will be forceful advocates for. Again,
    we are not talking about wasting money. We are not talking
    about giving money to people that do not need it, but we are
    talking about why spending a dollar at the front end in helping
    capacitate countries could save us a lot of money at the back
    end when those problems reach us here. And I hope all of you
    will be engaged in that effort, if confirmed.
        So I want to thank all of you. Unless Senator Menendez has
    anything else, I want to thank all of you for being here. For
    your families sitting through this hearing, I appreciate it as
    well. The fact that you did not get the full committee here is
    not bad news. It is good news. They know you are here. They
    know your nomination. They have read it. And obviously, a lot
    of them feel comfortable about it or they would be here asking
    tough questions. And to the members that came, I thank them
    because their questions were important. It was a really good
    hearing. So again, I thank you for your service and your
    willingness to continue to serve.
        The record of this hearing will remain open until the close
    of business on Friday.
        And without objection, this hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Hon. Brock D. Bierman by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. I served on the State Department's Trafficking in Person's
    Task Force in the George W. Bush administration. I was asked to do so
    because of my interest in the issue and my knowledge about the
    challenges in Moldova. During the time I sat on the Task Force, it was
    charged with determining which countries were most at risk of
    trafficking and where a significant increase of funds could make an
    immediate difference. I argued successfully for the inclusion of
    Moldova, and as a result the additional funds had an impact on
    protecting basic human rights in Moldova. I look forward to continue
    advocating for and supporting programs that further the protection of
    fundamental freedoms throughout Europe and Eurasia, if confirmed.

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

        Answer. The most pressing human rights concerns in Europe and
    Eurasia today include efforts to limit the fundamental freedoms of
    citizens--the freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of
    the press and expression, and the freedom of conscience. Without these
    basic freedoms that are so critical to citizen participation and human
    dignity, the prospects for improving people's lives are greatly
    diminished. Another major, related concern is the closing space for
    civil society. When regular citizens are harassed, or worse, just for
    working together in associations and other non-governmental groups,
    this also stifles personal freedom and dignity. Finally, inclusion
    continues to be an ongoing challenge in the region. Members of various
    minority and underrepresented groups continue to face great challenges
    to be considered equal members of society. Unfortunately, Russia
    sometimes exploits these societal divisions to advance its own agenda.
        If confirmed, I will work to ensure that USAID's programs in Europe
    and Eurasia will focus on continuing and strengthening our commitment
    to these fundamental freedoms through support for civil society, fair
    political competition, freedom of expression and media, and human
    rights. I will also work to continue our focus promoting an inclusive
    approach to development that leaves no one behind, including women,
    youth and marginalized communities.

        Question 3.  If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Europe and Eurasia
    in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. The central challenge for addressing human rights concerns
    is underdeveloped democratic institutions and democratic backsliding in
    the region. In some countries in the region, old patterns of
    concentrating political power mostly in executive authority have re-
    emerged. Those governments in the region that have shown the least
    progress in building functioning democratic institutions that can check
    executive authority are also those that have the most significant human
    rights issues. Closing space for civil society, and the associated
    harassment, restriction and repression of non-governmental
    organizations and activists, has been particularly severe in Eurasia,
    but has now spread further West to some Balkan and Central European
    countries. Other challenges include longstanding ethnic and religious
    divides that complicate efforts to build an inclusive democratic system
    and social understandings that marginalize some members of the
    community. Finally, I understand that establishing and strengthening
    resilient, functioning democratic institutions, processes, and values
    takes years of consistent effort--and will not be complete overnight.

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

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 5.  What will you do to build people-to-people ties
    between Americans and Europeans, and to support European and Eurasian
    civil societies, human rights activists, and independent media? What do
    you need from Washington-based U.S. officials on this?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize strengthening understanding
    between the people of the U.S. and of the region. I feel strongly about
    this, given my own experience on an exchange to the region through the
    American Council of Young Political Leaders many years ago and from my
    service as a volunteer trainer for an IRI program in Ukraine.
        I want to do more to help the American public understand the value
    of such engagement with citizens from the region through greater
    outreach. Similarly, I think we can do more to tell our story to the
    people of the region. Both of these efforts can be carried out through
    people-to-people exchanges. For example, I hope to better galvanize the
    East European diaspora in the United States to convey these message of
    friendship and partnership. I am aware that many of USAID's programs in
    the region already work to forge and strengthen these ties, but if
    confirmed, I will work to think about how we can increase those
    efforts. As part of that process, I will look for input and ideas from
    my colleagues in both the executive and legislative branches in
    Washington. I also look forward to working with you on implementing the
    provisions of the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions
    Act that you authored earlier this year that was signed into law, and
    appreciate your leadership on these issues.
    Diversity:

        Question 6.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups at
    USAID?

        Answer. The staff in the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia will be the
    most important part of our success. In order to achieve our shared
    goals, the Bureau must have a supportive and welcoming environment for
    all staff. As someone who hopes to lead the Bureau, I recognize that
    leadership and support from the top is essential to creating this type
    of work environment. Administrator Green has made it clear that USAID
    is ``committed to a culture of inclusion, integrity, dignity, and
    respect.'' I share the Administrator's vision for a workplace that
    supports diversity and inclusion. I also look forward to ensuring all
    staff members in the Bureau have opportunities to grow professionally,
    develop skills, and benefit from training and capacity-building
    opportunities.
        If confirmed, I will be interacting with all the staff members in
    the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia and will keep an open door policy. I
    plan to host two ``brown bag'' lunches each week, inviting every member
    of the staff of the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia, and inviting only 8
    staff at a time, until I have had a chance to meet every member of the
    Bureau. These meetings will be voluntary, but will give me an
    opportunity to interact with every member of the Bureau in a small
    group setting, and will be an important part of my open door policy. I
    plan to continue these ``brown bag'' lunches on a bi-weekly basis after
    I have had a chance to meet with every staff member.

        Question 7.  What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors within the Bureau of Europe and Eurasia are fostering an
    environment that is diverse and inclusive?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will insist that all supervisors and
    managers are fostering an environment that is open and collaborative,
    in which all cases of harassment and discrimination are dealt with
    swiftly, and where every staff member feels respected and empowered. I
    will make sure that all supervisors and managers are able to access
    training and capacity-building opportunities so they can ensure that
    the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia is one that welcomes and supports
    staff from all backgrounds. If confirmed, I will enforce a zero
    tolerance for any form of harassment or discrimination.
    Conflicts of Interest

        Question 8.  Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the USAID Inspector General) any change in policy or U.S. actions
    that you suspect may be influenced by any of the President's business
    or financial interests, or the business or financial interests of any
    senior White House staff?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 9.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

        Answer. Yes.

        Question 10.  Do you or do any members of your immediate family
    have any financial interests in any country abroad?

        Answer. No.
    European Resilience

        Question 11.  The Russia sanctions bill that passed resoundingly in
    the Senate by 98 votes to 2 and informed the bill President Trump
    signed into law included a robust authorization for assistance to
    counter malign Russian Government influence across Europe and Eurasia.
    In contrast, the administration's FY 18 budget request called for
    significant cuts across Europe, at a time when Russia is aggressively
    attacking democratic institutions and exerting its influence across the
    continent. Congress will likely restore that funding through
    appropriations. What is your plan for disbursing U.S. assistance in
    Europe and Eurasia? What are your priorities?

        Answer. The scale of the challenges facing Europe and Eurasia is
    hard to overstate. A still weakened European economy, malign Russian
    influence, changing demographics, and mass migration present a
    development context that requires bold USAID engagement across the
    region.
        Although I was not involved in the formulation of the FY 2018
    budget request for the State Department and USAID, I understand that it
    supports the President's commitments to make smart investments to
    further the capacities of governments, civil society, and the private
    sector to implement solutions to their development challenges. I
    strongly believe that USAID needs to be as efficient and effective as
    it can with its budget, regardless of the level of funding. Moreover, I
    plan to ensure that our program mechanisms are flexible enough to
    respond to emerging situations in a timely manner.
        I look forward to working with you as we establish shared
    priorities for the region, and am thankful for your leadership on
    countering Russian malign influence. I believe that fighting the
    scourge of corruption, promoting greater regional economic and energy
    independence, and supporting democratic governance will be key
    priorities for our work in the region going forward and for countering
    Russian influence.
    Legacy Funds
              The U.S. established a series of ten enterprise funds across
            Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, to
            ``jump-start'' capitalism in the former communist countries.
            They experienced varying degrees of financial success (in that
            some ended with considerable more in their investment funds
            than they started with) and in most cases these proceeds were
            turned into legacy foundations to provide grants to civil
            society actors across the region. There is reportedly more than
            $1 billion currently in the combined endowments of these legacy
            foundations, generating $50-75 million a year for expenditures
            in grants.

        Question 12.  With the resurgence of malign Russian influence in
    the region, should the boards of directors of these respective
    foundations be obliged to consider directing some or all of their
    grant-making towards projects and programs that address this urgent
    threat?

        Answer. I understand that the Legacy Foundations were designed to
    operate with a great deal of autonomy with the direction of an
    independent Board of Directors, and that they work to promote private
    sector development and policies and practices conducive thereto in
    their host countries. That said, I'm also aware that the U.S.
    Government has a permanent non-voting liaison to all the boards, a
    position often filled by the U.S. Ambassador but sometimes by USAID,
    which maintains a direct line of communication between the U.S.
    Government and the Legacy Foundations.
        If confirmed, I also look forward to learning more about USAID's
    relationship with the Legacy Foundations in the region and to exploring
    avenues, if any, to guide their future investments.

        Question 13.  How do you intend to engage with these boards in
    order to persuade them to direct funding towards this end?

        Answer. I understand that the Legacy Foundations were designed to
    operate with a great deal of autonomy with, and under the direction of
    an independent Board of Directors. If confirmed, I look forward to
    learning more about our engagement with the Legacy Foundations and to
    exploring avenues, if any, to guide their future investments.

        Question 14.  The original USAID grants creating these Enterprise
    Funds (EFs) called for evaluations at mid-point and end point, but
    these evaluations apparently did not take place. So, as Congress
    considers proposals to create new Enterprise funds in other countries/
    region, we have no official assessment of these earlier cases. I
    understand that USAID did conduct an overall evaluation of these
    enterprise funds in the Europe and Eurasia region just last year. Do
    you commit to share the findings of that evaluation with the committee
    upon your confirmation?

        Answer. While I have not read the report, I understand that USAID
    did recently commission its first ever external evaluation of the
    Europe and Eurasia Enterprise Funds and Legacy Foundation, from the
    launching of the first Funds in Poland and Hungary in 1990, through the
    Legacy Foundations' current private sector development work as the U.S.
    Government's enduring assistance legacy across Central and Eastern
    Europe.
        My understanding is that the evaluation final report is nearing
    completion. Per USAID's evaluation policy, once finalized, the
    evaluation report will be made publicly available via the Agency's
    Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) website for the sake of
    accountability and the use of evaluation findings by all interested
    stakeholders. I will also ensure the committee receives a briefing on
    the report.
    Democratic Backsliding
        Question 15.  Hungary and Poland are both engaged in democratic
    backsliding that threatens their judicial independence, press freedom,
    and the functioning of their civil societies. Nevertheless, U.S.
    assistance has been redirected away from Central Europe in recent years
    as these countries have integrated into the E.U. What scope do you see
    for regional programs and other efforts to bolster democratic
    institutions in such places?

        Answer. I agree that there are significant challenges to democratic
    institutions in Poland and Hungary. Support for democratic institutions
    in those countries could potentially be addressed through the framework
    of regional programs and in a targeted manner. If confirmed, I would
    work closely with the Department of State and would consult with
    Congress on determining appropriate levels of engagement for supporting
    democratic institutions in Central and Eastern Europe.
    Energy Diversification:
        Question 16.  With the Russian Government continuing to exert
    pressure on European states through the energy sector, how will you
    utilize USAID assistance programming to boost resilience to such
    pressure and increase energy diversification on the continent?

        Answer. I recognize the need for programs that address critical
    areas such as energy security Over-reliance on Russian sources of
    energy leaves many of our partners in the region vulnerable to Russia's
    malign influences. I understand that USAID entered into partnerships
    with U.S. industry associations and manufacturers to bring U.S.
    expertise, technology, and best practices in electricity, gas,
    cybersecurity, and critical infrastructure to the region. Also, through
    a combination of regional and bilateral programs, USAID continues to
    supports countries in the region with developing regional gas and
    electricity markets that are integrated with the European Union,
    leading to improved energy security through (1) diversification of
    market suppliers; and (2) increased energy sector investments,
    resulting from transparent and stable legal and regulatory frameworks.
        If confirmed, I look forward to exploring these partnerships and
    programs in greater depth and consulting with Congress on how we can
    best support energy security in the region.
    Discrimination/Xenophobia

        Question 17.  With increased incidents of hate crimes in Europe,
    concrete initiatives addressing racism, discrimination, and xenophobia
    are critical for the safety of our diplomats. I have annually supported
    funds to address anti-Semitism in Europe. More broadly, how will you
    work to direct funds in Europe to counter racism and xenophobia? How do
    you plan to include LGBT issues in USAID assistance? Do you see issues
    of tolerance and non-discrimination as relevant to stability in Europe
    and Eurasia?

        Answer. Tolerance and non-discrimination are important to
    maintaining stability in the region, and I applaud your leadership on
    this issue. I am deeply concerned about the rise of extremist groups
    and those who are willing to use violence to promote their agendas. I
    understand that currently USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives'
    programming in Ukraine promotes an inclusive civic identity and has
    also worked to promote human rights in Macedonia. If confirmed, I would
    welcome the opportunity to explore new avenues to address these
    pressing issues.
    Corruption/Rule of Law

        Question 18.  Russia continues to use extensive corruption networks
    to influence political actors in vulnerable parts of Europe, as well as
    to deny its own citizens the transparent, accountable government they
    deserve. How will you leverage USAID resources, in concert with State
    and DoJ partners, to address corruption and boost rule of law in Europe
    and Eurasia?

        Answer. Corruption, often defined as the abuse of entrusted power
    for private gain, is indeed a major and growing problem threatening the
    stability, prosperity and security of Europe and Eurasia. In many ways,
    corruption can also be conceived of as the manifestation of poor
    governance and inadequate rule of law. As a result, sound efforts of
    combat corruption need to work to strengthen democratic governance and
    the rule of law.
        USAID programs can work to deter, detect, and combat corruption
    through increasing transparency and openness in the public sphere;
    support watch-dog civic organizations; support investigative
    journalists; promote open government and e-governance systems; support
    special anti-corruption institutions and processes; and strengthen
    judicial independence and capacity, among other areas.
        In coordination with State and DOJ partners, USAID's anti-
    corruption efforts include working with government partners to enhance
    their capacity to reduce corruption by increasing the transparency and
    accountability of government institutions. For example:

       With USAID assistance, eight Europe and Eurasia countries
            are active in the Open Government Partnership (OGP) and have
            committed to make their governments more transparent, though
            the extent and depth of this involvement varies from country to
            country. In fact, Georgia is currently leading the OGP.
       The Organized Crime and Corruption Network--a USAID-
            supported collective of investigative journalists who expose
            corruption--partnered in the release of the ``Panama Papers,''
            the Azerbaijan Laundromat, and the recent ``Paradise Papers.''
            This project sheds light on the illicit financial networks used
            by autocratic regimes. These illicit networks also divert
            significant resources from the Europe and Eurasia economies,
            markets and government budgets.

        If confirmed, I anti-corruption efforts will remain a major
    priority and I will work to build on the progress that has been made,
    while also exploring new ways to support the rule of law, good
    governance practices, and strong democratic institutions.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
              to Hon. Brock D. Bierman by Senator Robert Menendez

        Question 1.  Will you advocate internally for an end to the Hiring
    Freeze at USAID?

        Answer. USAID and the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia cannot further
    the Administrator's goal of ending the need for foreign assistance
    without a highly trained and capable workforce. If confirmed, I will
    work to meet the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia's staffing requirements,
    and to provide all staff with training and capacity-building
    opportunities. I also commit to working with the Administrator to fill
    all key positions in the Bureau.

        Question 2.  How do you plan to address the effects of Sec.
    Tillerson's hiring freeze on Foreign Service officers who would
    ostensibly serve under the auspices of your bureau?

        Answer. Given the current constraints on hiring new Foreign Service
    Officers, I believe strategic workforce-planning is critically
    important to ensuring the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia can deliver on
    its mission. If confirmed, I look forward to being a part of the
    Agency's strategic workforce-planning decisions, and to advocate for
    the staffing needs of the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia. I will also
    work to make sure the Bureau's Foreign Service Officers receive the
    training and capacity-building opportunities they need to be
    successful.

        Question 3.  Following the fall of the Berlin Wall, USAID
    established so-called Enterprise Funds to leverage private sector
    investment into regions previously in the Soviet sphere of influence.
    From 2000-2010 nine so-called legacy foundations were established in
    East Europe and Eurasia to build on these modes, which essentially made
    equity investments in small and medium sized firms in those regions.
    These were largely, although perhaps not altogether, successful and
    profitable, with earned funds being returned to the U.S. Treasury or
    establishing endowments. As I'm sure you're aware, certain committees
    in Congress have a hold on the disposition to the Treasury of the
    Russia Enterprise Fund, which currently totals about $150 million.

