[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 
               THE BURMA CRISIS, ONE YEAR AFTER THE COUP

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

 SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA, THE PACIFIC, CENTRAL ASIA, AND NONPROLIFERATION

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                           FEBRUARY 17, 2022

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-105

                               __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
        
        
        
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       
        


       Available:  http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
                            docs.house.gov, 
                       or http://www.govinfo.gov
                       
                       
                       
                           ______                       


             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
46-709 PDF          WASHINGTON : 2022 
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

                  GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York, Chairman

BRAD SHERMAN, California             MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking 
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey                  Member
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia         CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida          STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
KAREN BASS, California               SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts       DARRELL ISSA, California
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island        ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California                 LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas                ANN WAGNER, Missouri
DINA TITUS, Nevada                   BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California                 BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania             KEN BUCK, Colorado
DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota             TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                MARK GREEN, Tennessee
COLIN ALLRED, Texas                  ANDY BARR, Kentucky
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan                 GREG STEUBE, Florida
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia         DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania       AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey           PETER MEIJER, Michigan
ANDY KIM, New Jersey                 NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
SARA JACOBS, California              RONNY JACKSON, Texas
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina        YOUNG KIM, California
JIM COSTA, California                MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
JUAN VARGAS, California              JOE WILSON, South Carolina
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois

                                     
 
                    Sophia Lafargue, Staff Director

               Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
                                 ------                                

 Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, Central Asia, and Nonproliferation

                    AMI BERA, California, Chairman,

BRAD SHERMAN, California             STEVE CHABOT, Ohio, Ranking Member
DINA TITUS, Nevada                   SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
ANDY LEVIN. Michigan                 ANN WAGNER, Missouri
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania       KEN BUCK, Colorado
ANDY KIM, New Jersey                 TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
GERALD CONNOLLY, Virginia            MARK GREEN, Tennessee
TED LIEU, California                 ANDY BARR, Kentucky
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia         YOUNG KIM, California
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina


                                     

                      Jamie Morgan, Staff Director
                      
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                               WITNESSES

Moy, Kin, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East 
  Asian and Pacific Affairs, U.S. Department of State............     7
Hart, Craig, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for East Asia 
  and the Pacific, U.S. Agency for International Development.....    12

                  INFORMATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Information submitted for the record.............................    25

                                APPENDIX

Hearing Notice...................................................    43
Hearing Minutes..................................................    44
Hearing Attendance...............................................    45

            RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Responses to questions submitted for the record..................    46


               THE BURMA CRISIS, ONE YEAR AFTER THE COUP

                      Thursday, February 17, 2022

                          House of Representatives,
                 Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific,
                 Central Asia, and Nonproliferation
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., 
via Webex, Hon. Ami Bera (chairman of the subcommittee) 
presiding.
    Mr. Bera. The virtual gavel is banged. The Subcommittee on 
Asia, the Pacific, Central Asia, and Nonproliferation will come 
to order.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the committee at any point. And all members will have 
5 days to submit statements, extraneous materials, and 
questions for the record, subject to the length limitations in 
the rules. To insert something into the record, please have 
your staff email the previously mentioned address or contact 
full committee staff.
    Please keep your video function on at all times, even when 
you are not recognized by the chair. Members are responsible 
for muting and unmuting themselves. And please remember to mute 
yourself after you finish speaking. Consistent with remote 
committee proceedings on H.Res. 8, staff will only mute members 
and witnesses as appropriate when they are not under 
recognition to eliminate background noise.
    I see that we have a quorum and will now recognize myself 
for opening remarks.
    You know, prior to making my remarks, let me recognize 
Ranking Member Chabot who was not able to join us today due to 
a family obligation. He has long been a leader on Burma. And I 
look forward to continue to work with him on the challenges 
facing this country as we look for a path forward. I also want 
to appreciate the vice ranking member, Ms. Wagner, who has long 
been a champion on issues in Southeast Asia, and particularly 
Burma, who will be serving in Rep Chabot's stead as the ranking 
member. Thank you, Ms. Wagner, for doing that.
    Let's talk about why this hearing is so important. When we 
think about the coup that the Tatmadaw executed almost a year 
ago on February 1st. We are now marking the first anniversary. 
The military junta known as the Tatmadaw flagrantly disregarded 
the Democratic process that was taking place. It was a young 
democracy, but the Democratic process that the Burmese people 
had put in place.
    The Burmese security forces the Tatmadaw had detained, 
jailed, and tortured countless selected representatives, 
journalists, and human rights defenders in this effort to 
stifle defense. They have killed thousands of innocent 
civilians, and uprooted and displaced hundreds of thousands 
more, destabilizing the region.
    What the Tatmadaw did not recognize is that the Burmese 
people have changed. They have experienced some beginnings of 
freedom and they rose up and this feels very different than 
other uprisings. You have seen several ethnic armed 
organizations that have used the ongoing crisis to expand their 
territorial and administrative control to certain regions. And 
as we have entered the dry season, you have seen the increased 
fighting that has worsened the already deteriorating 
humanitarian situation.
    Having traveled to the region last fall to--I went on to 
talk to individuals there, to talk to our embassy staff there, 
as well as NGO's that are operating on Thai-Burmese order to 
try to provide aid. You know, there is a real concern that the 
Tatmadaw will use this crises and extending into May to really 
try to stifle the resistance movement. With that said, we have 
seen the resistance movement fight back, join together with 
other ethnic minority groups. And there is a real concern that 
we are losing a window of opportunity to find a diplomatic 
solution here to avert this humanitarian crisis.
    I do want to commend our ASEAN colleagues. I had a chance 
to visit Jakarta and talk to the Indonesians who I do want to 
single out as really, you know, taking a leadership role, 
trying to push ASEAN to find a solution forward. As Indonesia 
passes the--or as the baton passes on to Cambodia, I really 
urge my Cambodian colleagues to continue to work within the 
ASEAN context to push Myanmar to at a minimum adhere to the 
five-point plan that was put in place. And again, work with 
countries in the region, including the United States, China, 
India and others to find a path forward here.
    Today, I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses as 
they give us an assessment of what they are seeing on the 
ground, their conversations with the countries in the region, 
including ASEAN, but also potentially there is an opportunity 
to find common ground with China where our interests may align. 
Also, with the Indians who were, you know, experiencing a 
border crisis as well as Thailand.
    I also do want to commend the Biden Administration for very 
early on implementing aggressive sanctions, taking aggressive 
policy positions and, working with Congress to speak with one 
voice, Democrats, Republicans, and the Administration to 
condemn this coup.
    So with that, I really do look forward to our witnesses 
giving us an update on what is happening on the ground.
    And let me recognize Representative Ann Wagner, the acting 
ranking member from Missouri. Thank you. Ms. Wagner.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, certainly for 
holding this very important hearing that is near and dear to my 
heart. And I am pleased to be filling in in Congressman 
Chabot's stead here. And I want to thank our witnesses 
certainly for their service.
    What is happening in Burma is devastating. My heart breaks, 
continues to break for the Rohingya who continue to suffer 
unimaginable atrocities at the hands of the genocidal Burmese 
military are Tatmadaw. And for the courageous protesters 
braving a brutal crackdown as they fight for democracy.
    I have been proud to work with my colleagues on this 
committee, to demonstrate Congress' unequivocal support for the 
Burmese people seeking a return to democracy, as well as our 
strong condemnation of the military coup.
    I am happy to say that the Foreign Affairs Committee 
unanimously advanced H.Res. 896 just last week which condemns 
the Burmese military for perpetrating gross violations of human 
rights. And I am hopeful that this legislation will soon be 
considered by the House.
    I am also urging the House to immediately take up Chairman 
Meeks' H.R. 5497, which is the Burma act, which I am a proud 
cosponsor. This critical legislation imposes tough sanctions on 
the perpetrators of the coup, requires action to cutoff the 
regime sources of financial support and calls on the State 
Department to formally designate the persecution of Rohingya as 
in fact genocide. The United States must continue to support 
the people of Burma as they stand up to the military junta and 
to bring to justice those responsible for egregious human 
rights violations and crimes against humanity.
    The global norms that safeguard international peace and 
security require active defense and enforcement by the 
international community. And in the last few years, we have 
seen China, Russia, Iran, and other autocracies align against 
Democratic norms, universal human rights, and even rights to 
freedom and self determination.
    Our adversaries are watching to see how we will respond 
when peace and Democratic freedoms are challenged. The Biden 
Administration's failure to respond swiftly and decisively to 
Russian aggression against Ukraine using a deterrent factor 
before a Russian invasion and uphold the responsibilities to 
our Afghan allies has further emboldened some of the dictators 
and bullies around the world. It is difficult to believe that 
any responsible member of the international community would 
hesitate to take action against Burma's military junta which 
has committed genocide against the Rohingya Muslims, illegally 
seized control of the Burmese government, and visited 
extraordinary violence and suffering on its own people.
    And yet, China and Russia continue to stand in the way of 
efforts to build a coordinated and meaningful international 
response to the cries in Burma. This is unacceptable. And I 
urge the Administration to demand stronger action in the United 
Nations to hold the Tatmadaw accountable.
    We must do more to isolate and punish the Burmese military. 
And it is imperative that the United States show strong and 
consistent leadership through this crisis to secure a future in 
which rule of law and democracy underpin relations among 
States.
    I thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back the remainder 
of my time.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Wagner.
    Let me now introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is 
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Kin Moy. Mr. Moy was 
appointed the principal deputy assistant secretary for the 
Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs on June 15, 2021. 
Immediately prior to this appointment, Mr. Moy was the Acting 
Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Intelligence and 
Research. He has been a Foreign Service officer for 29 years. 
Mr. Moy, thank you for your service.
    Our second witness is USAID Deputy Assistant Administrator 
Craig Hart. Craig Hart is a career member of the USAID Senior 
Foreign Service and has served as the Deputy Assistant 
Administrator for East Asia and the Pacific since August 2020. 
Prior to this, Craig served as deputy mission director in 
Vietnam from 2016 to 2020. Since joining USAID in 2005 he has 
served as a program officer in Tanzania, Afghanistan, the 
Republic of Georgia, and Washington, DC. Mr. Hart, thank you 
for your service.
    Let me go ahead and recognize Mr. Moy for 5 minutes his 
testimony.

  STATEMENT OF KIN MOY, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, 
 BUREAU OF EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 
                             STATE

    Mr. Moy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and madam vice ranking 
member, and all of the subcommittee members here today. I want 
to thank you for inviting me to speak with you about this very 
grave situation in Burma.
    The opening remarks that you made, Mr. Chairman, and as 
well as you madam vice ranking member were very thoughtful, 
very insightful. I think Secretary Blinken would want me to say 
that we will continue to work with you. We will continue to 
share as much information about the situation there as we can 
in order to really unite in order to, you know, protect as many 
Burmese citizens as we possibly can.
    In the year following the coup, the total damage the 
Burmese military has inflicted on innocent people in the 
country is impossible to calculate. But I would like to share a 
few data points with you to demonstrate the devastation it has 
wrought. Credible sources indicate the military has killed more 
than 1,500 people in Burma, including at least 117 children. 
And those are only the deaths that have been verified. The 
number is likely much larger.
    The regime has arrested at least 12,000 people and more 
than 9,000 of them remain in detention. More than 400,000 have 
been forced to flee their homes and are internally displaced, 
while others are seeking refuge in neighboring countries.
    The numbers paint a bleak picture. And the Burmese 
military's determination to employ horrific violence shows no 
sign of letting up. This is the same force that committed 
ethnic cleansing other atrocities against Rohingya in 2017.
    Mr. Chairman, I would like to spend a few minutes detailing 
how the Administration is grappling with this situation 
including our efforts to pressure the regime to immediately 
cease the violence, allow unhindered humanitarian access, 
release those unjustly detained by the military, including 
wrongfully detained U.S. citizen Kyaw Htay Oo. Ensure those 
responsible for atrocities and other human rights abuses are 
held to account and swiftly return Burma toward a path to 
inclusive democracy.
    Immediately after the military detained Burma's elected 
leaders the State Department acted quickly to assess that the 
military carried out a coup d'etat. President Biden issued an 
executive order shortly thereafter. The executive order 
authorizes sanctions in connection with the coup, including on 
individuals and entities responsible for undermining Democratic 
institutions in Burma and on their family members. We have used 
this authority to apply targeted sanctions on 65 individuals 
and sanctioned or placed export controls on 26 entities to 
date. These includes top military commanders, senior officials 
of the regime and their family members, as well as entities 
that generate revenue for the military and its leaders, and 
cronies that are involved in the military's procuring of the 
weapons.
    The State Department continues to work with the Department 
of the Treasury and other interagency partners to identify and 
assess additional sanctions, as well as other actions to 
restrict revenue to the regime. A top consideration when 
carrying out targeted sanctions is to ensure we are not 
exacerbating humanitarian crisis on the ground or increasing 
poverty for the people of Burma.
    We have closely coordinated all of our actions, including 
sanctions with our allies and partners to present a united 
front in the international community. We regularly consult with 
our partners in capitals across the world and the United States 
remains a leading voice in driving international policy on 
Burma. This coordination has severely limited the regime's 
international space. The U.N. General Assembly has also called 
on States to prevent the flow of arms into Burma. And our 
colleagues at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. similarly pushed for 
action there. The U.N. has established and the Administration 
is supporting the independent investigative mechanism for 
Myanmar otherwise known as IIMM to lay a robust foundation for 
criminal accountability efforts that may become available.
    Since the coup, the U.N. Security Council has met seven 
times to discuss the situation in Burma. Outside of the United 
Nations senior State Department officials are in regular 
contact with the ASEAN counterparts. And we value the role of 
ASEAN's neutrality as well as efforts by individual member 
States in promoting a peaceful resolution to the crisis and 
providing much needed support to the people of Burma.
    We are also in regular contact with the National Unity 
Government and other representatives from the pro-democracy 
movement. Burma faces both a political crisis and a 
humanitarian crisis on top of a myriad of economic and other 
challenges. And I will defer to my good friend, USAID Deputy 
Assistant Administrator Craig Hart, on those details of our 
efforts to mitigate the humanitarian crisis.
    But I would like to highlight the ongoing work to support 
vulnerable populations with Congress' support. In Fiscal Year 
2021, the U.S. Government provided more than $434 million to 
the humanitarian assistance for those affected by ongoing 
violence, including those internally displaced in Burma. 
Refugees from Burma in the region and communities hosting from 
Burma.
    Again, Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much for your time 
and all of the members of the subcommittee. And I look forward 
to taking your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Moy follows:]
    
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
   

      Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Moy.
    And I should have said without objection both witnesses' 
prepared written statements will be made part of the record.
    Now let me go and recognize Mr. Hart for his opening 
statement for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF CRAIG HART, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU 
 FOR EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL 
                          DEVELOPMENT