       Do you know why these funds are being held?

        Answer. I understand that in accordance with the terms of the U.S.
    Russia-Investment Fund's (TUSRIF) grant agreement, following TUSRIF's
    active investment phase, the liquidation proceeds can only be
    distributed to 1) a non-profit entity or entities for the purpose of
    providing assistance for private sector development in Russia, 2) the
    United States Treasury, or 3) a combination of 1 and 2 above. In
    February 2007, USAID notified Congress of a plan for the distribution
    of TUSRIF's assets which stipulated that TUSRIF would return one-half
    of the liquidation proceeds,million to the U.S. Treasury and that
    TUSRIF would use the other half to establish the U.S.-Russia Foundation
    for Economic Advancement and the Rule of Law (USRF).
        A hold was placed on the Congressional notification for the portion
    of the funds to be returned to the U.S. Treasury, and since that time
    USAID and its congressional oversight and appropriations committees
    have not been able to agree on a path forward for the funds that remain
    in TUSRIF--approximately $147 million.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with Members of the Senate
    Foreign Relations Committee, and other committees of jurisdiction to
    bring this issue to a resolution.

        Question 4.  As you are also probably aware, in the Countering
    America's Adversaries through Sanctions Act that Congress passed almost
    unanimously this year, we called for the establishment of a fund to
    support efforts to counter malign Russian influence, disinformation
    campaigns and propaganda. Do you believe that these frozen enterprise
    funds could be put to good use building democratic institutions that
    would help build resiliency in Eastern European and Eurasian countries
    against Russian disinformation and interference?

        Answer. I share your commitment to building democratic institutions
    in Europe and Eurasia, as democratic institutions are a critical to
    counter Russian malign influence. I appreciate your leadership on this
    issue and look forward to working with you on implementing this new
    law. Strong democratic, market-based economies serve as bulwarks
    against the expansion of Russian malign influence in Europe and
    Eurasia. While I am aware that approximately $147 million of funding
    remains in the U.S.-Russia Investment Fund (TUSRIF), I have not been
    fully briefed on the specifics of how those funds may be used. If
    confirmed, I commit to working with all stakeholders, including USAID's
    congressional oversight and appropriations committees, to resolve the
    impasse over the TUSRIF funds and build resiliency to Russian malign
    influence in Europe and Eurasia through strong democratic institutions.

        Question 5.  If so, what is your plan to ensure the release of
    these funds?

        Answer. As mentioned above, the objective of the proceeds is to
    provide assistance for private sector development. If confirmed, I
    commit to working with all stakeholders, including USAID's
    congressional oversight and appropriations committees, to resolve the
    impasse over the TUSRIF funds and build resiliency to Russian malign
    influence in Europe and Eurasia through strong democratic institutions.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
               to Hon. Brock D. Bierman by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

        Question 1.  Mr. Bierman, as you may know, I have introduced
    legislation with Senator Wicker to authorize the establishment of an
    enterprise fund in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which lags the farthest
    behind the rest of Europe when compared to other economies in the
    Western Balkans. Last year, USAID produced an assessment of my proposal
    that found an enterprise fund in Bosnia would effectively support U.S.
    foreign policy objectives there. Have you read the assessment, and do
    you agree that an enterprise fund in Bosnia would fill a gap in the
    financing opportunities available to small business in Bosnia?

        Answer. Yes, I have been briefed on that assessment and if
    confirmed, I commit to studying this issue further and consulting with
    you.
        Bosnia clearly faces significant economic challenges and is one of
    the most fragile countries in the region. The 2016 internal USAID
    assessment found that an investment fund could effectively support U.S.
    foreign policy objectives in Bosnia. Continued economic growth
    assistance from USAID to support economic reforms and improve the
    enabling environment for Bosnian businesses and entrepreneurs will be
    critical to the success of such a fund. A Bosnia enterprise fund would
    benefit from the larger existing macroeconomic and trade-oriented
    support provided by the World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction
    and Development and other multilateral financial institutions.

        Question 2.  Mr. Bierman, the key to addressing many challenges in
    the Western Balkans remains EU enlargement and integration. That said,
    each of these countries still has a considerable distance to travel
    before they might join the EU. How can the U.S. continue to encourage
    EU accession in the Western Balkans?

        Answer. EU accession represents a defining objective for USAID-
    assisted countries in the Western Balkans. As I mentioned during my
    nomination hearing, 11 USAID-assisted countries are now members of the
    EU. This is not only a testimony to USAID's efforts and legacy, but
    also to the vision and intent of Congress. These 11 countries have
    increased their U.S. imports from only $2 billion in 1995 to more than
    $10 billion annually in 2015, and as development peers, they have
    contributed over $1.4 billion to development in 2014, up from less than
    $200 million in 2002. Clearly, the goal of EU accession is not only
    central to addressing current challenges in the Western Balkans, but is
    very much in America's economic and national security interest.
        USAID programs promote democratic consolidation and economic growth
    necessary to bolster our partner countries' efforts to progress toward
    EU accession. Work in Serbia and Macedonia is on the vanguard of this
    effort, but we will also continue to drive forward reform and address
    any backsliding in Bosnia and Kosovo.
        If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, the EU, and our
    partners in the region to sharpen the focus of our assistance efforts
    and to do what we can to accelerate EU accession across the Western
    Balkans.

        Question 3.  Mr. Bierman, a large proportion of USAID funding goes
    to Ukraine. I believe the U.S. must continue to resolutely support the
    democratic aspirations of the Ukrainian people, including through
    assistance to the Ukrainian Government, civil society, and other actors
    that are integral to the success of that country. In particular, the
    U.S. must encourage political leaders in Ukraine to continue with
    critical reforms to their judiciary, in part to ensure that the
    corruption that has plagued prior governments is rooted out. How do you
    assess Ukraine's anti-corruption efforts up to this point, and if
    confirmed, will you continue to emphasize the importance of judicial
    reform and anti-corruption efforts to Ukrainian political leaders?

        Answer. Corruption is a central problem in Ukraine and across the
    region, and I appreciate all the efforts this committee has made to
    tackle corruption around the world.
        Anti-corruption progress has been made in targeted areas in
    Ukraine, including in the successful implementation of Prozorro, a
    full-service electronic public procurement system which has saved an
    estimated $1.27 billion since its launch in February 2015. However,
    significant challenges remain.
        I believe that corruption is a manifestation of governance
    problems, and as a result, efforts to combat corruption need to be
    based on efforts to improve democratic governance. If confirmed, I will
    continue to emphasize the importance of judicial reform and anti-
    corruption efforts in Ukraine and across the broader region, including
    through embedding good governance into our economic growth and social
    sector programming.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
             to Kenneth Braithwairte by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Having had the opportunity to serve in the United States
    Navy for over 30 years, I have taken part both as a junior officer and
    again as a senior officer (Rear Admiral) in numerous humanitarian
    actions on behalf of Our Nation. During the Balkans Crisis, I was
    awarded the Department of Defense Humanitarian Service Medal for my
    actions in support of Kosovo Refugees. I was assigned as one of the
    liaison officers at the temporary resettlement camp at Fort Dix, New
    Jersey. In this role I interacted directly with the refugees and was
    able to convey the aspects of democracy and freedoms that we in our
    country enjoy. I know those that we supported had a favorable
    impression of the United States and sought to later immigrate to the
    US. I was later as a Navy Captain (O-6) deployed to the western Sahara
    in Senegal to work with Senegalese tribes who had limited access to
    medical care. I was part of a humanitarian effort directed towards
    establishing temporary primary care missions in support of US efforts
    to extend democracies into these regions. This was in alignment with
    our national effort to ensure these peoples could understand and
    appreciate the freedoms our country promotes in contrast to the efforts
    of AL Qaeda and other Islamic Terrorist Groups attempting to influence
    them. We were successful in that our enemies were unable to solicit or
    recruit from the regions where we were involved. Finally, also as a
    Navy Captain, I was deployed to Pakistan in 2005-2006 to take a direct
    leadership role in Our Nations efforts to respond to the devastating
    earthquake affecting thousands of Pakistanis on the eve of their winter
    season. Our efforts were directed to ensure those impacted knew of our
    compassion but also the manner in which our democratic principles
    directed our actions. Here again we wanted to ensure that those we
    interacted with understood and appreciated our freedoms in contrast
    with those from radical Islamic groups that were also operating in
    these regions. As the lead for all Strategic Communications, our direct
    efforts led to a Gallup Poll shift in the perception of US actions
    among Pakistanis of nearly 50 points, from a low upon arrival of 23
    percent favorable to 79 percent favorable upon conclusion of our
    mission. I am very proud of all my teams direct efforts which in turn
    led to my second award of the Department of Defense Humanitarian
    Service Medal.

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

        Answer. Norway has a strong record on human rights and is a good
    partner for the United States in promoting human rights around the
    world. Norway is one of the world's most generous providers of
    development aid, spending more than one percent of its GDP per year on
    assistance. A portion of these funds promotes human rights and
    democracy. Norway is also a strong NATO Ally that is dedicated to
    upholding the values upon which the Alliance was founded. As with every
    country, Norway has some incidence of societal problems such as
    violence against women and children. NGOs have also reported incidents
    of anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant speech and sentiment in Norway. If
    confirmed, I will encourage Norway to continue protecting human rights
    at home and abroad. I will also regularly engage with representatives
    from government, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations
    to stress the importance of tolerance and diversity and to share best
    practices and new ideas for promoting human rights.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Norway advancing
    human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Human rights are widely respected in Norway and its legal
    framework for protecting human rights meets international standards, so
    any obstacles to addressing human rights issues must be viewed in this
    context. Civil society and democratic institutions are both strong in
    Norway. To the extent that Norway exhibits human rights problems, they
    are largely societal and are adequately addressed by the country's
    judicial system, government institutions, and non-governmental
    organizations. If confirmed, I will work with those institutions and
    organizations to exchange experiences and best practices to further our
    shared values.

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

        Answer. Yes, I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Norway.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Norway to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by Norway?

        Answer. Norway has a strong human rights record and generally
    independent and impartial judiciary. There are no reports of political
    prisoners or detainees, or politically motivated prosecutions, in the
    country. If confirmed, I will call out any future cases of this kind if
    they occur, and work with the Norwegian Government to encourage their
    resolution in accordance with Norwegian and international law and
    commitments.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that Embassy Oslo staff have
    access to appropriate training on Leahy Law requirements. I will also
    ensure Embassy Oslo thoroughly vets individuals and units it nominates
    to participate in U.S.-funded security assistance activities.

        Question 7. Will you engage with the people of Norway on matters of
    human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral
    mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will make matters of human rights, civil
    rights, and governance part of Embassy Oslo's regular public outreach.
    I believe these are excellent areas for people-to-people engagements
    where our citizens can exchange views, experiences and best practices.
    Given Norway's excellent record on these issues, I will also look for
    opportunities where we can jointly cooperate to provide expertise to
    third countries.

        Question 8. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your
    staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in
    the State Department?

        Answer. I appreciate the importance of fostering diverse and
    inclusive teams. Through my military career and experience in business,
    I have seen the value of diversity in leadership positions. In keeping
    with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, if confirmed I
    will develop an inclusive work environment at Embassy Oslo that
    encourages different perspectives.

        Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors at
    the Embassy foster an environment that is diverse and inclusive,
    including in terms of gender, ethnicity, and other characteristics?

        Answer. I will ensure that all supervisors receive regular formal
    training and guidance on EEO principles, diversity, and inclusion. In
    addition to leading by example, I will monitor the supervisors at the
    Embassy to ensure they are fostering an environment that is diverse and
    inclusive.

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

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

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

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

        Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Norway?

        Answer. No.

        Question 13. Have there been any material changes to your financial
    assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE financial
    disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please list and
    explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. I know of no significant change in my financial affairs
    since I filed my report. I am committed to ensuring that my official
    actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain
    vigilant with regards to my ethics obligations.

        Question 14. Russia Sanctions: Unity with European partners on
    Russia sanctions is critical to their success. What is your diplomatic
    plan to build support within Norway for stronger sanctions on Russia?

        Answer. Although Norway is not a member of the EU, it joined the
    United States and the EU in imposing economic sanctions on Russia in
    2014 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine and occupation and
    attempted annexation of Crimea. It also suspended military-to-military
    cooperation with Russia. If confirmed, I will continue to build support
    within Norway for stronger sanctions on Russia by communicating the
    importance of Russia sanctions to leaders across the Norwegian
    Government, and working with Norway to find ways to minimize the impact
    of sanctions on the Norwegian economy.

        Question 15. Russian Malign Influence: How will you seek to boost
    resilience to Russian meddling within Norwegian institutions and civil
    society? What assistance priorities will you push with Norwegian
    counterparts to shore up resilience elsewhere in Europe?

        Answer. Russia has undertaken a whole-of-government campaign aimed
    at undermining democratic and free-market processes and core Western
    institutions. In Norway's September 11 parliamentary elections, local
    authorities made a last-minute decision to count all ballots by hand
    after security experts raised the possibility of hacking attacks
    against the computerized ballot scanning system used in some
    localities. Norway is more resilient to Russian misinformation due to
    their extremely high rate of news readership--79 percent of the
    population ages 9-79 reads a physical or online newspaper daily. If
    confirmed, I will stand firmly with Norway and the rest of our NATO
    Allies in countering Russia's malign influence. I will encourage Norway
    to join us in cooperating with our NATO Allies to counter Russia's
    malign influence through our Centers of Excellence. I will work with
    the government and civil society to raise awareness of this issue and
    to increase institutional and public resiliency to malign influence
    campaigns. I will also encourage our Norwegian counterparts to share
    their expertise with our other partners and focus on continuing to
    build their own resilience and the resilience of others to such
    threats.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                to Carlos Trujillo by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. Human rights and democracy are two areas that are extremely
    important to me. One area of human rights work I have focused on is
    combatting human trafficking. As an elected representative in the state
    of Florida, in 2015, I sponsored an appropriations act that provided
    funding for the creation of 20 to 30 beds for child victims of human
    trafficking. The act was passed and signed into law during the 2015
    Florida Legislative Session. The act created additional separate
    housing for child victims of human trafficking.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to promoting diversity and inclusion, and to
    upholding equal employment opportunity principles. If confirmed, I will
    remain committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive team in the U.S.
    Permanent Mission to the Organization of American States, and make this
    a top priority throughout my tenure. I firmly believe, as articulated
    by the Secretary of State and the Deputy Secretary of State, that U.S.
    diplomacy is greatly served and strengthened by a Department of State
    that reflects America and the richness in diversity that characterizes
    our great country. If confirmed, I look forward to maintaining a robust
    and collaborative dialogue with Congress in advancing this important
    shared objective.

        Question 3.  Have there have been any material changes to your
    financial assets, income, or any other information requested by the OGE
    financial disclosure form since the date you signed it? If so, please
    list and explain below, and whether you have raised them with OGE.

        Answer. There have been no material changes that would bear on my
    ethics obligations. I am committed to ensuring that my official actions
    will not give rise to a conflict of interest and will remain vigilant
    with regards to my ethics obligations.

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

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

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

        Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws,
    regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through
    appropriate channels.
    OAS Revitalization and Reform Act of 2013

        Question 6.  What is your assessment of the State Department's
    efforts to advance the policy directives included in the OAS
    Revitalization and Reform Act of 2013 (P.L. 113-41), specifically the
    provisions on results-based budgeting, the streamlining of mandates,
    transparent and merit-based personnel practices, and the revision of
    member quotas related to the organization's budget?

       If confirmed, do you commit to taking all necessary steps to
            advance the policy directives in P.L. 113-41?
       If confirmed, do you commit to providing the Senate Foreign
            Relations Committee with routine briefings on your efforts to
            advance the policy directives in P.L. 113-41?

        Answer. I believe it is critical that we continue to press for OAS
    reform consistent with the ``OAS Revitalization and Reform Act of
    2013'' (P.L. 113-41) to build a stronger, more effective institution
    and help it reach its full potential.
        I understand the U.S. Permanent Mission has made significant
    strides, working with OAS leadership and other member states, to put
    the OAS on a firmer financial footing and restore its critical
    leadership role in the region. It remains vital, however, that we
    continue to press for additional steps to build on the progress
    achieved to date and increase the transparency, efficiency, and
    effectiveness of the organization. If confirmed, I will remain
    committed to this critical objective.
        Our focus should be to strengthen the core competencies of the
    institution as outlined in the ``OAS Revitalization and Reform Act''
    (P.L. 11341), and also focus on further assessing and pressing on ways
    to strengthen budgetary and management reforms, reducing mandates, and
    bolster oversight, transparency and accountability mechanisms on the
    allocation and use of scarce resources to ensure they are utilized
    effectively in support the organization's most vital functions.
        It is also important this be a shared priority for each and every
    member state as it is in our core collective interest to ensure that a
    strong OAS remains focused on its core pillars and the purposes and
    principles upon which it was founded and clear of purpose. We must all
    consider the value each of our countries gets out of the organization
    and share the burden of ensuring the OAS' long-term financial
    sustainability in a way the reflects that.
        OAS member states passed a resolution at the 2017 General Assembly
    in Canc#n, Mexico, mandating a reduction of the U.S. contribution to
    below 50 percent. If confirmed, I will work for a more equitable
    distribution of quota assessments among member states to ensure that
    each of them has the necessary fiscal buy-in to guarantee the
    organization's financial sustainability.
        If confirmed, I will also remain committed to briefing this
    committee on our efforts and also maintaining collaborative engagement
    to advance this important and shared objective.