    Mr. Hart. Chairman Bera, Vice Ranking Member Wagner, 
distinguished members of the subcommittee thank you very much 
for the opportunity to testify today regarding the important 
role that the United States Agency for International 
Development is playing to address the ongoing crisis in Burma.
    It was just 1 year ago that the start of the military coup 
d'etat slammed the door shut on Burma's recent Democratic 
opening. The coup is worsening the humanitarian plight of the 
people of Burma and has rolled back years of development gains, 
threatening what prosperity and freedom the country had 
achieved.
    So in 2021 poverty doubled, the country's GDP plummeted by 
18 percent. Government services are crippled, including health. 
The coup and pandemic have stolen more than a 1-1/2 years of 
education from over 12 million children. TB treatment and case 
notifications plunged by half, elevating the risk of multi drug 
resistant variants that could spread beyond Burma's borders. 
Some 6 million people in Burma are now requiring humanitarian 
assistance.
    So on the ground, USAID partners face harassment, 
detention, raids, intimidation, and deadly violence. Despite 
these challenges, our USAID office that was reopened almost 10 
years ago in Burma and our great implementing partners are 
continue to support health, livelihoods in education, and the 
drive for peace, democracy and human rights.
    USAID's comparative advantage is our field presence and our 
programmatic flexibility. Just days after the start of the 
coup, we shifted more than $42 million in assistance in 
activities that would have benefited the government to expand 
work supporting local civil societies, NGO's, and private 
sector partners to benefit the people of Burma, not the regime.
    Our immediate concern has been deliver humanitarian 
assistance. In 2021, we reached over 430,000 people with 
lifesaving aid through internal access. USAID's partners, 
including the U.N. World Food Programme continue to deliver 
food and other critical assistance to hundreds of thousands of 
internally displaced persons.
    For Rohingya IDPs and other vulnerable people in the 
Rakhine States. USAID provides shelter, water, and COVID-19 
prevention among other services.
    In health, USAID has expended health service delivery 
through NGO's, ethnic health organizations and the private 
sector. Burma currently has the lowest proportion of people who 
are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 in Southeast Asia. The 
regime secured about 60 million doses from the People's 
Republic of China, India, and Russia as of February 13th and 
has administered two doses to about 36 percent of the 
population.
    The COVID-19 vaccine facility COVAX allocated, but has yet 
to deliver about 10.7 million doses to Burma, since this is 
pending agreement regarding vaccine distribution. USAID and 
like minded donors agree that COVAX can play a unique role in 
vaccinating people who cannot or will not seek vaccinations 
through a regime controlled rollout. USAID supports site 
readiness for COVID-19 in terms of the vaccine doses that are 
coming, and also promotes COVID-19 prevention, testing, and 
treatment in community clinics.
    Since the coup began, we have launched four new activities, 
the first of these supports human rights defenders and pro-
democracy groups. Equipping civil society with the tools that 
they actually need to respond to human rights violations and 
atrocities. This is strengthening the foundations of resilience 
that the people will rely on to achieve their Democratic 
aspirations.
    The second will strengthen the quality of basic education 
through nongovernments, ethnic and Monastic providers helping 
them meet community needs and this includes out of school youth 
as well.
    Finally, two health activities will ensure that people in 
conflict affected and hard to reach areas can still access 
malaria, HIV, and TB services that benefit the people of Burma 
and help prevent global threats. USAID will continue to look 
for new opportunities to support the people of Burma as we work 
to regain what has been lost in the face of this derailed 
Democratic trajectory.
    Thank you for the opportunity to represent USAID. And I am 
looking forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Hart follows:]
    