        Question 7.  In your discussion with Senator Ben Cardin, Ranking
    Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you spoke in support
    of taking steps to expand opportunities for engagement by Members of
    Congress at the OAS. If confirmed, do you commit to taking steps to
    strengthen the role of elected national legislators at the OAS?

       If confirmed, do you commit to providing the Senate Foreign
            Relations Committee with updates on your efforts to strengthen
            the role of elected national legislators at the OAS?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will look forward to working with the
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee in advancing this important
    objective. I believe the OAS can play an important role in bolstering
    dialogue and cooperation between the region's legislatures. This kind
    of initiative can have enormous value, in particular in helping
    strengthen democratic institutions and advancing our region's shared
    commitment to democracy and to the separation of powers, consistent
    with the principles articulated in the Inter-American Democratic
    Charter.
        Strengthening engagement between the U.S. Congress and regional
    counterparts can also greatly enhance efforts to work jointly in
    promoting and advancing shared policy goals, values and objectives to
    the benefit of the citizens of the Americas. I understand the OAS
    Secretariat for Strengthening Democracy is working to enhance the role
    of the OAS in this regard and has organized various gatherings of
    regional legislators. I welcome the opportunity to work collaboratively
    with this committee on ways to build on the OAS' achievements to date
    and bolster its efforts in this important area.

        Question 8.  What steps will you take to ensure the continued
    independence of the OAS Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
    (IACHR)?

       What steps will you take to ensure that the OAS IACHR has
            sufficient resources to successfully advance its mission to
            defend human rights in the hemisphere, specifically at a point
            in time when the Trump administration is proposing drastic cuts
            to the U.S. foreign assistance budget?
       The OAS IACHR has taken incipient steps to review and investigate
            the July 2012 death of Cuban political activist Oswaldo Paya.
            If confirmed, do you commit to working with the IACHR to ensure
            a thorough investigation of Mr. Paya's death?
       In the aftermath of the September 2014 forced disappearance of 43
            students in Iguala in the State of Guerrero in Mexico, the OAS
            IACHR established an Independent Group of International Experts
            (GIEI) to review the official investigation of the incident.
            What is your assessment of the GIEI's work?
       Following completion of the GIEI's mandate, the Government of
            Mexico agreed to establish a follow on mechanism with the OAS-
            IACHR to implement the GIEI's recommendations. If confirmed, do
            you commit to working with the OAS Secretariat, the IACHR, and
            the Government of Mexico to ensure successful implementation of
            the GIEI's recommendations for the investigation into the
            September 2014 incident in Iguala, Mexico?
       If confirmed, do you commit to providing the Senate Foreign
            Relations Committee with updates on your efforts to ensure the
            implementation of the GIEI and the success of the OAS follow on
            mechanism?

        Answer. The United States has great respect for the role the Inter-
    American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) plays in addressing human
    rights in the hemisphere, including delicate human rights issues in the
    United States, and is its biggest supporter, both politically and
    financially. The Commission and the Inter-American Court of Human
    Rights look at some of the most delicate human rights issues in
    countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Ecuador. In some countries,
    especially those with broken legal systems, it is the only avenue to
    address human rights violations. As an autonomous organ designed to
    promote and protect human rights in the Americas, the IACHR is a useful
    tool for holding states like Venezuela and Cuba accountable. Through
    our political and financial support, the United States supports the
    independent work of the Commission without infringing upon its direct
    engagement with a member state.
        Recognizing the vital role the Commission and Court play in
    protecting and promoting human rights in the hemisphere and the need
    for both organs to have full independence in exercising their
    authorities, OAS member states decided at the 2017 General Assembly to
    increase the regular budgets of both institutions by a third over the
    next three years (2018-2020). If confirmed, I will continue to advocate
    for member states to commit sufficient resources to the Commission
    through the OAS Regular Fund as well as contribute voluntary funds so
    that the IACHR has a diverse and sustainable funding base.
        I believe it is imperative that human rights defenders the world
    over, including the IACHR, remain engaged in reviewing and
    investigating the death of Cuban political dissident Oswaldo Paya, and
    that the Cuban Government be held accountable and responsible for its
    egregious human rights violations and systematic repression of the
    fundamental rights of the people of Cuba. If confirmed, I will remain
    committed to advocating for and defending the right of the Cuban people
    to democracy and respect for human rights, consistent with the
    principles articulated in the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and
    ensuring that the IACHR and the inter-American human rights system
    remain fully engaged in addressing the gross and consistent violation
    of human rights of the people of Cuba under the current dictatorship.
        The September 2014 disappearance of the students in Iguala is a
    tragedy, and the United States actively encourages Mexican authorities
    to continue to thoroughly investigate and prosecute those responsible.
        I understand the Department has met with some of the Iguala
    victims' families as well as with all of the members of the
    Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts who worked under the
    auspices of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to assist the
    Government of Mexico with its investigation.
        I also understand the Department is actively following the
    implementation of the follow-up mechanism, agreed to by the Mexican
    Government, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and families
    of the victims. This mechanism, funded by Mexico, is intended to follow
    up on the experts' recommendations and ensuring protective measures for
    the victims and their families will remain in place. The Government of
    Mexico recently agreed to a one-year extension of the follow-up
    mechanism and the next visit of the mechanism is expected to take place
    February 2018. Mexico's Attorney General's Office remains in regular
    touch with the victims' families. Additionally, Mexican President Pena
    Nieto signed a new law on forced disappearances November 16.
        If confirmed, I look forward to maintaining an open dialogue with
    the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the implementation of
    the GIEI and the OAS follow-on mechanism.
        Also, if confirmed, I will remain firmly committed to work with
    like-minded member states to push back against those states that seek
    to undermine the IACHR and work to preserve its critical role in the
    promotion and defense of human rights in our region.
    Honduras
        Question 9.  What is your assessment of the OAS Support Mission
    Against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (MACCIH)?

       If confirmed, do you commit to working with the OAS Secretariat and
            the Government of Honduras to ensure that the MACCIH remains
            independent in its work and has all of the necessary resources
            needed to combat corruption and impunity in Honduras?
       If confirmed, do you commit to providing the Senate Foreign
            Relations Committee with updates on your efforts to ensure the
            success of the MACCIH?
       The OAS currently has an election observation mission (EOM) in
            Honduras. What is your assessment of the OAS EOM in Honduras?
       The OAS EOM in Honduras has expressed concerns about delays in the
            tabulation process for the Honduran presidential election. Do
            you agree with these concerns?

        Answer. The OAS Mission Against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras
    (MACCIH) represents a wide-ranging approach to reforming Honduras'
    anti-corruption institutions, from the Prosecutors' Offices to customs
    to electoral financing, and aims to drive broad reforms to the Honduran
    judicial system. MACCIH's most notable success to date is helping draft
    and pass electoral finance reform legislation through the Honduran
    Congress in time to impact the 2017 presidential elections. The United
    States has contributed $8 million to establish a secure foundation for
    advancing the work of MACCIH. The mission will serve an important role
    in a comprehensive, long-term effort to tackle corruption networks and
    improve the rule of law in Honduras.
        It is imperative that we continue to urge progress on anti-
    corruption efforts with the Honduran Government in collaboration with
    its partners and other OAS member and observer states, to ensure MACCIH
    has the resources and independence necessary to achieve its mission.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the OAS to ensure MACCIH has
    the capacity and support to achieve its objectives and is implemented
    effectively and I will keep members of Congress apprised of our
    efforts.
        OAS electoral observation missions (EOMS) fulfill a critical
    function in our efforts to strengthen democratic institutions in the
    hemisphere. OAS EOMs enjoy a longstanding reputation for impartiality
    and technical competence, respected worldwide for stringent standards
    in accordance with the UN ``Principles for International Election
    Observation.'' It is imperative that all stakeholders in the Honduran
    elections cooperate fully with international observers--including the
    Organization of American States and the European Union--and that both
    the OAS and EU be allowed to carry out their critical role in ensuring
    an open and transparent process that enables public confidence and
    trust in the results of these elections.

        Question 10.  The OAS maintains a Mission to Support the Peace
    Process (MAPP) in Colombia that supports the implementation of
    Colombia's historic 2016 peace accord. If confirmed, do you commit to
    working to ensure that the MAPP has all of the necessary resources that
    it needs to help advance the consolidation of peace in Colombia?

       If confirmed, do you commit to providing the Senate Foreign
            Relations Committee with updates on your efforts to support the
            work of the MAPP?

        Answer. Since 2006, the United States has committed over $10
    million in contributions to the MAPP. The work of the OAS in Colombia
    remains vitally important given that the peace process is now in its
    implementation stage, with a support role being played by a UN Special
    Political Mission. Funding assistance--including through the OAS--will
    help Colombia secure post-conflict areas, address the needs of conflict
    victims, and promote licit rural economic opportunity to address the
    conflict's underlying drivers and build on the success of our prior
    assistance. Understanding that financing for the MAPP comes primarily
    from voluntary contributions, if confirmed, I will work to advocate for
    the necessary political and financial support MAPP requires from the
    international community in order to enable it to continue its critical
    work and I will keep Congress apprised of my efforts.
    Venezuela
        Question 11.  While OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro has made
    tremendous efforts to address Venezuela's current political, economic,
    and humanitarian crisis, OAS member states have not been able to
    achieve consensus about the current tragedy in Venezuela. If confirmed,
    what specific steps will you take to forge greater hemispheric
    consensus regarding the situation in Venezuela?

       If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to advance a
            political resolution of the current crisis in Venezuela?
       If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to address the
            current economic crisis in Venezuela?
       If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to address the
            current humanitarian crisis in Venezuela?

        Answer. With strong leadership from Secretary General Luis Almagro
    and a majority of like-minded member states, including the United
    States, the OAS has played a crucial role over the last 18 months in
    drawing increased international attention to the dire situation in
    Venezuela. After a series of high-profile Permanent Council sessions
    and declarations, Resolution 1078 of April 3 established that a rupture
    in Venezuela's democratic order had occurred, and set the stage for the
    region's foreign ministers to address the crisis.
        Although the OAS General Assembly in Cancun was unable to approve a
    resolution on Venezuela, the 20 votes in favor of action to address the
    crisis represented a significant statement from leaders representing
    over 90 percent of the population of our region. Since then,
    governments in the Lima Group built on the OAS' work to ramp up
    international pressure still further.
        Based upon the regional consensus originally developed within the
    OAS, the sanctions we and other partners have imposed on individuals
    and entities linked to the Maduro regime's repression and corruption
    have garnered strong support. It is critical that we continue to speak
    as a region--including through the OAS--regarding our concerns about
    the political, economic, and humanitarian crisis in Venezuela and
    maintain pressure on the Maduro regime for the restoration of democracy
    in Venezuela.
        If confirmed, I will continue to carry out our concerted efforts to
    stand up for democracy and human rights in our region, guided by the
    Inter-American Democratic Charter, that are central to the work of the
    OAS in securing for our citizens a hemisphere of liberty and
    prosperity. Our shared goal continues to be to promote the return to
    full respect for the rule of law and the full respect for political
    expression and participation in Venezuela, consistent with the terms of
    the Inter-American Democratic Charter, to which Venezuela remains a
    signatory.
        As President Trump has stated, a ``stable and peaceful Venezuela is
    in the best interest of the entire hemisphere, and America stands with
    all the people in our great hemisphere yearning to be free.'' The
    United States wants to see a peaceful, prosperous Venezuela that
    respects the rule of law and basic human rights like the freedoms of
    political expression and public assembly. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that the OAS continues to have a vital role to play in helping
    Venezuela find a path back to peace and prosperity.
    Migration
        Question 12.  As a Florida state legislator, you introduced
    legislation that would have increased criminal penalties for
    unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. What was the intent of such
    legislation?

        Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify the intent of this
    legislation. The intent of the bill was to codify certain sections of
    the federal illegal reentry statute into state law. Mainly, to increase
    criminal penalties for individuals who had previously exhausted all due
    process, were forcefully removed from the United States, illegally
    reenter and are convicted of a new felony.

        Question 13.  The Western Hemisphere current faces myriad
    migration-related challenges in the hemisphere--including migrants and
    refugees fleeing violence in Central America, the growing refugee
    crisis emanating from Venezuela, and the challenges of statelessness
    facing individuals of Haitian ancestry in the Dominican Republic. If
    confirmed, will you advocate that OAS member states impose criminal
    penalties on individuals engaged in irregular migration in the region
    or will you work to ensure sufficient humanitarian protections for
    vulnerable migrants in accordance with international standards?

        Answer. The OAS serves as a useful forum for generating attention
    on high-level cross-border and extra-continental migration issues which
    adversely impact the United States. If confirmed, I will continue to
    seek constructive engagement with OAS member states to address regional
    migration issues as well as counter unhelpful interventions by some OAS
    member states that view migration as way to divide the United States
    from the rest of the region.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                    toCarlos Trujillo by Senator Marco Rubio

        Question . Peru will host the 8th Summit of the Americas in 2018.
    If confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American States,
    you will play an important role in the coordination of the Summit. As
    Cuba doesn't meet the norms of the OAS Charter, do you believe that
    Cuba should participate at the Summit?

        Answer. By precedent, the host of the Summit of the Americas has
    exercised its prerogative to invite countries at its own discretion. In
    2015, Panama invited Cuba to participate, for the first time, in the
    Summit of the Americas held in Panama City.
        Peru, as host of the next Summit, has indicated it plans to invite
    all governments of the Americas to the 2018 Summit in Lima, Peru, to be
    held April 13-14. It has chosen ``Democratic Governance against
    Corruption'' as the theme for the Summit. Cuba has not made any public
    statements as to whether or not it will participate in the Summit. If
    confirmed, I will express strong U.S. concern over Cuba's invitation
    with the Government of Peru.
        I believe the Summit can allow the United States and its like-
    minded partners to call on Cuba to implement reforms consistent with
    the highest values of our hemisphere, such as our support for democracy
    and respect for human rights. As such, if confirmed, I will work with
    the White House and the State Department to ensure that, if Cuba is
    invited and decides to attend, it is held to the same standards as all
    participants in the Summit, and its failures in these areas are raised.

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                 to Lee McClenny by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. As Charge d'Affaires of our Embassy in Caracas since July
    2014, I led our government's efforts on the ground to defend human
    rights and democracy from the depredations of the corrupt and
    increasingly dictatorial Maduro regime. Using USAID and State
    Department democracy and governance and public diplomacy programs, we
    supported Venezuelan civil society and NGOs focused on civil rights,
    human rights, and press freedom through training, networking, and
    professionalization activities. We supported more than 20 human rights
    organizations. Embassy Caracas publicly and clearly backed civil
    society organizations working for equality of opportunity for
    marginalized Venezuelans, including for persons with disabilities and
    the LGBTI community.
        We have focused especially on fair elections to ensure Venezuelans
    have a voice in their government. We provided support to NGOs
    conducting election observation activities, and Embassy personnel
    monitored nationwide elections for the National Assembly and
    governorships to assess the degree of freeness and fairness of the
    registration, tabulation, and actual voting procedures. We have
    coordinated with the international community to speak with a unified
    voice on the importance of free and fair elections and support to
    democratic actors.
        We have also supported and engaged directly with both leadership
    and the rank-and-file of Venezuela's democratic opposition parties, as
    well as the opposition umbrella organization, MUD. This activity
    intensified as MUD officials increasingly faced arbitrary arrest and
    detention of its members. We have repeatedly, and publicly,
    demonstrated our support for the democratically- and legitimately-
    elected National Assembly, in the face of Maduro regime efforts to
    undercut its constitutional role, authorities, and prerogatives.
    Simultaneously, we have strictly rejected overtures by, and refused
    contact with, the illegitimate and unconstitutional Constituent
    Assembly, created by the Maduro regime solely to supplant the duly
    elected, opposition-controlled National Assembly.
        Many of these efforts have amounted, unfortunately, to a rear-guard
    action. In the face of the increasingly flagrant efforts of the Maduro
    regime to undermine the few remaining Venezuelan institutions not
    compliant to its wishes, Embassy Caracas' strong, public stance across
    the spectrum of human rights and democracy and governance issues marked
    it as a beacon for many Venezuelans. Numerous of my Venezuelan contacts
    assessed that the U.S. mission's leadership helped create critically
    important breathing room, and provided a vital measure of encouragement
    and inspiration for those many Venezuelans fighting to defend and
    preserve democracy in their nation.