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

      
    Mr. Bera. Thank you for your testimony.
    I will now recognize members for 5 minutes each. And 
pursuant to House Rules, all time yielded is for the purpose of 
questioning our witnesses. Because of the virtual format of 
this hearing, I will recognize members by committee seniority, 
alternating between Democrats and Republicans. If you miss your 
turn, please let our staff know and we will circle back to you. 
If you seek recognition, you must unmute your microphone and 
address the chair verbally.
    I will start by recognizing myself for 5 minutes. To both 
witnesses, thank you for your testimony. A few weeks ago, 
Chairman Meeks, myself, Ranking Member Chabot had a chance to 
virtually have a conversation with our Ambassador to Burma, Tom 
Vajda. And I should recognize and thank the folks on or mission 
that still operates in Rangoon for their service obviously 
operating in a difficult circumstance.
    He did give us an assessment of what we were seeing on the 
ground. And maybe PDAS Moy I direct that first question to you. 
This feels very different right now but, you know, but the 
Tatmadaw has made statements that they have been sanctioned 
before, that they can survive the sanctions and, you know, 
continue to operate.
    And that may necessarily be true, but what seems different 
this time is the rising up of the Burma people and the 
resiliency of this resistance movement. And the increase in 
violence, how the Burma people are coming together with some of 
the ethnic minorities, whether it is under the National Unity 
Government. And my big fear is that this may be a long 
protracted conflict that may spill into an all out civil war. 
And the diplomatic opportunity to find a solution may be 
closing fairly rapidly. And while it is not synonymous with 
what we saw in the Middle East and Syria, I mean there are some 
similarities that you may have a full on staled State that does 
put tremendous on the region and the other countries in the 
region.
    I ask the question PDAS Moy, is the window to find a 
diplomatic solution closing? Is there a diplomatic solution 
that does not include bringing the Tatmadaw to the table in 
some way to deescalate violence? And then what are the 
opportunities--I touched in my opening statement on the 
importance of ASEAN here.
    And again, I think the Indonesians and others have done a 
wonderful job trying to push ASEAN to lead a solution, but are 
there--you know, India clearly has some concerns here, China 
clearly has some concerns. And is there a place where our 
interests may align?
    So I will recognize PDAS Moy first.
    Mr. Moy. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 
for recognizing Ambassador Vajda's incredible work out in the 
field and his mission out there who continue to work in some 
very unfavorable conditions to say the least.
    You really raise a very good point about the difference 
between 2022 and the 1990's. I think a year ago you would hear 
many sort of grizzled veterans of the region say, well, we can 
expect the junta will consolidate power and prevail as it has 
in the past. Well, that did not happen as you noted. And one of 
the reasons for that and I think that all of us agree that over 
the last few years because of the influence of Democratic 
governance, the people of Burma, especially those younger 
generations continue to thirst for governance that represents 
the people's interest and the rule of law.
    And so, the situation is much different today where if you 
ask people on the ground, people in the region, they would say, 
well, they had thought that the junta would have consolidated 
power by now. But in fact, that is not the case at all. If you 
are on the ground, and Ambassador Vajda's noted this to us, 
they are not in control. And one of the reasons is there is so 
much opposition, especially among those who continue to thirst 
for that democracy.
    I do agree with you completely that we still, even though 
we have tapped into multilateral groups and we have talked to 
like minded countries, we can still urge more coordination in 
terms of showing the junta that they are not likely to avail in 
the near future and their options are limited. And we are 
hopeful that that creates an environment that is conducive for 
all parties, especially those who are promoting nonviolence and 
a return to democracy.
    An environment where they can get together. Ambassador 
Vajda has said this often to us, and I think it is absolutely 
true, and that is the change in Burma must come within. And I 
am hopeful, we are all hopeful that with U.S. support and other 
countries, like minded countries and also you mentioned 
partners like India.
    And also maybe reaching out, I know that Secretary Blinken 
has spoken to China about Burma issues as well, but other 
parties, especially those on the border can play a role in 
encouraging the kind of dialog and maybe disabusing the notion 
that this is going to be the junta of the 1990's prevailing 
once again.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you.
    And since we are a smaller group today, we will probably do 
a second round of questions, because members have a number of 
other questions.
    Let me go and recognize Representative Ann Wagner from 
Missouri.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Russia has undermined the international response to the 
coup by selling the junta lower than $2.3 billion in weapons 
over the last year, while it prepares the most significant 
threat to peace in Europe since World War II.
    Deputy Assistant Secretary Moy, what consequences will the 
United States impose on Russia for being complicit in the 
Tatmadaw's staggering human rights abuses?
    Mr. Moy. Well, thank you very much for that question, 
Congresswoman.
    While we continue to press the regime to cease the violence 
release all those who are unjustly detained and return Burma 
back to democracy. And you have noted with regard to 
international arms sales and flows into Burma, I am not going 
to personally name and shame myself. But I think we all know 
what you are talking about, because you cited the name of the 
country.
    You know, we lead efforts last June at the U.N. General 
Assembly to call on the suspension of arms flows into Burma. 
And the Secretary himself has pledged to seek ways to cutoff 
the regime's access to weapons.
    Just earlier this month we cosigned with 35 other country's 
a statement commemorating the 1 year anniversary of the coup. 
And there was a prominent mention of a call for an arms embargo 
and the end to transfers to the regime.
    I think we all know that arms trafficking is one of the 
kind of shadowy or even shady types of transactions we see out 
there. There are times when our government learns about 
potential arms flows or different packages that could go into 
Burma. And when we learned of this information, we can work 
bilaterally to try to dissuade countries----
    Mrs. Wagner. Now, I appreciate that. $2.3 billion in 
weapons over the last year alone from Russia is unconscionable. 
I am certainly proud, let me just say that Congress has never 
hesitated to call the violence against the Rohingya what it is 
in fact, which is genocide. But the United States has now at 
last recognized the Uyghur and the Armenian genocide, but has 
not yet recognized a Rohingya genocide. And Deputy Assistant 
Secretary Moy, why has the Administration neglected to make a 
formal determination on the Rohingya genocide?
    Mr. Hart. Thank you very much for the question. As you 
know, the Secretary did commit to a review last year of the 
atrocities committed against Rohingya. And the review would 
make a determination whether it fit the criteria for genocide 
determination. The review is ongoing. I do not have a timetable 
for you in terms of when that will conclude, but I think what 
makes this determination so impactful is that we review factual 
information, we review all the evidence, we review, you know, 
the interviews of people. And then we make an objective 
determination.
    And so, I think at the end of this process, we will give a 
recommendation to the Secretary. Again, this is ongoing, but we 
are going to be meticulous in how we approach that review.
    Mrs. Wagner. Well, let me just jump in, because I have so 
many other questions. But I have to say, I hope that you will 
take into account Congress' lead in calling this in fact what 
it is, genocide, because it has been very bipartisan.
    I also, let me just say, I am outraged that China and 
Russia are impeding efforts to craft a robust response to the 
coup in the United Nations. Deputy Assistant Secretary Moy, how 
is the United States working to break this deadlock over an 
international arms embargo on the Burmese military?
    Mr. Moy. Well, as I noted, we led and effort last June at 
the General Assembly in New York to call out countries and to 
call on an arms embargo. I think that with regard to Russia in 
particular, because we see that country as being the sort of 
the main perpetrator in this case. There are other countries as 
well. But I think that to find ways to apply pressure, 
international pressure, using other like minded countries where 
we come together, we call on all countries to refrain from arms 
flowing in.
    I think that when arms do flow into Burma, it necessarily 
means that there will be more destablization there, there will 
be more violence. And I hardly think, especially with border 
countries that is in the interest of Burma's neighbors. And so, 
we are going to rely on like mindedness to help persuade or 
dissuade Russia from those kinds of transactions.
    Mrs. Wagner. The time is urgent. My time has run out.
    I appreciate your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. And I yield 
back.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Wagner.
    Let me now recognize the gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Ms. 
Houlahan for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Houlahan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Mr. Hart 
and Mr. Moy for joining us today.
    Last May, this committee held a hearing on at the time the 
recent coup in Burma and how the United States was responding. 
And I asked at that time about the potential positive impact 
that American businesses could have if they stayed in Burma by 
continuing to provide jobs and economic support to local 
communities.
    So as a followup to that question, I was wondering if you 
could tell me if the State Department or USAID is indeed 
tracking American commercial involvement in Burma still? And if 
a significant number of companies chose to leave or to stay? 
And for those possibly that stayed, has their presence in fact 
supported the Burmese people?
    And either one of you please. Thank you.
    Mr. Moy. I do not know, Craig, if you wanted to start. I 
can----
    Mr. Hart. Sure.
    Mr. Moy. Go ahead, please.
    Mr. Hart. Sure. Thank you. Thank you so much for the 
question. And I would say that one of the areas that we have 
very much focused in on has been the humanitarian assistance in 
food security. And so, what we have been doing as part of that 
food security spectrum is both bringing in significant amounts 
of humanitarian assistance through our partners, but also 
looking at local options for supporting the small holder 
farmers for processing locally, to ensure that there is another 
option to food security.
    And so, that is one of areas where we had worked with the 
private sector to be able to engage on that. I do not currently 
have a breakout of U.S. companies within that mix, but that is 
very much an area that we are zeroing in on.
    The other area that we have worked with private sector is 
the health provision, looking at private health clinics, 
because many people are not comfortable or cannot assess public 
clinics. So therefore, we have shifted our entire program to 
look at working with other partners, be they local NGO's, 
international, and others who are operating in that space as 
well, because the health gains that we had achieved are 
really--have significantly backslid in areas like TB, and other 
maternal and child and health areas as well. And so, we are 
looking for a range of partners very much to include private 
sector to help address those gaps.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Moy. In terms of American businesses and other 