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

        Answer. Corruption is the primary human rights issue in Paraguay
    and a clear drag on both social and economic development. If confirmed,
    I will strengthen the mandate of the Embassy's newly established Anti-
    Corruption and Transparency Working Group, which integrates anti-
    corruption, anti-impunity, and transparency efforts into nearly every
    Mission activity from public diplomacy to our interactions with the
    Government, political contacts, and the private sector. We must help
    Paraguay strengthen its public institutions and improve governance as a
    critical first step in reducing corruption and impunity.
        Child labor is pervasive, particularly for domestic labor and in
    the agriculture sector. The criadazgo system of using children from
    impoverished families to work as domestic laborers in richer households
    is prevalent and culturally accepted. No law now exists explicitly
    outlawing the practice, though a draft law has circulated
    unsuccessfully for some time. Only a strong legal framework coupled
    with government enforcement will change the situation, albeit slowly.
    If confirmed, I intend to maintain pressure on the Paraguayan
    legislature to make needed legal modifications, and I will urge the
    executive branch to enforce those laws and provide social support for
    victims. In the agricultural sector, the U.S. Embassy and Department of
    Labor have a dynamic working relationship with the Paraguayan Ministry
    of Labor to eliminate child- and forced-labor programs in the
    agricultural sector, including a $6 million project to prevent child
    labor in the sugar industry. If confirmed, I will reinforce and seek to
    augment these efforts. Our priority must be to help Paraguay protect
    its most valuable national asset--its youth.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Paraguay in
    advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

        Answer. Lack of enforcement of the rule of law, facilitated by a
    climate of impunity and a dysfunctional and often corrupt judiciary, is
    the principal obstacle for addressing nearly every human rights issue
    in Paraguay, including corruption and child labor. Critical to holding
    government authorities accountable for enforcing the law fairly and
    justly is a capable and engaged civil society, which is still nascent.
    Paraguay has not had a strong tradition of effectively incorporating
    civil society voices, opinions, and ideas into public policy and
    governance discussions. As such, one of the biggest challenges is
    empowering civil society organizations to participate in policy-making
    and implementation while encouraging government agencies to recognize
    them as a resource. The U.S. Government has an important role to play
    in training, supporting, and highlighting the important dividends that
    a strong civil society, as we have in the United States, could provide
    to the Paraguayan public.

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

        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with
    a broad spectrum of society among the Paraguayan public, including
    human rights activists, civil society, religious groups, and the
    organizations that represent them.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Paraguay to address cases of key political prisoners or persons
    otherwise unjustly targeted by Paraguay?

        Answer. While there are no reports of political prisoners or
    detainees in Paraguay, my Embassy team and I will actively engage with
    the Government of Paraguay should such issues arise. The Embassy team
    is closely following reports that public employees have filed
    complaints with a non-government public employee association for being
    harassed, dismissed, or transferred for their stance on the upcoming
    presidential primary. We strongly support the principle of democratic
    transition of power through free, fair, and credible elections. If
    confirmed, I would seek to ensure that all relevant stakeholders in
    this electoral cycle are able to play a supportive and collaborative
    role on the ground.

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

        Answer. Vetting of potential recipients of U.S. security assistance
    is vital in maintaining integrity of our assistance programs. Embassy
    Asuncion already has in place a robust and active Leahy vetting
    program, processing more than 900 requests per year. If confirmed, I
    will continue Post's prioritization of Leahy vetting and seek ways to
    further strengthen the program. If there is credible information
    implicating security force units or members in gross violations of
    human rights, we will take the necessary steps in accordance with the
    law and Department policy, including working to ensure the responsible
    parties do not participate in U.S.-funded training, and will assist
    their respective governments in taking effective measures to bring them
    to justice.

        Question 7. Will you engage with Paraguay on matters of human
    rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will engage with the Paraguayan authorities
    on matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of our
    bilateral mission.

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

       What steps will you take to ensure each of the supervisors at the
            Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse and
            inclusive?

        Answer. I am committed to equal employment opportunity principles.
    If confirmed, I will foster a diverse and inclusive team in the U.S.
    Mission in Paraguay. If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Mission in
    Paraguay continually strives to promote equal opportunity for our
    officers, including women and those from historically marginalized
    groups. In keeping with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on
    diversity, I will ensure all supervisors have access to and avail
    themselves of opportunities to receive regular formal training and
    regular guidance on EEO principles, diversity, and inclusion to
    sensitize them to these important issues and ensure they are helping to
    foster a work environment that is diverse and inclusive.

        Question 9. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 10.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 11. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Paraguay?

        Answer. No.

        Question 12. If confirmed, do you commit to taking all necessary
    steps to ensure that justice is upheld for the June 2015 murder of U.S.
    citizen Alex Villamayor?

        Answer. Since 2015, the U.S. Embassy in Asuncion has repeatedly
    urged the Government of Paraguay to do everything in its power to
    guarantee an efficient and transparent judicial process, consistent
    with Paraguay's laws and procedures, and I will continue these efforts.

        Question 13. If confirmed, do you commit to offering all necessary
    technical assistance to the relevant Paraguayan authorities to ensure
    that there has been a comprehensive investigation into Alex
    Villamayor's death and that there is an expeditious trial?

        Answer. The United States and Paraguay enjoy strong cooperation in
    law enforcement and security, and in the past the U.S. Government has
    provided technical assistance and training for judges, prosecutors, and
    police. However, the judicial system continues to be highly
    politicized, and despite improving levels of transparency, corruption
    and impunity persist. If confirmed, I will engage with the Paraguayan
    authorities to offer all relevant technical assistance that might help
    achieve a thorough, impartial investigation and fair trial in this
    case.

        Question 14. If confirmed, do you commit to meet with the Alex
    Villamayor's family members?

        Answer. Yes.

                                   __________

                                  NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m. in Room
    SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake,
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Flake, Isakson, Shaheen, Kaine, and
    Booker.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

        Senator Flake. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee will come to order.
        Today, the committee will consider the nomination of two
    experienced career Foreign Service officers to be U.S.
    Ambassadors to Rwanda and Gabon.
        Economic growth in Rwanda has averaged 7.6 percent per year
    over the past decade, which we will get after we pass this tax
    bill. Right? [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. No, okay.
        And it has gone from ranking 56th place to 41st place in
    the World Bank's 2018 Doing Business report.
        Yet, a number of constraints on foreign investment in
    Rwanda persist. The donor aid remains a key source of funding
    for the country's development and economic growth initiatives,
    and concerns persist about the state of Rwanda's electoral
    process with the Trump administration recently criticizing
    irregularities with the country's presidential election last
    August, which saw President Paul Kagame, elected to his first
    term in 2003, handily win reelection here. Kagame was cleared
    to run for an additional term following a constitutional
    referendum that exempted him from presidential term limits.
        Now, in Gabon, declining oil prices have led to economic
    challenges for an economy dominated by oil. Despite Gabon's
    President Bongo working to diversify the economy, private
    sector firms still face challenges to impede investment in the
    country, which is thought to have significant deposits of iron,
    diamonds, and gold, among other minerals.
        Gabon is a key player in peacekeeping efforts in Central
    Africa and like Rwanda, has committed peacekeepers to a variety
    of missions. This is an issue that we have talked about in our
    office in terms of peacekeeping, and it is important in terms
    of these countries and their contributions.
        I thank each of you for your time, for sharing your
    expertise. I also want to thank the family members who are in
    attendance and those who are not who continue to make
    sacrifices to support the work that you do for your country.
        With that, let me turn it to Senator Booker for comments
    before we get to the witnesses.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

        Senator Booker. Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for your
    opening remarks and your unbounded optimism about the United
    States of America.
        I am just going to submit my statement for the record.
        I just really want to say thank you both. Reading your bios
    and knowing the strategic importance of places to which you are
    being nominated to represent the United States of America, you
    are great patriots that have served with incredible careers. I
    see a lot of people that look suspiciously like family members.
    I hope you will take some time to introduce us to your families
    who also make a tremendous sacrifice for their country and
    support you in your essential work on our behalf and, frankly,
    not just our behalf but on behalf of humanitarian issues,
    democratic issues, dealing with international diseases. It is
    tremendous the work that you all are doing. So thank you very
    much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [Senator Booker's prepared statement follows:]

                   Prepared Statement of Senator Cory Booker

        Thank you for holding this hearing Mr. Chairman and thank you to
    our witnesses for being here today and for willing to take on these
    posts. We often don't thank our career foreign service officers for
    their service.
        But indeed, you are expected to spend years abroad, away from
    family and friends here in the States. As Senator Flake mentioned, you
    have served in many corners of the world--Iraq, Afghanistan, Ethiopia,
    Israel--working to promote U.S. priorities and relationships. You have
    also developed specialties in your fields, as expert negotiators and
    managers, which I know will be invaluable to the posts to which you
    will hopefully be deployed very soon.
        You are also going to strategically important countries, especially
    in the context of peacekeeping operations. Both Gabon and Rwanda
    contribute to U.N. and African led peacekeeping missions.
        We were reminded of the heavy price peacekeepers and their
    countries pay after last week's attack on U.N. peacekeepers in the
    Democratic Republic of Congo. Both countries will play important roles
    especially as the continent aims to raise sustainable African resources
    for peace keeping operations on the continent.
        Thank you again for your service. Thank you for being here. I look
    forward to your testimonies and to your response.

        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker.
        Senator Isakson, do you have anything to say before we get
    started?
        Senator Isakson. Have we had the testimony yet?
        Senator Flake. No.
        Senator Isakson. Let us hear from the witnesses.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Our first nominee is Ambassador Vrooman who most recently
    served as Charge and Deputy of Chief of Mission in Ethiopia.
    Prior postings include New Delhi, Baghdad, Tel Aviv, Beirut,
    Djibouti, and U.S. Liaison Office in Somalia.
        Our second nominee is Joel Danies, who is currently the
    Associated Dean of the School of Professional and Area Studies
    at the Foreign Service's Institute. In addition to serving as
    Special Envoy for Haiti, his prior assignments include Kabul,
    Geneva, Paris, and Sanaa.
        With that, we recognize Mr. Vrooman.

        STATEMENT OF PETER HENDRICK VROOMAN, OF NEW YORK, TO BE
      AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
              STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

        Mr. Vrooman. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, members
    of the committee, Senator Isakson, it is an honor to appear
    today before you as the nominee as the next U.S. Ambassador to
    the Republic of Rwanda. I thank President Trump and Secretary
    Tillerson for the trust they have placed in me by nominating me
    for this position. If confirmed, I will work closely with this
    committee and other interested Members of Congress to advance
    U.S. interests in Rwanda.
        I would like to particularly recognize my wife Johnette, a
    former Peace Corps volunteer and photographer, and our
    children, Zarah and Hendrick, who are here. Without their love
    and strength and support, I would not be here.
        Senator Booker. Mr. Chairman, I think that is a foul. They
    really need to identify themselves.
        Senator Flake. Yes, raise your hand there. There is the
    family. Okay.
        Senator Booker. And who is the person charitably married to
    you, sir?
        Mr. Vrooman. I think she is parking at Union Station.
    [Laughter.]
        Senator Flake. I thank the family for being here.
        Mr. Vrooman. My mother Sally is also here from upstate New
    York. Her encouragement first propelled me into the field of
    foreign affairs, from my time as a Rotary International
    Foundation scholar and ambassador of good will in 1986 to an
    ambassadorial nominee here today.
        My brother Eric has traveled from Minnesota to be here, and
    my other brother Bruce is watching from New Hampshire. My
    mother-in-law, sisters-in-law, and brothers-in-law and our
    extended family are here joining me as well today. So we have a
    full house.
        If confirmed as Ambassador to Rwanda, my first priority
    will be to ensure the safety and security of U.S. citizens in
    Rwanda, whether they are representing our country as diplomats
    in our mission, whether they are representing our--working in
    NGOs or faith-based organizations, conducting business,
    traveling on vacation, or working in the Peace Corps.
        My four policy goals will be to, one, sustain our
    development partnership while reducing Rwanda's aid dependency;
    two, promoting U.S. exports and business ties; three, advancing
    rule of law and human rights in Rwanda; and four, encouraging
    Rwanda's continued role in peacekeeping.
        The United States has a strong partnership with Rwanda. The
    Rwandan people have crossed many milestones in their trajectory
    of recovery, reconciliation, and rebuilding since the 1994
    genocide. In the past 10 years, Rwanda lifted more than 1
    million of its 11 million people out of poverty and doubled per
    capita GDP in that same period. Since the year 2000, Rwanda has
    reduced its budgetary reliance on foreign assistance from 86
    percent to 35.
        Rwanda has worked hard to meet the basic needs of the
    population for potable water, roads, primary education, and
    health care. And, for example, Rwanda's focus on combating the
    HIV epidemic--I was at the PEPFAR conference just this week--
    has resulted in a reduction of new HIV infections by more than
    50 percent. Maternal and under-5 mortality has also dropped by
    more than 50 percent in the last decade. These and other
    critical gains in the health sector have occurred with support
    from our foreign assistance, including PEPFAR, USAID's maternal
    and child health programs, and the work of Peace Corps
    volunteers in rural communities.
        Rwanda also encourages private sector investment. And we
    have been, over time, the largest investor in Rwanda, and U.S.
    citizens are its largest source of tourism outside the East
    Africa region. U.S. companies are bringing innovative ideas in
    water treatment, energy generation, aviation, logistics to
    Rwanda, creating jobs in both of our countries. If confirmed, I
    will promote a Rwanda that remains open to U.S. business,
    trade, and investment as it pursues continued economic growth.
        Respect for human rights and democratic practices remain
    areas of great importance to our bilateral relationship. They
    are critical for Rwanda's continued prosperity, regional
    leadership, and partnership with the United States.
        If confirmed, I will work with the Rwandan Government and
    civil society to encourage a Rwanda that adheres to the
    democratic ideals enshrined in its own constitution, and these
    include the rule of law, respect for fundamental human rights,
    pluralistic democracy, equitable power sharing, tolerance, and
    resolution of issues through dialogue.
        As noted, Senators, Rwanda is one of the most committed
    countries to international peacekeeping. It is the fifth
    largest contributor of troops, the second largest of police
    units to UN peacekeeping operations around the world. And
    Rwandan peacekeepers have served with distinction in many of
    the world's most complicated trouble spots from the Central
    African Republic to Haiti, South Sudan, and the Sudan. Rwanda
    championed the Kigali Principles on Protection of Civilians, a
    set of best practices for protecting civilians in times of
    armed conflict and during the deployment of peacekeeping
    operations. If confirmed, I will continue to encourage Rwanda
    to play a positive role in peacekeeping in Africa and beyond
    and within the African Union as President Kagame assumes the
    role of chairperson of the African Union for 1 year beginning
    in January 2018.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and
    members of the committee, Senator Isakson, for the opportunity
    and honor to appear before you today. I look forward to
    answering any questions that you may have.
        [Mr. Vrooman's prepared statement follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Peter Vrooman

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the committee,
    it is an honor to appear before you today as the nominee to be the next
    United States Ambassador to the Republic of Rwanda. I thank President
    Trump and Secretary Tillerson for the trust they have placed in me by
    nominating me for this position. If confirmed, I will work closely with
    this committee and other interested Members of Congress to advance U.S.
    interests in Rwanda.
        I would like to recognize my wife, Johnette, and our children,
    Zarah and Hendrick, who are here today. Without their love, strength,
    and support, I would not be here. My mother, Sally, is here too, from
    upstate New York. Her encouragement first propelled me into the field
    of foreign affairs, from my time as a Rotary International Foundation
    ``ambassador of goodwill'' in 1986 to a junior Foreign Service Officer
    in 1991 and an ambassadorial nominee today. My brother, Eric, has
    travelled from Minneapolis to be here, and my other brother, Bruce, is
    watching from New Hampshire.
        If confirmed, my first priority will be to ensure the safety and
    security of U.S. citizens in Rwanda, whether they are representing our
    country as diplomats, working in NGOs or faith-based organizations,
    conducting business, traveling on vacation, or serving in the Peace
    Corps. My goals will be to sustain our development partnership while
    reducing Rwanda's aid dependency, promote U.S. exports and business
    ties, advance the rule of law and human rights in Rwanda, and encourage
    Rwanda's continued role in peacekeeping.
        The United States has a strong partnership with Rwanda. The Rwandan
    people have crossed many milestones along the trajectory of recovery,
    reconciliation, and rebuilding since the horrific 1994 genocide. In the
    past ten years, Rwanda lifted more than one million of its 11 million
    citizens out of poverty and doubled per capita GDP in that same period.
    Since the year 2000, Rwanda has reduced its budgetary reliance on
    foreign assistance from 86 percent to 35 percent.
        Rwanda has worked hard to meet the basic needs of its population
    for potable water, roads, primary education, and health care. For
    example, Rwanda's focus on combatting the HIV/AIDS epidemic over the
    past decade has resulted in a reduction of new HIV infections by almost
    50 percent between 2006 and 2016. Maternal and under-five mortality
    have also both dropped by more than 50 percent. These and other
    critical gains in the health sector have occurred with support from our
    foreign assistance, including the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for
    AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), USAID's Maternal and Child Health programs, and
    the work of Peace Corps volunteers in rural communities.
        Rwanda encourages private sector investment. We have been the
    largest investor in Rwanda, and U.S. citizens are its largest source of
    tourism. U.S. companies are bringing innovative ideas in water
    treatment, energy generation, aviation, and logistics to Rwanda,
    creating jobs in both our countries. If confirmed, I will promote a
    Rwanda that remains open to U.S. business, trade, and investment as it
    pursues continued economic growth.
        Respect for human rights and democratic practices remain areas of
    great importance to our bilateral relationship. They are critical for
    Rwanda's continued prosperity, regional leadership, and partnership
    with the United States. If confirmed, I will work with the Rwandan
    Government and civil society to encourage a Rwanda that adheres to the
    democratic ideals enshrined in its constitution. These include the rule
    of law, respect for fundamental human rights, pluralistic democracy,
    equitable power sharing, tolerance, and resolution of issues through
    dialogue.
        Rwanda is one of the world's most committed countries to
    international peacekeeping operations - the fifth-largest contributor
    of troops in the world and the second-largest contributor of police to
    international peacekeeping missions. Rwandan peacekeepers have served
    with distinction in many of the world's most complicated and protracted
    conflicts, including the Central African Republic, Haiti, South Sudan,
    and Sudan. Rwanda championed the Kigali Principles on the Protection of
    Civilians, a set of best practices for protecting civilians during
    peacekeeping missions. If confirmed, I will encourage Rwanda to
    continue to play a positive role in peacekeeping in Africa and within
    the African Union, as President Kagame assumes the role of AU
    Chairperson for one year starting in January 2018.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the
    opportunity and honor to appear before you today. I look forward to
    answering any questions that you may have.

        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Danies?

        STATEMENT OF JOEL DANIES, OF MARYLAND, TO BE AMBASSADOR
       EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
    AMERICA TO THE GABONESE REPUBLIC, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND
    WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
        PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
              DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE

        Mr. Danies. Thank you, Chairman Flake, Ranking Member
    Booker, Senator Isakson. It is an honor to appear before you
    today.
        I am grateful to President Trump and to Secretary Tillerson
    for the confidence that they have placed in me as their nominee
    to be Ambassador to the Gabonese Republic and also the
    Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe. If confirmed, I
    will be honored to work with you and other Members of Congress
    to protect and advance U.S. interests in both countries.
        Throughout my 30 years in the Foreign Service, I have
    focused on developing the skills required to promote U.S.
    interests globally and to effectively implement U.S. foreign
    policy objectives. I have worked to increase respect for human
    rights, identify U.S. trade opportunities, and promote
    adherence to the rule of law for the well-being and security of
    American and local citizens. If confirmed, I look forward to
    promoting our interests and democratic values in Gabon and Sao
    Tome and Principe and to encouraging both countries to
    contribute to a vibrant and prosperous region.
        I would not be where I am today without the enduring love
    and support of my family, and I am joined today by my wife
    Karen and my daughter Blair. Our son Judson is probably
    watching this from the West Coast, and some very close friends
    of mine have also joined us today.
        Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe have been relatively
    peaceful and stable since their independence. U.S. policy
    priorities are clear for both countries: protecting U.S. lives
    and interests, strengthening democratic institutions and
    improving governance, enhancing trade and economic
    opportunities, and ensuring peace, security, and stability.
        In Gabon, our priorities remain to encourage the process of
    democratization, increase good governance, and increase
    transparency. If confirmed, I will engage government leaders,
    opposition parties, and civil society to strengthen human
    rights and fundamental freedoms, and urge Gabon to stay on the
    path to democracy.
        Gabon's economy has been affected by falling oil prices
    leading to increased activity in the agriculture, fisheries,
    and timber sectors. These are areas in which U.S. knowledge and
    experience can contribute positively. If confirmed, I will
    tirelessly promote U.S. values and business interests, and I
    will continue to advocate on behalf of U.S. companies for a
    level playing in Gabon.
        Gabon is a country located on the strategic Gulf of Guinea.
    If confirmed, I will work closely with the government, as well
    as the Economic Community of Central African States,
    headquartered in Libreville, to promote regional security
    cooperation in this vital region by leveraging partnerships
    with U.S. forces.
        Gabon is also an important partner in the Congo Basin
    Forest Partnership, a multilateral public-private initiative
    for addressing regional environmental concerns, including
    deforestation and wildlife trafficking. If confirmed, I will
    continue to advance our shared work on sustained natural
    resource stewardship that denies revenues to transnational
    criminal organizations.
        The other country to which I am nominated to serve as
    Ambassador, the small island of Sao Tome and Principe, has a
    vibrant political scene but faces severe budgetary constraints
    that have hampered the dividends of democracy.
        U.S. national interests are served by Sao Tome's strategic
    location in the Gulf of Guinea and its respect for democracy.
    Sao Tome has been a reliable partner, hosting since 1992 a
    Voice of America relay station that covers much of Africa. It
    has also encouraged U.S. investment, and as a result, a U.S.
    company began oil exploration there in 2016.
        If confirmed, I will continue to work with Sao Tome to
    improve its port security through cooperation with the U.S.
    Coast Guard, as well as to strengthen regional security and
    improve bilateral trade links with the United States.
        Every country's greatest hope for the future is its youth.
    If confirmed, I will continue to work with the young people in
    both countries to promote peaceful dialogue, empower women, and
    foster entrepreneurship to further expand the private sectors
    in their nations.
        Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, Senator Isakson, no
    goal will be more important to me than protecting the lives,
    interests, and welfare of Americans living and traveling in
    Gabon and Sao Tome. If confirmed, I look forward to leading and
    fostering the development of the dynamic embassy team,
    including the great local staff that we have in Gabon and Sao
    Tome and Principe.
        Thank you.
        [Mr. Danies's prepared statement follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Joel Danies

        Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, and members of the
    committee: It is an honor to appear before you today. I am grateful to
    President Trump and to Secretary Tillerson for the confidence that they
    have placed in me as their nominee to be Ambassador to the Gabonese
    Republic and also the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe. If
    confirmed, I will be honored to work with you and other Members of
    Congress to protect and advance U.S. interests in both countries.
        Throughout my 30 years in the Foreign Service I focused on
    developing the skills required to promote U.S. interests globally and
    to effectively implement U.S. foreign policy objectives. I have worked
    to increase respect for human rights, identify U.S. trade
    opportunities, and promote adherence to the rule of law for the well-
    being and security of local and American citizens. If confirmed, I look
    forward to promoting our interests and democratic values in Gabon and
    Sao Tome and Principe and to encouraging both countries to contribute
    to a vibrant and prosperous region.
        I would not be where I am today without the enduring love and
    support of my family and I am joined today by:Gabon and Sao Tome and
    Principe have been relatively peaceful and stable since their
    independence. U.S. policy priorities are clear for both countries: (1)
    protecting U.S. lives and interests; (2) strengthening democratic
    institutions and improving governance; (3) enhancing trade and economic
    opportunities; and (4) ensuring peace, security, and stability.
        In Gabon, our priorities remain to encourage the process of
    democratization, increase good governance, and improve increased
    transparency. If confirmed, I will engage government leaders,
    opposition parties, and civil society to strengthen human rights and
    fundamental freedoms, and urge Gabon to stay on a path to democracy.
        Gabon's economy has been affected by falling oil prices leading to
    increased activity in the agriculture, fisheries, and timber sectors.
    These are areas in which U.S. knowledge and experience can contribute
    positively. If confirmed, I will tirelessly promote U.S. values and
    business interests, and I will continue to advocate on behalf of U.S.
    companies for a level playing field in Gabon.
        Gabon is a country located on the strategic Gulf of Guinea. If
    confirmed, I will work closely with the government as well as the
    Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) headquartered in
    Libreville, to promote regional security cooperation in this vital
    region by leveraging partnerships with U.S. forces. Gabon is an
    important partner in the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP), a
    multilateral public/private initiative for addressing regional
    concerns, including deforestation and wildlife trafficking. If
    confirmed, I will continue to advance our shared work on sustained
    natural resource stewardship that denies revenues to transnational
    criminal organizations.
        The other country to which I am nominated to serve as Ambassador,
    the small island state of Sao Tome and Principe (STP), has a vibrant
    political scene but faces severe budgetary constraints that have
    hampered the dividends of democracy.
        U.S. national interests are served by Sao Tome's strategic location
    in the Gulf of Guinea and its respect for democracy. Sao Tome has been
    a reliable partner, hosting since 1992 a Voice of America relay station
    that covers much of Africa. It has also encouraged U.S. investment and,
    as a result, a U.S. company began oil exploration there in 2016.
        If confirmed, I will continue to work with Sao Tome to improve its
    port security through cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard, as well as
    to strengthen regional security and improve bilateral trade links with
    the United States.
        Every country's greatest hope for the future is its youth. If
    confirmed, I will continue to work with the young people in both
    countries to promote peaceful dialogue, empower women, and foster
    entrepreneurship to further expand the private sectors in their
    nations.
        Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, and other members of the
    committee, no goal will be more important to me than protecting the
    lives, interests and welfare of Americans living and traveling in Gabon
    and Sao Tome. If confirmed, I look forward to leading and fostering the
    development of the dynamic embassy team, including the great local
    staff that we have in Gabon by serving as the next U.S. Ambassador to
    the Gabonese Republic and the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and
    Principe. Thank you.