businesses for that matter who are working in Burma, we 
regularly consult with them. As you may have seen on the 1 year 
anniversary of the coup, we actually issued a business advisory 
to frankly or to have a frank discussion about the potential 
hazards of working in Burma.
    We do support businesses that are legitimately working 
there because our commitment is to helping the people of Burma. 
And we think that having economic activity there, especially 
when they are trusted U.S. firms and trusted foreign farms, 
that can help the population there.
    But it is tricky. We want to make sure that we are not 
legitimizing the junta. We are not legitimizing what we regard 
as an illegitimate force that took over a year ago. And so, to 
make sure that those sources of revenue do not flow to those 
who are perpetrating violence that is----
    Ms. Houlahan. Sure. Sure.
    And I totally understand from both of you gentlemen the 
dangers that exist if the resources that we are sending end up 
having unintended consequences. But I do think it is intriguing 
and interesting that as near as I can tell neither of you know 
of what businesses remain that are American, you know, run or 
operated, or maybe have we not documented whether they have 
stayed?
    Do we have a very directed and specific outreach to them 
that clearly these--or not clearly, I would assume these would 
be trusted assets and resources because they are American owned 
and operated. So it is intriguing to me that we do not have a 
direct program or plan or understanding of where they are. Is 
that a fair statement?
    Mr. Moy. We do keep contact through our embassy. I do not 
know--I am not aware of any comprehensive list of U.S. firms 
that are working there. However, we are in touch with American 
citizens who do business there. And there is a Chamber of 
Commerce as well that we maintain contact with.
    Again, we would advocate on behalf of U.S. firms that are 
trying to do legitimate business there is it is in our national 
interest to help the Burmese people and to make sure--I think 
earlier there was a mention, and we hate to use this 
terminology because it sounds so ominous, but we do not want 
Burma to be a failed State.
    Ms. Houlahan. Yes.
    Mr. Moy. And if the economy does not exist and it continues 
to plummet further, that is exactly what we might have.
    Ms. Houlahan. No. I appreciate that. I was waning seconds. 
I know I have run out of time. I want to foot stomp on the fact 
that we should be benefiting from the private sector, as you 
guys have mentioned, and particularly those who are American-
owned businesses and operated in the area would be seem to be 
trusted resources. And I think we should have a better handle 
on who they are and how we can be using them.
    And with that, I yield back. And thank you for your time, 
gentlemen.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Houlahan.
    And with that, let me go ahead and recognize the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania, Mr. Perry, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Perry. I thank the chairman, my friend, the gentleman 
from California.
    Mr. Moy, I think I will start with you, if you do not mind. 
Secretary Blinken when he was confirmed, I think, made a 
commitment to make a determination on the Rohingya genocide. 
And I am sure you know, and certainly my colleague, Ms. Wagner, 
who has brought this up. I think it is kind of all on our 
minds. I think in 2018, if memory serves correctly, about 400, 
so that has a fairly large chunk of Congress. It is hard to 
get, you know, 40 on agreement on something, let alone 400 
agreed, you know, to characterize it as such.
    I am just wondering if you know and can impart to us what 
else it will take or is there something that the Secretary's 
waiting on? Is there something he needs to see? What are we 
waiting on regarding the determination of genocide?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you for the question, Mr. Congressman.
    And as I noted earlier, the review is ongoing. I think that 
it is just--I think the Secretary is waiting for the conclusion 
of that. And so, I do not think that there is any sort of 
special delay or reason for delay here. It is just--it is a 
fairly meticulous process. It has to go through, you know, 
legal review as well as other.
    But that does not really stop us at all from continuing to 
condemn those who perpetrated these atrocities. And we have 
taken steps in recent years, including through global 
Magnitsky, to identify some of those key figures involved in 
the atrocities and it does not stop us from applying sanctions 
on those individuals.
    Mr. Perry. And listen, I appreciate that. I do not know. I 
suspect there is no timeline associated with it. And look, you 
know, as a guy who lived in the private sector, many of us 
have, it is frustrating, you know, that we cannot get this 
done. I know there is a process, but for goodness sakes. I 
mean, you can imagine how much that would help us. It would 
help the world community in dealing with what has happened in 
Burma.
    And quite honestly for the people that continue to suffer 
there, my goodness. I mean, I do not know if you just wait 
until there is nothing left to do to say, you know, we 
recognize what happened in the past. I mean, we want to help 
people now. We cannot change the past, but for goodness sakes, 
let's speed it up. I would just say that. From my standpoint, 
if you are going to send a message back to the Secretary, you 
know, light a fire under somebody's rear end, you know. People 
are being persecuted, they are being tortured, tormented, and 
killed. It is unacceptable, quite honestly. It is just taking 
too long.
    I will just move on here. Can you or how do you assess 
China's approach to Burma? And what do you believe their most 
important goals are? And what they might do in the upcoming 
months to pursue those goals? So where is China? What is their 
position on Burma? What are they going to do?
    Mr. Moy. Yes. Thank you for the question. It is a very 
interesting one, because as a border country with a long 
history, actually, especially the relationship between the sort 
of familiar relationships across the border, China has a very 
unique way of approaching Burma. What we would request, as we 
do with other neighboring countries, is that they all play a 
constructive role in achieving peace.
    I think that China because of their concerns about 
instability across their border, it does not matter if it is 
Burma or any other country, it could be North Korea, it could 
be other countries that I think there are 17 countries that sit 
on China's borders, but I think that is always there, their 
central concern. And so, you know, we have----
    Mr. Perry. What are they willing to do about it?
    Mr. Moy. Well, without going into, you know, too much 
detail, it is my understanding that they have reached out to 
some of the ethnic groups across the border. I think that they 
are trying to in their own ways tamp down the level of violence 
right now because it does not serve their interest. And that is 
really where China usually comes from. It is not necessarily an 
altruistic goal, but it is something that serves their own 
national interest. And I think that keeping that border calm, 
whether it has to----
    Mr. Perry. Excuse me. Is the U.S. Government or any of our 
NGO's working directly with China to facilitate our goals in 
Burma?
    Mr. Moy. I am not aware that we worked together on issues 
like humanitarian assistance. I think as I understand they have 
their own ways of getting vaccines to Burma. But we have 
Secretary Blinken, in fact has raised with his counterpart the 
Burma issue and our kind of shared interest in making sure that 
the violence stops. And I think that there are other countries 
that share those goals as well, including India.
    Mr. Perry. OK. Thank you. My time has long expired.
    I appreciate the chair's diligence and patience. Thank you 
very much. And I yield.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Perry.
    I see Mr. Sherman's camera on, but I do not see Mr. 
Sherman.
    Not seeing the gentleman from California, let me go ahead 
and recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Representative 
Levin, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you very much, Chair Bera, and thanks for 
having this really important hearing.
    I want to thank you Deputy Assistant Administrator Hart and 
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Moy for appearing before 
us.
    You know, this hearing today speaks not just to the 
immediate and ongoing crisis in Burma, but also to larger 
questions about our government's duty to the international 
community in the face of genocide and our willingness to adhere 
to the Democratic values to which we aspire.
    During my first trip as a Member of Congress, I visited the 
Rohingya refugee camps in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, where over 
700,000 people fled after a horrific campaign of violence 
against them.
    Long since that trip now, I remain shocked and saddened 
that our government has not acknowledged what we already know 
to be true, military forces in Burma committed atrocities that 
amount to genocide against the Rohingya people. In fact, I 
shudder to think that it is in part because of our government's 
refusal to recognize this fact that the Tatmadaw continue to 
act with impunity and their brazenness grows by the day.
    PDAS Moy, I was glad that reading your testimony that the 
State Department is working to ensure those responsible for 
atrocities and other human rights abuses are being held to 
account to quote you. And I have heard some of the earlier back 
and forth on this.
    But, you know, in 2018 the State Department found that 
violence committed by the Burmese military against the 
Rohingya, including from August to October 2017 was not only, 
and I am quoting, ``extreme, large scale, widespread, and 
seemingly geared toward both terrorizing the population and 
driving out the Rohingya residents.'' end quote. But also 
quote, ``well planned and coordinated.'' end quote.
    Given this and reports by groups like the U.S. Holocaust 
Museum, and fortified rights that painstakingly, sir, detailed 
the systematic violence and crimes committed by the Tatmadaw by 
Burmese militants working with them and others. The question of 
why the State Department is slow walking this determination 
just has to be answered.
    On the anniversary of the coup this year, the Jewish 
Rohingya Justice Network issued a statement calling out the 
United States and the international community's failure to help 
the people of Burma. As they put it, remaining silent is not an 
option, particularly when it is the very same military that led 
the genocide against the Rohingya that is now in control and 
continuing to commit atrocities against the Burmese people.
    So PDAS Moy, I understand that you are not answering this 
question directly today. But I really need you to commit to, me 
to a timeline to get back to me, or to explain why the State 
Department is taking so much time to something with all due 
respect to your earlier statements about how painstaking you're 
being and so forth. This is extremely well documented, sir. So 
what--give me an answer.
    Mr. Moy. Thank you very much, Congressman.
    I wouldn't agree with the characterization that we are slow 
walking this at all. In fact, I know that this----
    Mr. Levin. Five years, sir, it is 5 years.
    Mr. Moy. The review--I mean, the Secretary committed last 
year to the review and we are undertaking that review. You 
know, we are still in the process of finalizing and we are just 
going to be very meticulous. It is--we take this very, very 
seriously. And I can commit to you that we will continue to 
share information about this with you and your team about how 
we are proceeding. And we know that people are watching. We get 
inquiries from human rights organizations, and other interested 
parties all the time.
    Mr. Levin. All right. Well, let me go on. I just--I 
appreciate your willingness to be in touch with my office 
directly.
    And Mr. Chair, without objection, if it is all right, I 
would like to enter the full statement from the Rohingya Jewish 
Justice Network into the report.
    Mr. Bera. Without objection.
    [The information referred to follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