        Senator Flake. Thank you for your willingness to serve,
    both of you.
        Mr. Vrooman, with regard to Rwanda, what do you consider
    the greatest challenge you will face there? Does it involve
    their economy and U.S. participation or promotion of U.S.
    business there? Is it governance? What do you think the biggest
    challenge is?
        Mr. Vrooman. The biggest challenge that we will face or I
    will face, if confirmed as the Ambassador to Rwanda, is to
    promote the multiple pillars of our policy, and those include,
    as you have noted, promoting U.S. business, as well as our
    values, rule of law, and economic growth in Rwanda.
        And I think for Rwanda, the biggest challenge is the youth
    bulge that they face. Like many countries in Africa, they have
    high fertility rates. Their population of 12 million will
    double by the year 2035, and they are already the most densely
    populated country on the continent. So the efforts that U.S.
    foreign assistance can assist the Rwandans in in helping
    provide jobs for the youth who are unemployed will be critical
    for their security into the future and to create markets for
    U.S. exports and trade.
        Right now, we have a trade surplus. So that is less of a
    challenge, but cementing and making sure that our investments
    in Rwanda are protected--we have made significant investments
    in energy, aviation, and water treatment, but securing the fact
    that the American private sector interests will remain engaged
    will be a continuing challenge.
        And finally, on the values side, I think clearly from your
    comments and from my own, promoting some of the values that we
    uphold, rule of law, will require our technical assistance and
    some of our programmatic assistance to assist the Rwandans in
    making good on some of their own constitutional ideals and some
    of their own values.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Mr. Danies, you mentioned our efforts to help with
    deforestation and wildlife preservation. They have some of the
    last remaining forest elephants I think there and lowland
    gorillas. We, working with U.S. Fish and Wildlife, there, what
    agencies of the U.S. Government are making an effort there?
        Mr. Danies. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        You are correct that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as
    well as USAID, are very involved with the Government of Gabon
    towards the protection of its wildlife and towards the
    protection of its environment. This is something that we in the
    United States care very much for, and this is something that I
    believe our embassy is very well placed to be able to provide
    the technical assistance and know-how that we have gathered in
    the United States to help the Government of Gabon, the people
    of Gabon protect this environment.
        Senator Flake. With regard to the Gulf of Guinea, there was
    concern a while ago, as we had some success with regard to
    piracy on the other coast of Africa around Somalia, that it
    might move to the Gulf of Guinea. Are there efforts and
    cooperation that is taking place to make sure that piracy does
    not gain a foothold there?
        Mr. Danies. Mr. Chairman, there is very much this sort of
    cooperation between the United States military forces who do
    multiple port calls, the U.S. Coast Guard in developing the
    capacity of the Gabonese maritime forces to be able to both
    protect the country, protect the region against piracy, against
    illegal fishing, against malevolent behavior that might take
    place in the Gulf of Guinea. So we are working very closely,
    and I can assure you, if confirmed, our embassy will be very
    engaged in that effort with the Government of Gabon.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. I am going to defer to the esteemed Senator
    Isakson.
        Senator Isakson. I did not know he was here. [Laughter.]
        Senator Isakson. Thank you, Cory.
        Thank you, both of you, for accepting the challenge of
    representing our country as Ambassador. You are both very
    fortunate to go the countries you are going to.
        Rwanda is one of my favorite places in the whole world.
    Everybody says you really have not been to Rwanda. Have you? I
    said I have been to Rwanda. And President Kagame is quite a
    character in and of himself and has done some exemplary things
    to bring about peace and justice in a time of terrible trouble.
    And I urge you when you get there--do you know what Umuganda
    Sunday is? Have you heard about Umuganda Sunday?
        I love to tell this story, Mr. Chairman and Senator Booker,
    because it is just such a telling story about reconciliation in
    Africa. When Kagame rose to leadership, one of the main things
    he knew he had to do was bring the people together. So they
    created this Umuganda Sunday where one Sunday out of every
    month, the president of the country declares a holiday. Nobody
    gets in their cars. Nobody goes anywhere, but the villages all
    get together and decide on a project they can do together to
    make their village better.
        Senator Corker and I in 2010 were there on Umuganda Sunday
    and helped dig a stump out of the middle of the road that went
    through the town and the village going down to the larger town
    and village. The hardest day's work I ever put in in my life,
    but the most fun I ever had to see people who were, in many
    cases, still angry at each other over a lot of the problems
    that had happened previously, working together to solve a
    problem for the neighborhood.
        And so I commend you, when you get there--you are dealing
    with a country that has really bent on reconciliation and
    improvement. It is growing tremendously. It is expanding
    tremendously. It is a great country, and Kagame has had a few
    stumps along the way, but he has done a fantastic job as
    president of that country and does a great job and a great
    friend of the United States of America.
        I have not been to Gabon, but I have helped them get some
    poultry. They are working very hard to expand their business
    and economic opportunity working with the University of Georgia
    on some techniques where they can make a cottage industry in
    Gabon by raising chickens by families raising them. They are
    anxious to expand their economic growth.
        Both those countries are tremendously important to the
    United States of America.
        And I want to close with this statement and then ask
    anything you want to say.
        Each of those countries, like every country in Africa, has
    a vote in the United Nations. Africa is the continent of the
    21st century for our country. The opportunity to expand
    American influence and friendship on the continent of Africa
    offers tremendous opportunity for our country, not only on
    votes in the UN, friends voting with friends, but also
    expanding opportunities in markets in those two countries for
    American value-added products at the beginning of the chain,
    like baby diapers and things of that nature, to expansion like
    the industry of poultry and things of that nature.
        So you are going to two great opportunities for our
    country. I know from reading both your resumes, you will both
    do a great job. And I look forward to hearing a good report
    when you come back. And I will first volunteer to say if you
    ever feel like the State Department is overlooking you--and I
    see the lady behind you is watching me when I say this--call
    me. I will go down there and vouch for you any time because you
    are going to the front line of where America's 21st century
    needs to be, and that is the continent of Africa.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Isakson.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much.
        Again, it is great that you are here. Your wife now has
    returned from parking. So if you would like to point her out.
    Yes. You missed your moment. [Laughter.]
        Senator Booker. I am really grateful again for the two of
    you.
        I want to jump right in. Obviously, these are such critical
    countries that you all are going to be representing the United
    States to, and there have been tremendous positive things
    happening. But I just want to hone in a little bit on some
    human rights issues and perhaps temper some of the praise for
    President Kagame as well.
        Right now--this is according to the Congressional Research
    Service--human rights advocates are asserting the laws and
    taboos prohibiting public acknowledgement of ethnic identity
    have been wielded as a tool to silence criticism of the
    government and that years of intimidation and interference have
    weakened the capacity of civil society to operate effectively.
    Over the years, various political opponents, critics, and
    journalists have been criminally prosecuted or have fled the
    country. Several dissidents have been violently attacked or
    killed outside the country in what critics portray as state-
    backed assassination.
        There are a lot of these reports. Does this concern you?
    And tell me what we could be doing from the State Department to
    address some of these issues.
        Mr. Vrooman. Thank you very much, Senator Booker, for that
    question. It is an important one and a challenging one, given
    where they have come from, as Senator Isakson had mentioned,
    from the genocide onward, and building a community of
    reconciliation and overcoming the legacy of the genocide is an
    amazing challenge for an emerging democracy like Rwanda.
        I think that some of the key tools that we have to work
    with the Rwandans have been in the area of rule of law, which
    is fundamental to addressing any number of the challenges that
    you have just raised, whether it is with regard to civil
    society organizations and their freedom of operation, freedom
    of expression for the media, or for those very same opposition
    members, some of whom have been detained.
        So we have a number of ways in which we are working through
    USAID programs, one of which is through the University of
    Northern Ohio which has done training for judges and
    prosecutors and has worked on law school curriculum that help
    improve the delivery of justice in Rwanda.
        We have also as well an Access to Justice program that is
    unique with USAID and involving local partnerships and
    providing legal defense for people in Rwanda. That is critical.
        The University of Massachusetts is working with the Legal
    Aid Forum in Rwanda and looking at the quality and consistency
    of judicial decisions. And I found that in my experience before
    in Ethiopia that working on rule of law is one tool to helping
    a country move towards greater democratic pluralism and the
    rule of law in the country.
        So these programs are really critical, and I thank the
    Congress and the American people for supporting the efforts
    that we have put in, as well as the universities that have
    contributed to those efforts thus far.
        Senator Booker. So I appreciate that. And I will note that
    there were many universities you mentioned, none of which were
    in New Jersey.
        But I do have some concerns about the overall State
    Department's support of the kind of efforts that you are
    talking about. Last week, Secretary Tillerson held a town hall
    with employees of the State Department and USAID, which were
    both mentioned as important actors in the region, which they
    absolutely are, but when the Secretary announced the State
    Department's and USAID's missions, neither included democracy
    or democracy promotion.
        I have concerns about the health of civil society in Rwanda
    and in Gabon, which maybe you both can address, but maybe let
    us just sticking with Rwanda for a second--I think I respected
    George Washington as much as I did when I started studying
    African countries. It seems that President Kagame is intending
    to stay for an undetermined period of time. The constitution
    has been changed. Obviously, Rwanda has a tremendous record for
    promoting women, something frankly that maybe the United States
    can learn a thing or two from. But when Diane Rwigara, a Kagame
    critic and would-be first female independent presidential
    candidate, was denied registration as a candidate, that
    obviously raises concerns. She was also subject to an apparent
    smear campaign and was arrested for tax evasion shortly after
    the vote. I am really concerned about the continued focus on
    these issues in terms of democracy promotion and what this
    might mean for long-term stability in a nation that, as you
    said, is such an essential partner for us in regional
    stability.
        Mr. Vrooman. Indeed. And I think President Kagame--he was
    first elected in 2003. He has indicated on several occasions
    that he does not intend to remain president forever.
        Senator Booker. But I read the constitution. He could stay
    till 2035.
        Mr. Vrooman. Indeed. But, again, that is the outward limit
    of what is conceivably possible under the new constitutional
    amendments.
        But one of the opportunities that I see in the coming year,
    if confirmed, would be to work with the Rwandan parliament
    which, as you say, 60 percent are women in the parliament, but
    primarily those do not include many opposition parties. So it
    is not a very vibrant body in terms of diversity in terms of
    political parties.
        That said, they are revising their electoral law. And I
    think it is a hope of many Rwandans, both inside and outside
    Rwanda, that that electoral law will have in its reform better
    and more transparent criteria for becoming candidates, which is
    one of the criticisms that has been levied about the Rwandan
    democracy, and secondly, that there will be more safeguards put
    in place for the ballot counting mechanisms that are in place.
    So I would see it as a fundamental role as an ambassador to
    engage with Rwandan officials, whether they are in the
    legislative branch or the executive branch, to work with them
    at making improvements to their electoral law. And that is an
    area, as you know, where we have many U.S. agencies, both in
    and outside of government, that have expertise in that matter
    and there are many as well around the world.
        Senator Booker. And, then Mr. Danies--I know I am a little
    bit over my time, but if you will indulge me with answering the
    question about human rights concerns. Obviously, there have
    been election irregularities as well. Can you tell me about it,
    should you be confirmed, about some of your focus on civil
    society, democracy, and human rights?
        Mr. Danies. Thank you, Senator.
        I would say that that is probably the one area where the
    United States carries the greatest amount of strength and
    credibility in the way we have worked with organizations and
    groups, whether they are in the opposition or whether they are
    nongovernmental organizations or civil society organizations in
    countries to reinforce the benefits that they bring to a
    democratic process.
        I would say to you that, if confirmed, I could not imagine
    behaving any differently in Gabon in the sense of we have a
    country that has stated its determination to the democratic
    process, to openness, to transparency. I believe that we should
    hold them to their word and we should continue to encourage
    them to proceed down that path and to continue to strengthen
    those institutions.
        Senator Booker. [Foreign language spoken.]
        Senator Flake. Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you both for being here today, for your service, and
    for your willingness to be nominated for these new very
    important posts. And I am delighted, Mr. Vrooman, that your
    brother Bruce is watching from New Hampshire. [Laughter.]
        Senator Shaheen. I want to ask you because we have all
    watched, especially given what happened in Rwanda in the 1990s,
    the genocide, and the gains that have been made there. The
    importance of women is one of the things that I have watched
    very closely. I think Rwanda has the highest percentage of
    women of any country in its national governing body, its
    parliament. But to what extent has that equality for women in
    elective office translated across the culture in the country,
    and to what extent do they, in reality, share power in the
    country?
        Mr. Vrooman. Thank you, Senator.
        I think there is still work to be done in the economic
    sphere, in the social sphere within Rwanda. As with many women
    around the world, gender-based violence is still an issue, as
    it has been in many of the places where I have served, whether
    in Ethiopia or India. And several of the ways that a U.S.
    Ambassador and their country team can work to bring attention
    to those issues and those inequalities is through nominating
    international women of courage that come to the State
    Department as nominees from our missions. And we have
    nominated--I have nominated women in those positions from India
    and Ethiopia. And I would think that there are people in Rwanda
    that would deserve similar recognition.
        One of the things concretely that we are doing through our
    programmatic assistance through PEPFAR, for example,
    recognizing that, for example, female sex workers have the
    highest prevalence of HIV--Ambassador Birx and the PEPFAR
    program have given us an opportunity to work on the DREAMS
    Program to help address both sexual violence and also the
    spread of HIV among adolescent girls. So the DREAMS Program has
    given us some additional resources to begin to target that
    community with additional assistance to help alleviate that
    challenge.
        But one of the things I believe in and I have believed in
    throughout my career is the importance of the girl child. I
    have one. So promoting those opportunities--and I think as an
    ambassador, one of the things we can do is to promote
    inclusiveness within our country teams to give opportunities to
    women, to the disabled, and to disabled women. That is one
    thing we have done in Ethiopia and which I would hope in a
    country like Rwanda that has suffered after the genocide with
    many people who face disabilities to give them opportunities,
    in addition to focusing on women as one of the key communities
    that does the work in the society and that will open
    opportunities for Rwanda as it goes forward and continues its
    economic development.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. It is also one of the reasons
    why diversity within our State Department is very important as
    well.
        I want to ask both of you about 2017 Trafficking in Persons
    Report, which listed both Rwanda and Gabon on its tier 2 watch
    list, meaning that they both have work to do in that area. And
    I wonder if both of you could tell me to what extent you think
    the leaders in the countries appreciate the importance of
    addressing this issue and what they might be doing to help make
    progress.
        Mr. Vrooman. Yes, indeed. And tier 2 watch lists is really
    a wakeup call. If the tier 2 was not, then the watch list is
    because that can lead to an automatic downgrade if action is
    not taken.
        I will say that in my briefings and consultations, I have
    learned about the action plan that was put in place in 2014 to
    begin to address more seriously the trafficking issues that
    Rwanda faces. And they have made some headway. All border
    forces in Rwanda have received training. There are 30,000
    community workers who have received training to help identify
    minors and others who might be victims of trafficking.
        We, through the J/TIP Office at the State Department, have
    offered programs to help provide some regional legal
    assistance--and this is done throughout the region--in helping
    them define a standalone anti-TIP law that is about to be
    unveiled. Now, law in itself is not sufficient because
    implementation and bringing to justice people who are judged
    guilty of promoting trafficking in persons needs to be done. So
    I believe our terrific embassy is going to be looking at and
    evaluating and reporting to what degree there is implementation
    and execution of that law and bringing people to justice.
        The other key aspects are we are working kind of uniquely
    with the International Organization of Migration both through
    J/TIP and USAID to form complementary programs to not just look
    at the law but the implementing regulations so that trafficking
    prevention, the three P's of anti-trafficking efforts, are
    really brought to bear and scaled throughout the country. And
    that is one thing that Rwanda is particularly good at is
    bringing programs to scale. So, if confirmed, when I go out
    there, I will be looking to see to what degree that the one-
    stop shops for people who are seeking protection get it, to see
    what their needs are because offering protection to victims of
    trafficking is expensive and challenging, but incredibly
    important for their rehabilitation. So that is something that I
    would look forward to see expanding under the next action plan
    after this one concludes at the end of the year.
        Senator Shaheen. Great.
        Mr. Chairman, can I get an answer from Mr. Danies as well?
        Senator Flake. Sure.
        Mr. Danies. Senator, Gabon is very fortunate as being a
    middle income country which, therefore, means that it is
    attractive to a lot of the citizens and countries in its
    neighboring countries. As a result, it is very important for
    Gabon to have better control over the movement of people in and
    out of the country in order to be able to combat the illegal
    trafficking of people. It has a viable economy, which makes it
    attractive and therefore, of course, allows for criminal
    elements to use that as a way to be able to continue this
    horrid practice of trafficking in human beings.
        I believe that the United States again is very well placed
    to provide the sort of assistance that a country like Gabon
    could use in terms of helping develop its law enforcement
    capabilities, in helping it increase and provide the right sort
    of shelters, be able to identify criminal elements, and then
    create the institutions necessary to both investigate and then
    prosecute them as a way to stop this sort of practice.
        Senator Shaheen. I am over my time, but do I understand you
    to say then--yes or no--are they committed to addressing this
    issue?
        Mr. Danies. I apologize. Yes, they are very committed to
    it. This is one of the areas that we have worked very closely
    with the Government of Gabon.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine?
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and congratulations to
    each of you for your careers and for your nominations.
        I would actually like to ask both of you--this is almost
    more an Armed Services question than Foreign Relations. I sit
    on both, as does Senator Shaheen.
        The extent of U.S. military operations in Africa are
    something that I think a lot of Americans are surprised by when
    they wake up and they read about the death of American troops
    in combat in Niger, for example. That was surprising to many,
    not to those of us who serve on these committees. My son was
    deployed in Africa with the Marines in 2015, attached to
    AFRICOM.
        But talk a little bit about the state of the mil-to-mil
    relationship between the United States and each of the
    countries for which you have been nominated and what you could
    do in the position as Ambassador to promote cooperation, human
    rights training, upgrading of military standards, et cetera.
        Mr. Vrooman. Thank you very much, Senator.
        It is very important. I have worked in Ethiopia now and, if
    confirmed, in Rwanda, which are two of the leading African
    peacekeeping contributors. Both countries and Rwanda are
    beneficiaries of U.S. training for peacekeeping and have
    received substantial training monies from the U.S. Congress for
    support for the ACOTA training of peacekeepers. And in Rwanda's
    case, they have received IPPOS police keeping training from INL
    to support the police in their deployments of foreign police
    units overseas.
        What that means is that cumulatively that 20 percent of
    Rwanda's forces are deployed--their soldiers are deployed on
    peacekeeping missions. And all of those have gone or almost all
    of them have gone through some form of peacekeeping training,
    which includes respect for rule of law. And that is one reason
    I think that there has been--Rwandans have been valued in
    peacekeeping and been awarded, recognized in the Central
    African Republic for their work. They also have a zero
    tolerance policy for sexual exploitation and abuse, which is
    significant and I know is a consistent concern of the Congress
    and the administration in that regard. So those training
    programs have been important.
        Rwanda like Ethiopia is also a beneficiary of APREP. That
    is an acronym, so I will spell it that out. But it is the
    African Peacekeeping Rapid Response country, of which there are
    six in Africa. And that program has allowed them or will allow
    them, as it rolls out, to support their logistics, the
    deployment of medical evacuation units, and their support for
    aviation, which would facilitate, if we are able to deliver two
    Cessna aircraft--allow them to do evacuation of peacekeeping
    personnel in their deployments. So the APREP has given them a
    significant boost to the security assistance that we offer, and
    their IMET training is something that they willingly engage in
    and they permit Leahy vetting very transparently. And that is
    something that I would, if confirmed, pledge to continue.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you.
        Mr. Danies, if you could answer the same question about
    Gabon.
        Mr. Danies. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        Both of us would tell you that the worse news an ambassador
    can ever receive is the death of an American citizen in their
    region, much less that of an American citizen who is the
    military, which means that it is critical to us that we
    continue to have these military-to-military cooperation
    arrangements but that we do so in a way that works to
    strengthen and bolster local forces in order to both be able to
    protect their citizens but also protect our citizens.
        In the case of Gabon, there is a very close partnership
    certainly related to maritime protection in the Gulf of Guinea,
    but also in helping to combat the encroachment of poachers into
    their region which can not only, of course, destroy the
    environment but also bring with them criminal elements which
    are dangerous to the country and eventually perhaps to the rest
    of the world. We are fortunate that the Government of Gabon--
    Libreville hosts the Economic Community of Central African
    States, which continues to be a cooperative arrangement of 10
    countries in the region with which our U.S. military
    cooperates, both our naval forces and our military forces. So I
    believe that the relationship is a strong one and we will
    continue to keep it that way.
        Senator Kaine. I appreciate that.
        And, Mr. Chair, my observation from working on the defense
    authorizing bill every year is that the work we do to train
    foreign militaries is just like part of a fingernail of the
    Department of Defense budget, whether it is bringing officers
    for training here at the War College or in other venues in the
    United States, or whether it is on-the-ground training in those
    countries. But we would want them to want us to be their
    security partner of choice, and that training both in technical
    capacity but also around issues like respect for rule of law
    and human rights is incredibly valuable, and it also builds
    relationships that are important. The captain you train today
    could be the defense minister in 10 years or the leader of a
    country in 20 years.
        So this is a really important part of what we do on the
    defense side and it is about diplomacy and building
    relationships. These Ambassadors will have an important role to
    play in it, and I wish you both well. Thank you.
        Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
        We have got votes in just a few minutes, but I just have
    one quick question. Then I think Senator Booker has another.
        Mr. Vrooman, there is a long history of border incidents
    between Rwanda and Burundi. There have been issues of troops
    coming across. In what ways are we dealing with that issue, and
    is the government sufficiently cooperating with us and with the
    Government of Burundi as well?
        Mr. Vrooman. Yes, sir. In my consultations, I have looked
    at that history. In the past, the Child Soldier Protection
    Act--because of Rwanda's support for the M-23 militia in
    eastern Congo, they were listed under that in 2015 and
    similarly for recruiting Burundi soldiers in their refugee
    camps in 2015, later in 2016.
        But in the actual year of 2016 and 2017, following that
    listing, they are no longer, to the extent that I am aware,
    supporting proxies in those neighboring states. And that is a
    good thing. So I cannot attribute it to whether the listing had
    that effect, but the corrective actions that have been taken
    have been noted by our embassies in the region.
        Senator Flake. Thank you.
        Senator Booker?
        Senator Booker. I am just going to briefly put out two
    questions and maybe you guys can answer them and we can
    conclude.
        The first one will be for Mr. Danies. Obviously, climate
    change is having a disproportionate impact on countries like
    Sao Tome and Principe. What do you believe we could be doing in
    the United States to help them deal with this pressing concern?
        And then the second one for Mr. Vrooman. I have some
    concerns about the violence between Hutus and Tutsis in Burundi
    and how that might destabilize Rwanda.
        If you all could comment on those two, I would appreciate
    it. Thank you.
        Mr. Danies. Thank you, Senator.
        Very briefly, just like in the Amazon, one of the biggest
    sources of mitigation for the climate are protecting forests
    and rainforests. And both Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe are
    very fortunate to have viable environments. And therefore, I
    think it is in our favor to be able to continue to help them
    protect those, to help them manage them in a very smart way so
    that they are constantly providing more protection for the
    environment rather than going through some of the problems
    countries that have been deforested have seen and which have
    exacerbated the problem of climate change.
        You are right that for a country island state like Sao Tome
    and Principe, this is especially important, and therefore, I
    think this is a role that the embassy can play very well in
    helping them develop the right economic techniques to be able
    to protect that environment.
        Mr. Vrooman. Senator, to your question about the relations
    with Burundi, that is obviously a question that the Ambassadors
    of both missions look to. If confirmed, I will work closely
    with our embassy in Bujumbura. I am meeting our Ambassador
    tomorrow as part of my consultations.
        But my understanding is that there are more than 70,000
    refugees from Burundi in Rwanda currently in camps. So that is
    an area certainly of concern that I will continue to monitor
    going forward.
        The East African Community is charged with having dialogue
    and conducting dialogue between the two countries, and that is
    an area that I would continue to monitor as well, if confirmed
    as Ambassador to Rwanda.
        Senator Booker. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
        Senator Flake. Well, thank you both. We appreciate you
    being here and your families as well. I continue to be
    impressed by the sacrifices that they make. These are tough
    posts, a long way from home, and we just appreciate your
    willingness to serve and the sacrifices made by all the
    families.
        For the information of members, the record will remain open
    until the close of business tomorrow--that is December 20th--
    including for members to submit questions for the record. We
    would ask the nominees if you could respond as promptly as
    possible to these questions.
        With the thanks of the committee, the hearing stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 2:53 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  ----------

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                  to Joel Danies by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. From very early in my career, I have worked to promote
    human rights, beginning with my repeated visits and engagements in
    Yemen with a small community of Jewish citizens to confirm their
    security and well-being and to report on behalf of the Embassy any
    concerns they might have regarding mistreatment or discrimination by
    the authorities. During this first assignment in Yemen, I also traveled
    with the Ambassador to visit Eritrean refugees in the southern part of
    the country to review their living conditions and coordinate with the
    International Organization for Migration (IOM) on the protection and
    care in the refugee camps located there. I was a key member of the
    staff of the President's Special Representative on Haiti in 1992-93,
    engaged in the successful effort to overturn the illegal military coup
    in Haiti and the return of its exiled president. Our primary focus was
    on the protection of the Haitians fleeing the criminal behavior of the
    junta leaders. We worked closely with IOM, the United Nations Office of
    the High Commissioner for Refugees (OHCR), and the U.S. military to
    establish sites in Jamaica, Turks and Caicos, the Bahamas, and
    Guantanamo for the protection and care of Haitian refugees. I worked
    diligently within the Department and administration to uphold the Leahy
    legislation toward Colombia by ensuring that counternarcotics
    assistance was provided solely to government entities that were not
    accused of being or alleged to be human rights violators. I also spent
    four years in Geneva heading U.S. Government human rights efforts,
    representing our country's human rights values and objectives before
    the U.N. Human Rights Council, and coordinating with the Office of the
    High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). During that period, in a
    number of instances, I led U.S. Government efforts to hold countries
    identified as human rights offenders accountable for their behavior,
    and I successfully negotiated resolutions that promoted and
    strengthened the values outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human
    Rights.