        Mr. Levin. PDAS Moy, I want to turn very quickly to another 
way the Biden Administration can hold the Tatmadaw accountable. 
I am the colead of the new resolution with the chair and 
ranking member of this subcommittee, Chair Meeks, Congresswoman 
Eshoo, which both recognizes the sanctions the Biden 
Administration has imposed thus far and calls for you to go 
further including by sanctioning Tatmadaw-controlled entities 
and State-owned enterprises.
    Does the State Department agree that continuing to allow 
entities like the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise to operate 
freely enables the Tatmadaw to continue to act with impunity 
and gives them resources for their oppression?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you so much for that question.
    It is one that we have been discussing over the last year. 
I can say that there is no tool out there that we have 
rejected. No tool out there that might have an impact on the 
calculation of the junta that we have dismissed. And so, 
without going into specifics and revealing our hand, I would 
say that we continue that discussion.
    We also, and I think, Mr. Chairman, I know that you have 
traveled in the region fairly recently, as you probably heard 
when we applied these broader kinds of actions, we always have 
to consider some of the effects especially on the people of 
Burma. And so, those are the kinds of things that we consider. 
The bigger the impact, we do understand that there are some 
actions that we could take that might have a very, very deep 
impact on the thinking of the junta. But we also have to 
remember that they do have impacts on ordinary citizens as 
well. And that is something that we really do have to take into 
consideration.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you.
    Mr. Moy. And also consideration of other countries.
    Mr. Levin. Well, thanks.
    I think you may know that I am the author of other 
legislation to deal with the impact of sanctions on civilians. 
And so I am very sensitive to that.
    Mr. Chairman, I just want to close by thanking the State 
Department and in particular you all have mentioned Ambassador 
Vajda. You know, this team, Mr. Chairman, and Ambassador Vajda 
in Myanmar worked tirelessly to win the release of my 
constituent, Danny Fenster, who was unjustly imprisoned for 5-
1/2 months. And I will always be grateful to the embassy and 
consular officials in Burma and the whole State Department team 
for their assistance in getting Danny Fenster out of that 
unjust detention.
    And with that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you, Representative Levin.
    Let me now recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. 
Burchett for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I realize that we 
skipped Representative Sherman. If we need to go back to him we 
can do that if you need to. I am cool with it.
    Mr. Bera. I am sorry. Go ahead and continue.
    Mr. Burchett. Do what?
    Mr. Sherman. Mr. Chairman, is it my turn or is it the 
gentlemen's turn?
    Mr. Bera. We are alternating Democrat and Republican. So 
Mr. Burchett, if you want to go and then Mr. Sherman you are up 
next.
    Mr. Sherman. OK.
    Mr. Burchett. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This for Mr. Moy and Mr. Hart. I understand that the 
Burmese military they do not even recognize the Rohingya 
people. And I am wondering what USAID's doing to help these 
folks specifically. But then Mr. Moy, you mentioned that they I 
think, I am curious about the humanitarian aid that we are 
sending and they are ripping us off and they are stealing it. 
And I am wondering what we are doing to stop that? And how much 
of it is actually getting to the people we intend it to go to? 
That is for both of you all.
    Mr. Hart. Me, I can start it, if that is OK.
    So thank you very much for the question. That is an 
extremely important areas for us of course. And the U.S. 
Government is leading the donor and humanitarian response to 
the conflict. And we have about 1.6 billion since August 2017 
of which USAID is about 711 of that. In terms of responding 
both to the conflict within Burma and to the refugees from 
Burma. So that is the large picture aspect of things.
    For Fiscal Year 2021, for example, USAID provided almost 
$50 million in critical humanitarian needs of IDPs in Burma for 
about 430,000 people. What that really means in terms of items 
on the ground is that what we are doing is we are procuring 
locally and regionally to be able to provide protection 
services, nutrition, mobile medical clinics, shelter and 
settlements there, also essential household items, sanitation 
kits, drinking water, et cetera. So the basics. This picture is 
shifting inside of Burma week by week and sometimes day by day. 
And our partners are doing a few things to adapt because 
adaptation is critical.
    So one, we are working with World Food Programme and others 
to be expand our local NGO base to be able to push this--these 
items out to Burma in a variety of ways to ensure that we are 
actually addressing the most needy of individuals through our 
systems.
    The great thing is that we have, and since it has been 
almost 10 years since we have reopened our USAID office in 
Burma and therefore have built a platform by which we can 
continue to operate. We have a lot of the relationships in 
place. And so with the humanitarian assistance, we are 
operating from those relationships. We are also very much 
closely working with the U.N. and others such as the ASEAN 
center for humanitarian assistance there as well where we have 
been assisting them in the past and continue to collaborate 
with them to look for new opportunities and new ways to be able 
to ensure that these items reach the intended beneficiaries. 
That is one.
    You also mentioned in terms of the aspect of is this--are 
these materials actually getting to the intended recipients. 
One, we immediately after the coup, we shifted out $42 million 
worth of our portfolio away from assistance that could have 
benefited the government. So we took that immediate action. We 
took that assistance and made sure that that was supporting the 
civil society actors and others in a very direct fashion.
    But since then, we have also launched additional programs 
for education, as well as human rights in civil society. And 
so, we are taking those actions to immediately stand up our 
response to support exactly these groups. If there is at any 
time--while we do not provide any assistance of course to the 
regime, if there is any type of report, we have reporting 
mechanisms from our partners in terms of standard practice. But 
we also have a public hotline to be able to have folks call in 
and identify issues that they see.
    And so, we are taking every precaution to ensure that there 
is no overlap there, that these items are not hitting anyone 
within the regime or that the regime is allowed to even take 
credit for any of those. And so, I think those have some of the 
critical pieces that you referred to, sir.
    Mr. Moy. I think Mr. Hart actually went into some of the 
areas I was going into. Our main principle is really to make 
sure that we do not legitimize the junta and that we close off 
all forms of revenue. And so, I think that we do have some the 
system in place to ensure that do not happen.
    Specifically in terms of Rakhine State, USAID and the State 
Department's Bureau of population refugees and migration, what 
we know as PRM. And with the generous support of Congress has 
provided more than $201 million in humanitarian assistance to 
those affected by the Rakhine State crisis in Burma and that is 
since 2017.
    So I think in total, Mr. Hart mentioned this before, but we 
provided more than $1.2 billion to assist those effected by the 
crisis in Burma. And Bangladesh as well where about 900,000 
Rohingya are right now. But we work as Craig said, to make sure 
that none of those moneys go to the illegitimate junta.
    Mr. Burchett. I think I am about out of time.
    But I just want to warn you all, the tides are kind of 
shifting in Washington. In the past I have supported USAID, but 
I would hope we could get some definite answers over if this 
aid is actually getting to where it is supposed to be.
    And I had some others, but the Russians and their 
involvement with the Chinese, but I believe my time is up, Mr. 
Chairman. Is that correct?
    Mr. Bera. That is correct, Mr. Burchett.
    Mr. Burchett. All right. Thank you, brother. Appreciate 
you.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you. Let me go ahead and recognize the 
gentleman from California, Mr. Sherman, for 5 minutes of 
questioning.
    Mr. Sherman. Thank you. I want to build on other comments, 
particularly those of Mr. Levin, regarding the Rohingya. We 
have seen a democracy movement in Burma, Myanmar that has 
inspired us. Many of us have come to know Aung San Suu Kyi as 
an inspirational, figure and we are so disappointed when the 
democracy movement in Burma was unwilling to State clearly that 
all the Rohingya born in Burma should be given citizenship 
documents and repatriated.
    Has Aung San Suu Kyi herself embraced that explicitly?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you, Congressman.
    Not that we are aware of but we have focused our attention 
on the atrocities themselves and that is why we have called out 
the junta. The Burmese military is responsible.
    Mr. Sherman. We are being called upon--it is--look, we know 
how bad the junta is but we are being called upon to support a 
democracy movement that seems to believe in democracy for 
almost all the people of Burma and cannot bring itself to 
oppose the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya. They make--they 
make a few statements like, well, we should respect the 
Rohingya according to Burmese law. Then you look at Burmese law 
and it says wipe out the Rohingya or at least do not give them 
citizenship documents. Make them all illegal residents and then 
presumably expel them.
    So what have--we have--our friend should listen to us more 
than we expect our enemies to listen to us. Has the democracy 
movement said that the Rohingya people who were born in Burma 
are Burmese citizens and entitled to citizenship documents?
    Ms. Moanker. Not that I am aware of, sir.
    Mr. Sherman. That is consistent with what I know and is 
very disappointing. And I would point out that if neither the 
junta nor even the democracy--if Burma is unwilling to govern 
its territory in a way that is non-genocidal to the people who 
have a right to live there, then maybe a portion of Rakhine 
States should become independent or join Bangladesh. We have 
only recognized this century, I believe, one changed 
international border, that being the creation of South Sudan. 
And we did so precisely because the government in Khartoum was 
intent upon oppression, some would say genocide, of a portion 
of its territory and they lost that territory.
    I am also concerned with the fact that we are still giving 
economic aid to Burma. I brought this up in the hearing that we 
did on September 28 of last year. And we have got a way, money 
we send, economic development aid we send to Burma to aid that 
we could provide to starving people in Yemen or Tigray. And I 
understand why we would provide food aid to displaced people. 
But we are also providing economic investment aid that was 
defended by your colleague, Mr. Shear, on the theory that we 
need to keep the Burmese people on our side. Should we be 
helping the junta meet its economic development objectives in 
Burma-Myanmar?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you, Congressman.
    With regard to the Rohingya issue, I am not--I am not going 
to speak on behalf of the various groups, especially the pro 
democracy groups. But in our recent meetings, in fact, with the 
NUG, they have invited in Rohingya to represent part of their 
larger groups. And so was that the first time that we covered--
--
    Mr. Sherman. That is a step in the right direction and 
clearly the democracy groups are less bent on ethnic cleansing 
and genocide than the junta is but that is the low Bart.
    Go ahead.
    Mr. Moy. Yes, thanks very much.
    But, yes, there are small steps, and I think there is 
recognition, especially after having more and more 
consultations with international partners and countries that 
are interested in democracy like the United States.
    I think we talked about economic issues a little bit 
earlier. We are very concerned when the junta can benefit from 
any economic arrangements. And so we, when we consult with 
companies, that is one thing that we caution. And we are very 
much a part, but we are very much in favor of a legitimate 
businesses that can help the Burmese people.
    Mr. Sherman. Yes, my question was about American tax 
dollars going to economic development in Burma. And that ought 
to be redirected to less ambiguous situations, situations sort 
of where it is clearly beneficial to the goals that we all 
have.
    And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you, Representative Sherman.
    Let me now recognize the gentlelady from California, Mrs. 
Kim, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Thank you, Chairman Bera and Acting 
Member Ann Wagner. And I want to thank all of our witnesses for 
joining us today.
    You know, Congress stands united in continuing to condemn 
the violent coup in Myanmar last year. And that resulted in the 
murdering of unarmed civilians, destruction of the 
democratically elected government, and continued persecution of 
ethnic minorities.
    However, the United States' and Allies' pressure on Myanmar 
can only accomplish so much, and the country is no stranger to 
isolation and relying on China and its Southeast Asian 
neighbors.
    The question--the first question is to you, Secretary Moy. 
Could you please assess ASEAN's efforts to lessen the violence 
in Myanmar and urge a return to dialog, and how has the United 
States supported ASEAN diplomacy on Myanmar or urged a more 
forceful response from its Southeast Asia neighbors?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you for the question, Madam Congresswoman. 
It is a very good question because, since the very beginning 
last year, the, you know, days following the coup, ASEAN has 
had to respond to a very uncomfortable situation for them 
because so many of the ASEAN members do not support what 
happened there.
    I think that you saw in the last few months, even though 
the five-point consensus had not been adopted yet, ASEAN has 
sought to marginalize the junta by not allowing political 
representation from Myanmar, from Burma in ASEAN leadership 
meetings.
    And so just today I was reading an account of the ongoing 
ASEAN foreign ministers meeting in Cambodia, and they have not 
allowed Burma to send political representation there. So they 
are at odds.
    And so we really do tip our cap to them because this is 
quite unprecedented for ASEAN. As you know, it is a consensus 
organization. And they sometimes may be willing to try to 
appease or they are unwilling to take a harder position. But we 
think that there, in ASEAN today, there is recognition that 
this is--this is--that the coup cannot be supported, cannot be 
legitimized by ASEAN. And there is, you know, choosing ways to 
make that known.
    And I think it was, from what I understand, it was very 
unexpected from the perspective of the junta. They did not 
believe that ASEAN would take this step, and they have. And so 
I think that we will continue to rely on ASEAN's neutrality but 
also use other kinds of diplomacy--Japan, Korea, India, those, 
Australia, other like-mindeds--to make the junta aware that 
2022 certainly is not the 1990's.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Thank you so much.
    I would also like to ask how you would describe the 
opposition to the military junta government, including the 
National Unity Government, specifically in organization goals 
and decisionmaking. Are they seeking a return to the status quo 
pre-coup, or are they looking to establish and reform the form 
of government in Myanmar?
    Mr. Moy. Thank you very much.
    We have met a number of times with the National Unity 
Government in recent months including at very senior levels of 
the State Department. I know that in the NSC as well. Our 
Deputy Secretary, Wendy Sherman, has met with the NUG and 
Counselor Derek Chollet has. And I think those meetings were 
very productive. We were able to learn that the NUG is very 
much, you know, in favor of putting Burma back on the right 
path toward full democracy.
    And so those are areas that really do overlap with what we 
think should happen there. So and not only the NUG, we would 
continue to consult with other parts of, you know, civil 
society, those who are in support of rule of law, in support of 
democracy.
    And, you know, I think that, you know, in contrast to times 
past, this has really sobered the junta in the sense that what 
they thought was going to happen was that they would simply 
roll over these, you know, activists, those who favor 
democracy. That hasn't happened at all.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Proponents of opposition to the 
military regime have claimed repeatedly that their organization 
is inclusive of all ethnic groups and affiliations including 
the Rohingya who have been subjected to ethnic cleansing and 
potential genocide for years at the hands of the Myanmar 
military.
    Let me ask this question. I hope I have some time to do 
this. Administrator Hart, is it accurate to say that the 
Rohingya stand a better chance at receiving protection and 
inclusion with the opposition? If the opposition were to 
somehow take back control of the country, what would stop them 
from continuing to carry out violent and discriminative 
policies to the Rohingya?
    Mr. Bera. And, Mr. Hart, I would have you to keep your 
answer tight and short.
    Mr. Hart. Thank you so much for the question.
    While I think my colleague, Kim Moy, may have a more 
fulsome answer to this, I think that what we are interested in 
doing are assisting the people, the Rohingya and those who have 
been affected in Burma. And so that has been our perspective in 
terms of how can we best support them so that they can then 
achieve their goals.
    And that support right now is very basic in terms of the 
need to ensure basic humanitarian issues are being addressed, 
basic health issues are being addressed. That has been our 
focus that enables them to further support their own goals. 
Thank you.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Thank you.
    I do not think I have any time to yield back. Thank you so 
much.
    Mr. Bera. OK. Thank you, Representative Kim, and for both 
you and Mr. Sherman raising the important issue that the 
National Unity Government has to be an inclusive government. I 
know in May, I think, it was Representative Levin that raised 
that issue when we had a witness. We have also raised that 
issue directly with the National Unity Government, if they want 
full recognition, full support. They are slowly moving in that 
direction, but they are not quite there, as PDAS Moy has 
indicated. And we will continue to deliver that answer.
    Let me now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 
Connolly, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome to our 
witnesses.
    Mr. Hart, you were talking about the mission of USAID is to 
help the people and to get assistance to the people. Has USAID 
explored or is it now providing humanitarian assistance to 
locally administered territories outside the purview or control 
of the current military government?
    Mr. Hart. Thank you, sir, for that question.
    Yes, we are providing a wide range of humanitarian 
assistance through the front door, if you will, into Burma to 
be able to provide a range that I summarized earlier in terms 
of the basic needs, because across the board, education systems 
have gone down, health systems have gone down, and we need 
better opposites.
    Mr. Connolly. So your answer is that, outside of the 
control, territories that are outside the control of the 
current military junta, that are locally administered, often 
backed up by armed militias, we are, in fact, providing 
assistance to those territories directly.
    Mr. Hart. So assistance is going through both our 
international and our local partners. They are adapting on a 
regular basis to be able to pursue exactly what you are 
speaking of which is delivering these items to the most 
vulnerable. They are very innovative.
    Mr. Connolly. I am sorry. I am worried about time, but 
thank you.
    Are you finding resistance from the military junta in your 
efforts to do that?
    Mr. Hart. Absolutely. And that is why we are definitely 
relying on our implementing partner, partners to be able to be 
as innovative as possible, given a conflict situation, to be 
able to identify who is out there and that needs this 
assistance, how we can best get them to them, and we are 
working with other donor partners as well to be able to do just 
that. We are pursuing as many avenues as we can.
    Mr. Connolly. Got it. And the Chinese are already doing 
that, are they not?
    Mr. Hart. That is our understanding. What our coordination 
mechanism usually is, is through the U.N. to be able to 
coordinate with other donors, in addition to all of the other 
donor conversations that are going on. The U.S.G. Has been 
definitely the lead in terms of humanitarian assistance, but we 
are also working with, as I mentioned earlier, the AHA Centre 