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in Gabon
    and Sao Tome & Principe? What are the most important steps you expect
    to take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Gabon
    and Sao Tome & Principe? What do you hope to accomplish through these
    actions?

        Answer. The most important human rights problems for Gabon, as
    noted in State Department's 2016 Human Rights Report, are harsh prison
    conditions, lengthy pretrial detention, and arbitrary arrests. In
    addition, the 2016 presidential election was marred by significant
    irregularities. I will pursue opportunities to continue to engage
    leaders from the Government, opposition parties, and civil society to
    increase respect for human rights and protection for fundamental
    freedoms, and to press Gabon to abide more fully by democratic norms
    and principles.
        In Sao Tome & Principe, also as noted in the State Department's
    2016 Human Rights report, the most pressing human rights issues are
    difficult prison conditions, official corruption, and domestic
    violence. I will work closely with the Sao Tomean Government and civil
    society to identify effective ways to promote transparency and rule of
    law.
        In both countries, establishing open and honest relationships with
    government and civil society will be crucial to countering these
    issues.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Gabon and Sao Tome
    & Principe in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in
    general?

        Answer. Institutional capacity will likely be the biggest obstacle.
    In addition, civil society remains weak in both countries. I will seek
    opportunities and resources for capacity building. I would note that in
    both countries, severe budgetary constraints will also limit local
    governments' efforts. Shifting institutional culture as well as
    societal norms will likely be challenges.
        In Sao Tome and Principe, we face the added challenge of promoting
    human rights from a distance. We do not have a significant presence on
    the ground and must engage from Libreville. To counter this challenge,
    I will regularly visit and seek opportunities to partner with Sao
    Tomean Government institutions and civil society to support democratic
    development and respect for human rights.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Gabon and Sao Tome & Principe? If confirmed,
    what steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and
    similar efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance
    and security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. I am committed to meeting with organizations that are
    concerned with human rights and civil society issues concerning Gabon
    and Sao Tome & Principe. Ensuring that the United States does not
    provide military assistance to foreign military units that violate
    human rights is crucially important. I will ensure that Embassy
    personnel responsible for vetting under the provisions of the Leahy Law
    are familiar with its rules and can implement them fully and
    effectively. I will engage host government interlocutors to remind them
    of the importance the United States places on respect of human rights
    by security services.

        Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with
    Gabon and Sao Tome & Principe to address cases of key political
    prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted by Gabon and Sao Tome
    & Principe?

        Answer. I will engage with the governments of both countries to
    address cases of political prisoners and arbitrary arrests.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Gabon and Sao Tome & Principe on
    matters of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your
    bilateral mission?

        Answer. I will engage regularly on these issues with the
    Governments of Gabon and Sao Tome & Principe, opposition parties, and
    NGOs.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign Government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in Gabon and Sao Tome & Principe?

        Answer. Neither I nor any of my immediate family members have any
    financial interests in Gabon or in Sao Tome and Principe.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. The country team is a very important part of any embassy;
    it provides direction, feedback, and guidance to the Chief of Mission
    on all aspects of embassy operations. Seventy percent of Embassy
    Libreville's country team is comprised of officers from a diverse
    background and/or underrepresented group. These talented and highly-
    qualified officers work in nearly 50 percent of our positions.
        I will support and mentor all officers at post to ensure they have
    an equal opportunity to advance through the organization to the highest
    levels throughout their career. Additionally, I will make a concerted
    personal effort to reach out and recruit qualified officers who reflect
    the rich diversity of our nation to fill the periodic vacancies at the
    embassy.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. I will ensure that embassy personnel are familiar with
    applicable federal laws and State Department policies that protect an
    inclusive workspace. This includes the continued appointment and
    support of EEO officers at post, as well as periodic Embassy-wide town
    halls to discuss issues of diversity, inclusiveness, and bullying for
    both the American and the locally-employed staff. Additionally, I will
    ensure officers at all levels are given the opportunity to serve and
    chair the many important committees within an embassy that shape both
    internal and external operations, to include the various budget,
    security, safety, and employment committees. I will also motivate my
    staff to continue to pursue leadership training opportunities that
    reinforce the values of diversity and inclusiveness.

        Question 12. In what sectors is most official corruption found in
    these countries?

        Answer. Corruption remains a major concern in Gabon. Nepotism, in
    particular, places a burden on the country's financial situation,
    resulting in a large and expensive civil service. There are also
    widespread reports of Gabonese officials' utilizing public funds for
    travel on private jets or openly displaying extravagant spending such
    as for high-end luxury vehicles. Within key economic sectors, the
    timber and petroleum industries are most affected by corrupt behaviors,
    although such corruption is often difficult to prove. Most Sudanese
    also view the judicial system as highly corrupt. Corruption also
    manifests itself in the actions of lower level functionaries, including
    police officers, the customs administration, and public utilities.
        The Gabonese Government launched an anti-corruption campaign called
    ``Operation Mamba'' in 2016. To date, only a small number of officials
    or former officials have been prosecuted through this effort. Former
    Hydrocarbons Minister Etienne Dieudonne Ngoubou is incarcerated. Former
    Minister (Economy, Budget, and Infrastructure) and Advisor to the
    President Magloire Ngambia is facing charges of embezzling state funds
    in the amount of $810 million. While the Operation Mamba cases reflect
    positive steps, more needs to be done in order for Gabonese authorities
    to address the nation's corruption challenges.
        Official corruption is much less open in Sao Tome and Principe, but
    it is still cause for concern among embassy interlocutors. In
    particular, there are those who vociferously complain in local media
    that nepotism influences the hiring process for government positions as
    well as the awarding of contracts. Although in the past there have
    generally been weak government accountability and controls, the
    National Assembly recently passed legislation authorizing the referral
    of public corruption cases to the Public Prosecutor's Office for
    investigation. On December 20, the National Assembly directed one of
    its own, Deputy Delfim Neves, to present himself to the Public
    Prosecutor's Office to for questioning regarding an attempt to bribe
    magistrates.

        Question 13. If confirmed, what tools do you have at your disposal
    to help address corruption and what actions will you take as Ambassador
    to advocate for improvement in transparency and good governance with
    relevant stakeholders?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with the two primary
    anti-corruption groups in Gabon: the Commission to Combat Illicit
    Enrichment (CNLCEI) and the National Financial Investigations Agency
    (ANIF). I would also work with civil society and members of the non-
    governmental organization (NGO) community to continue to raise the
    public's awareness about the importance of eliminating corruption at
    all levels and reinforce the important role of civil society in pushing
    for greater transparency and accountability. I would also continue to
    explore opportunities to encourage Gabonese institutions to take
    advantage of U.S. Government technical assistance programs to assist
    with anti-corruption efforts, transparency, and the rule of law. These
    include exchange programs focusing on anti-corruption efforts and
    organizing remote discussions through Digital Video Conference
    technology and expert speaker programs that target anti-corruption.
        While the amount and scope of public corruption in Sao Tome and
    Principe (STP) is relatively small, our active engagement with the
    Government, opposition parties, and NGOs is important to promote
    greater transparency. If confirmed, I intend to visit STP regularly and
    deliver consistent messaging in support of rule of law and the
    principle of meritocracy.

        Question 14. The State Department has ranked Gabon ``Tier 2
    Watchlist'' in its most recent Trafficking in Persons Report. If
    confirmed, what types of U.S. diplomatic efforts and assistance, if
    any, would you pursue to help Gabon better tackle this problem?

        Answer. The State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Libreville
    actively engage with the full range of public and private stakeholders
    to encourage the Gabonese Government to take additional steps to
    address trafficking in persons (TIP). Gabon ratified the Palermo
    protocols in 2010, but has yet to harmonize its domestic legal system.
    In addition, our joint efforts are required to strengthen key
    institutions and address the broad perception that bribery of the
    judiciary effectively eliminates trafficking-related cases. There have
    been no trafficking-related prosecutions in recent years. If confirmed,
    I would work with effective individuals and institutions in Gabon to
    reconcile its penal code with the Palermo protocols, and I would seek
    opportunities to provide direct support through USG technical
    assistance, including training for the judiciary.

        Question 15. In what ways might such efforts be incorporated into
    existing U.S. programs that aim to help strengthen Gabon's security
    sector and the rule of law?

        Answer. The U.S. Embassy has had some success in recent years
    building capacity in individual judges through the International
    Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP). If confirmed, I would work to
    continue to offer this type of experience to members of the judiciary
    we identify as emerging leaders. As the pool of IVLP alumni in the
    judiciary grows, we are hopeful they will form a nucleus around which
    rule of law will grow and ultimately be the norm.

        Question 16. In your view, what are the core U.S. interests in
    Gabon? What changes to U.S. bilateral aid would you advocate, if any?

        Answer. The core U.S. interests in Gabon are long-term political
    stability, sustaining maritime and border security, supporting U.S.
    companies, including those that are heavily invested in the petroleum
    industry, eliminating wildlife and other illicit trafficking,
    protecting the flora and fauna in the Congo Basin, and supporting
    Gabonese peacekeeping efforts. Gabon is also a Cooperative Security
    Location for the Department of Defense, which allows the country to
    facilitate U.S. crisis response, including emergency evacuation of U.S.
    embassies. At present, U.S. bilateral aid for Gabon is limited to
    International Military Education and Training (IMET) programming,
    grants and direct support awarded through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service, and USAID's Central Africa Regional Program for the
    Environment (CARPE). Gabon has also received security assistance
    funding through the Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) account to fund a
    number of key efforts, including peacekeeping capacity building,
    counter-poaching efforts, maritime security capacity building, and
    military education institution building. Gabon has also received
    funding through the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) fund maritime
    capacity building efforts. In addition to supporting these existing
    efforts, I would advocate in two key areas:
        Agribusiness: Gabon is very interested in attracting businesses
    that transform natural resources, generating added value. If confirmed,
    I would like to look at ways that agencies such as OPIC, USTDA, the
    U.S. Export-Import Bank, and USAID might be able to support U.S.
    companies that are interested in investing in Gabon. There is a
    relatively short window of opportunity to help Gabon develop the
    structures necessary to take advantage of the remaining eight years of
    AGOA.
        Rural Development: With Embassy Libreville's support and advocacy,
    both the Government of Gabon and the Peace Corps have expressed
    interest in re-establishing a Peace Corps program in Gabon, resources
    permitting. If confirmed, I would continue to advocate for the return
    of Peace Corps as I believe there is potential to have a positive
    impact in all six of Peace Corps' project sectors: agriculture,
    community economic development, education, the environment, health, and
    youth in development. If confirmed, I would like to see whether Peace
    Corps could return to Gabon.

        Question 17. Please describe U.S. maritime security cooperation
    efforts in Gabon. Please describe U.S. support for Gabonese
    environmental conservation, and the results of such efforts to date.

        Answer. Maritime Security cooperation is a key element of U.S.
    engagement in Gabon. Gabon is a part of AFRICOM's Line of Effort (LOE)
    Four, which supports and focuses U.S.-based security assistance toward
    maritime security and countering illicit activities in the Gulf of
    Guinea. Gabon has historically received all its maritime security
    cooperation through the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard.
        In 2014, the U.S. Secretary of the Navy delivered recommendations
    for a maritime security strategy to President Ali Bongo. Shortly
    thereafter, Gabon established a Sea Security Council, which currently
    advises its president on maritime capacity building. The U.S. Embassy
    works with the Gabonese to identify areas where the United States can
    support the implementation of Gabon's maritime security strategy.
        One of the U.S. Navy programs supporting this strategy is the
    expansion and maintenance of its shore-based sensor surveillance
    system, the Regional Maritime Awareness Capability. The current
    project, funded through State Department assistance, aims to build a
    sensor site at Cap Esterias (north of Libreville), repair and upgrade
    existing systems in Port Gentil, and potentially install a new sensor
    site in Mayumba (southern border between Gabon and the Republic of
    Congo) with existing Africa Maritime Security (AMS) Foreign Military
    Financing (FMF) grants. AMS has also supported the sustainment of naval
    vessels.
        For early 2018, the U.S. Navy is also working with Gabon to host
    OBANGAME EXPRESS 2018, a Gulf of Guinea naval exercise. This will
    consist of Gabon's hosting a Final Planning Event in mid-January 2018,
    followed by the exercise the last two weeks of March 2018. The U.S.
    Navy is also working with Gabon to host a Senior Leader Seminar during
    the exercise, which will draw Chiefs of the Navies from many Gulf of
    Guinea states, as well as international partners and senior U.S. Navy
    leadership to a three-day maritime security seminar.
        The International Military Education and Training (IMET) program
    consistently prioritizes developing the capacity of Gabonese naval
    officers. In FY 2017, Gabon sent two naval officers to further their
    military training at U.S. Navy and Coast Guard training centers. The
    Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)-funded Africa Maritime Security
    Initiative (AMSI) has supported the training of officers in Gabon on
    maritime topics including maintenance, management, and boarding team
    operations. Three commissioned Gabonese naval officers recently
    graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis. The U.S. Embassy is
    working with these commissioned officers to ensure a positive impact on
    the Gabonese Navy and hopes to continue to provide technical to support
    qualified Gabonese candidates.
    Environmental Conservation
        In 2018, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will support
    the fifth year of a five-year cooperative agreement developed in
    collaboration with Gabon's National Parks Agency (ANPN). Through this
    agreement, USFWS partners with ANPN to address rapidly escalating
    threats to security, including elephant poaching and trans-boundary
    environmental crime. In addition, USFWS has stationed a Special Agent/
    Attache at the Embassy in Libreville to partner with Gabonese
    authorities in the investigation of natural resource crimes. USFWS
    draws from its expertise in wildlife management to assist Gabon as it
    develops a protected area system and capable personnel to run it. USFWS
    also plans to continue support for small grants to non-governmental
    organizations to complement ANPN's activities.
        With USFWS support, ANPN has successfully eliminated elephant
    poaching from the Wonga Wongue Presidential Reserve, whose bull
    elephants were previously heavily poached for their ivory. This
    approach is being replicated in other national parks in Gabon. USFWS
    support has also led to the establishment of a new Marine Protected
    Area (MPA) network via the `Blue Gabon' initiative. In working towards
    an expanded MPA network, ANPN, in collaboration with the Gabonese Navy
    and Gabon's national fisheries agency, succeeded in bringing together
    diverse stakeholders ranging from coastal communities to companies
    involved in offshore oil production. The U.S. Government will also
    assist the Gabonese Armed Forces and ANPN Park Rangers to develop their
    civil-military operations capability to ameliorate a gap in the
    Government's ability to work with the local populace on anti-poaching
    efforts.

        Question 18. Did Sao Tome's MCC Threshold Program achieve its
    stated aims?

        Answer. Sao Tome's MCC Threshold Program was very successful. It
    helped the Government of Sao Tome increase revenue through improved tax
    and customs administration and enforcement, and also helped streamline
    business registration procedures. Based solely on the success of its
    Threshold Program, Sao Tome would usually be considered for a compact,
    but it is considered too small. If confirmed, I would like to explore
    opportunities for including STP in MCC regional programs or MCC
    programs that are designed to target small island nations, such as
    those in the Pacific.

        Question 19. What kinds of U.S. assistance, if any, would you
    advocate for Sao Tome?

        Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for assistance in
    agriculture and agribusiness development, environmental degradation,
    and rural development. It is worthwhile to note that Peace Corps
    suspended its program in Sao Tome and Principe when it suspended its
    Gabon program in 2005, as the two programs were managed out of
    Libreville. If Peace Corps were to resume operating in Gabon, I would
    advocate for a corresponding return to Sao Tome.

        Question 20. What are the aims and status of U.S. maritime security
    capacity-building efforts in Sao Tome, and the role of the IMET
    program?

        Answer. Nearly all capacity-building occurs in the maritime
    security sector, where the U.S. works closely with the Sao Tomean Coast
    Guard. The United States led a multilateral effort with STP, Portugal,
    Brazil, and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the
    development of STP's draft maritime security strategy. The strategy was
    approved in December 2017 by the Council of Ministers and awaits final
    approval by the National Assembly, the last remaining step before we
    can continue our assistance in supporting the development of an
    implementation plan.
        The United States conducts security assistance training and annual
    military exercises with STP with the intent to help strengthen its
    maritime security capacity. The STP Coast Guard participates annually
    in the U.S. Navy-sponsored maritime security exercise OBANGAME EXPRESS,
    which Gabon will host in March 2018. STP has historically participated
    in limited fashion since 2011 by contributing some vessels, boarding
    teams, and use of its maritime operations center. Moreover, the U.S.
    Navy evaluates the STP Coast Guard's performance and programs training,
    when available, to assist in improving identified deficiencies.
        In 2007, the United States installed the first shore-based sensor
    system, the Regional Maritime Awareness Capability, on Sao Tome and
    Principe for maritime surveillance in the Gulf of Guinea. In 2010, the
    United States granted a 43-foot Archangel class patrol craft, using
    anti-terrorism funding. Both the sensor systems and vessel have
    suffered from a lack of maintenance due to insufficient funding within
    the Ministry of Defense and the Coast Guard, leaving both in a state of
    disrepair. Small Africa Maritime Security (AMS) Foreign Military
    Financing (FMF) grants have permitted some minimal maintenance. The
    U.S. Navy expects to spend $150,000 in repairs to the shore-based
    sensors systems in February 2018 and, dependent on the availability of
    funding, conduct around $200,000 in repairs to Archangel.
        The International Military Education and Training (IMET) program
    focuses on professionalizing STP's Coast Guard through professional
    military education (PME), Expanded-IMET (E-IMET) focused on human
    rights and rule of law, and limited technical training. Over the past
    three years, the IMET program has enabled the U.S. Embassy in
    Libreville to send three Sao Tomean Coast Guard officers to further
    their professional military education at U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Navy
    training centers. Currently, the IMET program sponsors a Sao Tomean
    Lieutenant Colonel attending the U.S. Navy Command College in Newport,
    Rhode Island.
        In late 2017, the Portuguese Navy announced that it would base the
    naval patrol craft ``Zaire'' in Sao Tome. The plan is to have two 33-
    man crews, one from STP and the other from Portugal, to patrol the
    waters within STP's Exclusive Economic Zone starting in January 2018.
    Over the course of one year, Portugal will phase in STP Coast Guard
    crew members and replace Portuguese sailors. The end state of this
    operation is STP taking complete control of the mission, comprised of
    only STP sailors, by January 2019. To support this endeavor, AFRICOM
    aims to start the process of integrating STP and Portugal into the
    Africa Maritime Law Enforcement Partnership (AMLEP) with the vessel as
    possible means to eventually conduct combined operations in the Gulf of
    Guinea with a U.S. Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment (LEDET).

                                   __________

          Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted
                 to Peter Vrooman by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

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

        Answer. During the course of my Foreign Service career, I have
    drafted or supervised the drafting of numerous Department of State
    Country Reports on Human Rights, including reports on Djibouti,
    Lebanon, Israel, and Ethiopia. When I served as the country desk
    officer for Algeria, I worked with the American Bar Association, which
    conveyed a ``Rule of Law letter'' to the Algerian Government on the
    case of another defense attorney who had been arrested and was later
    acquitted. I developed a strategy with our Embassy in Algiers and
    several international election monitoring organizations for observing
    the 1997 legislative elections, which, while flawed, marked the
    evolution toward more democratic government after years of violent
    conflict.At the United Nations, I worked with other diplomats to call
    for a Special Session of the U.N. General Assembly to commemorate the
    60th anniversary of the liberation of Nazi death camps. This session
    provided an opportunity for Elie Wiesel to address representatives of
    Member States, and its most significant impact was the establishment of
    an annual Holocaust Remembrance Day at the United Nations. In Israel,
    our team supported local NGO efforts to provide humanitarian assistance
    to migrants and trafficking victims. As spokesperson of the U.S.
    Embassy in India, I promoted the rights of the Girl Child and efforts
    to combat gender-based violence. For example, in the wake of several
    horrific rape cases in Delhi, our Embassy nominated an Indian victim as
    an International Woman of Courage.Q

        Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
    Rwanda? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
    confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Rwanda? What do you
    hope to accomplish through these actions?

        Answer. The State Department's most recent human rights report
    notes that the most important human rights issues in Rwanda are
    government harassment and arrest of political dissidents; restrictions
    on media freedom and civil liberties; and restrictions on and
    harassment of nongovernmental organizations. If confirmed, I would
    continue to consistently engage in a frank dialogue with the Government
    on human rights issues. I would ensure that Embassy staff attend
    relevant trials that are open to the public. I would also look for
    opportunities to sustain our engagement and programming with respect to
    promoting the rule of law, a vibrant civil society, and freedom of
    expression.

        Question 3. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
    addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
    previous response? What challenges will you face in Rwanda in advancing
    human rights, civil society, and democracy in general?

        Answer. Rwanda often replies to criticism of its human rights
    record that it is a sovereign country with a unique context and that
    outside actors should not interfere in its internal affairs,
    particularly after the failure of the international community to
    intervene to prevent the 1994 genocide. Our challenge is convincing the
    Government that efforts to silence critics run counter to Rwanda's
    development goals and constitutionally enshrined rights, and that
    greater respect for freedom of expression and media freedoms are
    crucial to fostering the knowledge-based economy the Government seeks
    to build.

        Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil
    society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with
    local human rights NGOs in Rwanda? If confirmed, what steps will you
    take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and
    ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security
    cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

        Answer. I am committed to meeting with U.S. and local human rights
    and civil society organizations, if confirmed. If confirmed, I will
    also ensure that my staff fully complies with the Leahy Law and similar
    efforts.

        Question 5. Will you and your Embassy team actively engage with
    Rwanda to address cases of key political prisoners or persons otherwise
    unjustly targeted by Rwanda?

        Answer. Yes, my Embassy team and I will actively engage with Rwanda
    on such cases.

        Question 6. Will you engage with Rwanda on matters of human rights,
    civil rights, and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

        Answer. If confirmed, I will actively engage with Rwandan officials
    on matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance. These issues
    are indispensable to our bilateral diplomacy and central to our efforts
    to ensure that Rwanda consolidates the socioeconomic gains it has made
    in the past decades.

        Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention
    (and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or
    U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the business or
    financial interests of any senior White House staff?

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

        Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any
    reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
    controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the
    President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior
    White House staff?

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

        Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have
    any financial interests in the Rwanda?

        Answer. Neither I nor any members of my immediate family have any
    financial interests in Rwanda.

        Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when
    managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of
    creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote,
    mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and
    underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

        Answer. In 1991, I entered the Foreign Service with two classmates
    who were the first two blind Foreign Service Officers. Their service
    inspired me to promote an inclusive workplace. I subsequently served as
    an EEO Counselor at two large U.S. embassies and this experience has
    greatly enhanced my toolkit for promoting the respect for and
    encouragement of diversity in the workplace. For example, I recommended
    mission-wide training and sensitization regarding sexual harassment in
    the workplace at three embassies. In one instance, I succeeded in
    removing a local guard supervisor who had created a hostile work
    environment for female employees. The removal of this bully not only
    addressed a valid EEO complaint, but also allowed for the development
    of a more tolerant and inclusive workforce environment that benefited
    all employees at the Embassy. My message as a mentor and a leader has
    been to encourage everyone at our missions to know their EEO rights and
    their reporting responsibilities regarding harassment and
    discrimination. If confirmed, I would ensure that all employees take
    required No FEAR Act training and EEO sensitization aimed at advancing
    this objective.

        Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the
    supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse
    and inclusive?

        Answer. In Addis Ababa, I chaired an interagency Inclusiveness
    Working Group that included supervisors and managers to look for ways
    to promote this value internally within our mission and externally in
    our public diplomacy and programmatic outreach. For example, we looked
    for concrete ways to promote awareness of the challenges faced by
    disabled persons. We awarded community grants to local NGOs and took
    steps to make sure that the Embassy, the Ambassador's residence, and
    our American space in Addis Ababa are accessible to disabled persons.
    We created a Disability Advisor position within our human resources
    section to promote accessibility, accommodation strategies, and more
    effective recruitment policies for our own staff. If confirmed, I would
    look forward to engaging in similar initiatives with our country team
    in Rwanda and will ensure that all Department of State supervisors have
    taken required leadership courses regarding EEO/Diversity and the
    fundamentals of supervision at the Foreign Service Institute, or other
    accredited leadership training institutions.

        Question 12. On December 6, the U.N. Committee Against Torture
    released its concluding observations after a routine review of the
    situation in Rwanda. During the review, committee members raised
    concerns about serious violations--including torture, extrajudicial
    executions, enforced disappearances, and intimidation of journalists,
    human rights defenders and opposition party members. What role should
    the U.S. play in addressing the concerns raised by the U.N. with the
    Rwandan Government?

        Answer. The U.S. Government has repeatedly expressed concerns about
    torture; extrajudicial killings; enforced disappearances; and
    intimidation of journalists, human rights defenders, and opposition
    figures in Rwanda. Our Embassy has also encouraged senior members of
    the Rwandan Government to engage with U.N. bodies and international
    human rights organizations to address credible allegations of human
    rights violations. If confirmed, I will continue to raise these
    concerns with the Rwandan Government. I will also encourage the
    Government of Rwanda to continue to investigate allegations of torture
    and to bring additional perpetrators of torture to justice, as the
    committee against torture highlighted in its second periodic report
    (CAT/C/RWA/CO/2) regarding Rwandan Government efforts to date.

        Question 13. Rwanda is ranked 50th of 176 on Transparency
    International's Corruption Index. In what sectors is most official
    corruption found in Rwanda?

        Answer. Rwanda is ranked among the least corrupt countries in
    Africa, and the government has been proactive in addressing corruption
    when it occurs. While corruption is not prevalent within any specific
    economic sectors, there are occasional cases of misuse of public funds.
    Rwanda's National Public Prosecution Authority routinely prosecutes
    civil servants, police, and other officials for fraud, petty
    corruption, awarding of public tenders illegally, embezzlement, and
    mismanagement of public assets. In 2017, the vice rector of the
    University of Rwanda and the managing directors of the Water and
    Sanitation Agency and the Energy Utility Corporation were arrested on
    corruption charges. Between September 2016 and August 2017, 203
    individuals--mostly local leaders and administrative staff members--
    were convicted of embezzlement.

        Question 14. If confirmed, what tools do you have at your disposal
    to help address corruption and what actions will you take as Ambassador
    to advocate for improvement in transparency and good governance with
    relevant Rwandan stakeholders?

        Answer. The Government of Rwanda has stated its commitment to
    eradicate official corruption. Our Embassy is actively engaged in
    advocating for improvements in fiscal transparency with senior Rwandan
    officials and in promoting capacity building for local officials and
    administrative staff to improve good governance and management of
    public resources. If confirmed, I would continue these efforts.

        Question 15. The State Department has ranked Rwanda ``Tier 2
    Watchlist'' on trafficking in persons. If confirmed, what types of U.S.
    diplomatic efforts and assistance, if any, would you pursue to help
    Rwanda better tackle this problem?

        Answer. The United States is supporting Rwanda's efforts to address
    the concerns raised in the Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report through
    multiple initiatives geared to improving inter-government coordination
    on TIP and boosting investigative and prosecutorial capacity. For
    example, in January 2017, USAID awarded a $1.3 million grant to the
    International Organization for Migration (IOM) to assist Rwanda in
    combatting trafficking.
        If confirmed, I would monitor the effectiveness of this new
    program, along with other U.S. Government-funded initiatives to combat
    trafficking in persons and continue to make the issue a priority in our
    diplomatic engagement with the Government of Rwanda.

        Question 16. In what ways might such efforts [to combat human
    trafficking] be incorporated into existing U.S. programs that aim to
    help strengthen Rwanda's security sector and the rule of law?
        Answer. In March 2017, the State Department's Office to Monitor and
    Combat Trafficking in Persons (J/TIP) awarded a targeted technical
    assistance grant to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime for
    investigative and prosecutorial training.
        J/TIP has also approved an additional award for FY 2018 to the
    International Organization for Migration to combat TIP, including in
    refugee camps, that complements the existing USAID grant to IOM.
        If confirmed, I would look for synergies between these programs and
    existing police-training programs that the U.S. Government supports,
    such as the International Law Enforcement Academy and police,
    peacekeeping, and capacity-building programs. I would also encourage
    the Government of Rwanda to address recommendations identified in our
    TIP report.

        Question 17. What steps has Rwanda taken, if any, to address
    alleged official involvement in Burundian refugee recruitment into
    armed groups in 2015-2016?

        Answer. In 2016, the Government of Rwanda adopted new guidelines on
    refugee camp management, which explicitly outlawed recruitment and
    trafficking-in-persons in refugee camps and imposed criminal sanctions
    for these actions. There were no credible reports of Rwandan
    authorities' involvement in the recruitment of refugees into armed
    groups from Rwanda's refugee camps in 2017, and Rwanda was removed from
    the Child Soldier Prevention Act list in 2017.

        Question 18. The U.S. has invested heavily in development and
    peacekeeping in Rwanda over the past two decades. What impacts, if any,
    might the administration's proposal to decrease funding for health and
    development programs have on Rwanda, if implemented? What democracy-
    promotion programs might be feasible, if any?

        Answer. U.S. assistance in Rwanda has improved basic health
    services, expanded economic opportunities in rural areas, strengthened
    agricultural production and food security, prepared youth to contribute
    to the transitioning economy, and encouraged citizen-responsive
    governance. USAID will continue to find effective ways to leverage
    private sector and local resources to advance these development goals
    and support Rwanda's efforts to reduce its reliance on foreign
    assistance. USAID supports a number of targeted activities to promote
    the rule of law, human rights, civil society, and the media. These
    activities include strengthening local NGO capacity to engage in
    policy-making, improving the ability of the media to provide
    independent and impartial information to objectively inform citizens,
    and skills training for judges to issue accessible and transparent
    decisions.

        Question 19. What lessons can we draw from Rwanda's response to
    criticism and military aid restrictions imposed in reaction to Rwanda's
    support for rebel groups in DRC and Burundi?

        Answer. Rwanda defends fiercely its reputation and actions when
    challenged by international partners and NGOs and is quick to issue
    defensive responses to any evidence or reports linking the Government
    to wrongdoing. However, Rwanda also cares about its international
    reputation, and in some instances has taken corrective steps in the
    past in response to concerns about its actions in the region when met
    with sustained criticism and especially punitive measures that affect
    its access to international aid. Coordinated messaging from the
    international community, including the United States, has been
    important in encouraging Rwanda to play a constructive role in
    supporting peace and stability in the Great Lakes region, including in
    the DRC.
        Question 20. Rwanda is named in the President's Emergency Plan for
    AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Strategy for Accelerating HIV/AIDS Epidemic
    Control (2017-2020) as one of 13 high-burdened countries prioritized
    for investment during the life of the strategy to achieve the 90-90-90
    targets by 2020, whereby 90 percent of people living with HIV know
    their status, 90 percent of people who know their status are accessing
    treatment and 90 percent of people on treatment are virally suppressed.
    What are the main challenges facing the country in achieving their 90-
    90-90 goal?

        Answer. Because Rwanda is in the ``last mile'' to reach the 90-90-
    90 goals, finding the remaining HIV-positive individuals is the
    country's greatest challenge. Therefore, the PEPFAR program in Rwanda
    is focusing on finding undiagnosed HIV-positive individuals in specific
    key populations (commercial sex workers, men who have sex with men,
    etc.) who have the highest prevalence rates and getting them onto
    antiretroviral treatment. PEPFAR is also increasing its testing efforts
    in geographic areas that have the highest HIV prevalence rates (i.e.
    the three districts of Kigali) and supporting proven interventions to
    reduce new infections.

        Question 21. If confirmed, what will you do to support Rwanda and
    its communities in achieving that [90-90-90] goal?

        Answer. In addition to increasing efforts to find, test, and treat
    the remaining undiagnosed HIV-positive individuals, it is imperative to
    continue providing support to direct services in order to maintain the
    impressive results Rwanda has already achieved in putting and keeping
    people living with HIV on treatment, which is key for viral
    suppression. If confirmed, I would concentrate my efforts on ensuring
    that the Government of Rwanda continues to foster an environment that
    enables these successes to continue, while strengthening its own
    domestic health investments. As such, I would work closely with senior
    government leaders to support the implementation of PEPFAR activities
    and initiatives to reach the 90-90-90 goal and maintain the U.S.
    taxpayers' investment in a program that has saved tens of thousands of
    lives in Rwanda and millions of lives throughout the African continent.

                                   __________

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

                                    APPENDIX

                        Alphabetical Listing of Nominees

                       Considered by the Senate Committee

                        on Foreign Relations During the

                       First Session of the 115th Congress

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

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]