out of ASEAN, the U.N. system, as well, in terms of providing 
that response, and others to be able to coordinate the 
humanitarian assistance that is coming into country.
    Mr. Connolly. Thank you. Very heartening to hear.
    Mr. Moy, why did the U.S. Government not declare genocide 
when the Tatmadaw was involved in numerous atrocities in trying 
to put down demonstrations opposing the military coup?
    Mr. Moy. Mr. Congressman, I am not sure I can answer 
exactly--oops. Sorry. I just unmuted myself.
    I am not sure I can explain the reasons in the past. All I 
can say is that the review is ongoing today to make that 
determination. There, I think, are a number of steps that were 
taken in recent years to make it known that those atrocities 
were unacceptable. And, you know, we will continue to condemn 
the regime because they were--the current military was 
responsible for those, you know, violations of human rights 
starting in 2017.
    Mr. Connolly. Well, let me just say as a member, and I am 
sure other members feel the same way, you know, the situation 
in Myanmar is grave. The violence, the brutality exercised by 
the military junta is deplorable, and at some point the U.S. 
Government has to weigh in. We cannot, you know, for political 
niceties or in the hope that maybe we can create a diplomatic 
pipeline to the military by softening our position with respect 
to the atrocities that have occurred and I do not mean to say 
that we have soft-pedalled it.
    But at some point it seems to me the heavy hammer here is 
to say these are genocidal, you know, behaviors by the military 
junta. And we also need to be very cognizant of the message we 
are sending the Burmese people. You know, they have got to be 
feeling very isolated right now. The United States is the 
essential player even there for them, and that means that we 
have got to weigh very carefully how we present this and how we 
condemn it.
    And so I strongly would urge you to go back to the State 
Department with your colleagues and let them know that there 
are many of us here on the Hill who believe the time has come 
for a much stronger statement than just condemning atrocities.
    I mean, of course, we all condemn atrocities. But this 
pattern of atrocities means something. And what does it mean, 
and what is the United States prepared to say with respect to 
it?
    Thank you, Mr. Moy.
    Mr. Moy. Thank you. And we could understand the importance 
and the urgency. Thank you.
    Mr. Connolly. I am sure you do. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Connolly.
    Let me now recognize the gentlelady from Virginia, Ms. 
Spanberger, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Ms. Spanberger. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    And I want to followup the sort of line of questioning 
related to sanctions. And certainly, you know, along with the 
measures imposed last year, the Administration has now 
sanctioned 65 individuals and sanctioned export controls on 26 
different organizations with close regime ties.
    So, Mr. Moy, I would love to begin with you. In your 
assessment, could you--and I know that people have talked about 
sanctions along the way throughout this hearing. But can you 
give a baseline discussion of how effective these sanctions can 
be or have been--excuse me? In particular, what are the effects 
of sanctions on those who are aiding the Tatmadaw but from 
within Burma who do not necessarily have foreign assets?
    Mr. Moy. Yes, that is such a thoughtful observation right 
there, Madam Congresswoman.
    I think that the sanctions themselves were not intended to 
in and of themselves create the change but are part of a larger 
policy to change the thinking of the regime. I think we all 
know that especially the junta leadership is not as exposed 
maybe as other, you know, entities in other countries would be 
to the international economy. And, therefore, sometimes 
sanctions, even, you know, with a targeted approach, they might 
not be the, you know, dispositive, shall we say, element in the 
decisionmaking.
    Ms. Spanberger. And so kind of, given that I think 
throughout the course of the hearing today and even just 
drawing out from your answer to my first question, you know, 
could you just talk about what other policy tools or points of 
leverage might be more impactful, you know, considerations 
about a ban on aviation fuel going into Burma or Myanmar as an 
effort to stop deadly air strikes? Are there other 
considerations or policy tools that have been considered and 
not implemented or that you would want to raise in response to 
that question?
    Mr. Moy. Yes, there have been other tools that have been 
discussed. And, in fact, as I noted earlier, we haven't 
actually rejected any of those as possible tools. We are trying 
to find--we are trying to thread a needle, really, to make sure 
we are causing no more harm out there to the people of Burma 
but also delivering a message to the junta, too.
    And so I think a few weeks ago you might have seen we 
designated more or we made a few more designations in terms of 
sanctions. We will continue to review more possibilities, and 
that applies not just to those involved in or in more senior 
leadership positions but also family members as well. You 
mentioned the entities. We are also in contact with other 
governments, those who might control financial pursestrings, so 
to speak, that also might be able to apply a little bit more 
pressure.
    Ms. Spanberger. And so----
    Mr. Moy. So----
    Ms. Spanberger [continuing]. Mr. Moy, just kind of related 
to that, because you mentioned some of out partner nations, 
knowing that the military does draw not an inconsequential 
amount of money from business interests and networks, in 
addition to State-owned conglomerates, what has the United 
States or any of our partners done to crack down on these other 
sources of revenue that come in for the military? And what in 
your estimation could be among the most effective ways for us 
to cut down on the junta's access to foreign currency?
    Mr. Moy. Right. Yes, without going into the specifics of 
the information, we have had conversations with a number of 
countries about the things they know and the actions they could 
take, because sometimes these, you know, economic or these 
transactions, if you will, are not made through the United 
States.
    And so when we do come across information, we can act on 
that information. And we have let other governments know that 
we will be coming to them. And I think that there is a 
willingness----
    Ms. Spanberger. And coming to them with disapproval. Am I 
understanding that correctly?
    Mr. Moy. Right. Coming to them with information that they 
can act on as actionable, so to speak, and in our various 
conversations, especially when we have been on the road, I 
think that we have heard actually very positive reactions 
because, when it comes to other countries, they do not want 
their names sullied by dealing with the junta, too. And so they 
have their own interests in working with us to make sure some 
of those sources of revenue are cutoff.
    Ms. Spanberger. Excellent.
    Well, thank you, Mr. Moy.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Spanberger.
    I am going to allow us to do a second round of questioning, 
and I know Mr. Levin had a followup question. We are going to 
lose him in a moment.
    But, Mr. Levin, if you want to go ahead and be recognized 
for a second question.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. You are the 
best.
    So I want to followup on a couple of questions that I think 
Mr. Sher--you know, Representative Sherman, Representative Kim 
asked and broaden this out a little bit beyond the questions 
about the Rohingya because, you know, in the November 2020 
election, more than 1-1/2 million voters or would-be, should-be 
voters were disenfranchised from mostly among ethnic minority 
communities in Kachin, Karen, Mon, Rakhine, Shan, and Chin 
States.
    And so this is--and in our resolution, after the coup, we 
called not just to restore the government, the, you know, sort 
of weird balance between the military and the civilian 
government that had existed but true democracy and inclusive 
democracy. And what is interesting to me, PDAS Moy, there is 
have in the resistance in the organizing of the people to, you 
know, against the coup regime, there have been chutes, right, 
growing of collaboration. And I think of the majority Burma 
people realizing that everyone is in this together and that 
they need to work together.
    So can you just say a little more about how that--where 
does that stand today, not just about the, you know, the sort 
of opposition shadow government but amongst--what is happening 
in the country about people organizing so that the coup regime 
might be followed by a more fulsome democratic order?
    Mr. Moy. Yes, thank you, Congressman, for recognizing 
actually that there are changes that are underway.
    I do want to temper all of this. I mean, you used the 
metaphor chutes. Right? And I think that that is true. These 
are changes that will happen, you know, gradually over time.
    But I think to the extent that we can help in that 
conversation, we have urged various groups, civil society 
groups, those that are interested in, you know, restoring 
democracy in Burma. We have had a constant conversation about 
further recognition. And we see, as Congressman Sherman noted, 
you know, a little bit of that coming through in where the NUG 
has invited representation from Rohingya.
    And the statement is true for ethnic groups as well. They 
are finding common cause. I guess that is sort of a good thing. 
But, you know, we still have a lot, of, you know, real estate 
to cover when it comes, to you know, full recognition and these 
kinds of issues.
    I know my time is running short. But I did want to pick up 
op something you mentioned earlier, Congressman. I do want to 
thank you actually for, you know, the work that you did, 
continuing to consult with the Fenster family. I know that 
Bryan Fenster was in touch with you and other family members. 
We could not have--no one can do this alone. And when we saw 
Danny Fenster, when he came to the department shortly after his 
released, he was quite effusive in praise for all of those, you 
know, people in Michigan who came to bat on his behalf. I just 
wanted to mention that.
    Mr. Levin. Thanks. It was a whole-of-community effort. That 
is for sure.
    Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you.
    And if I could just followup on the point Mr. Levin made, 
it does seem like the Myanmar people, you know, now that they 
are being attacked by the Tatmadaw, are realizing the 
atrocities that were perpetrated against the Rohingya. There is 
a long ways to go, but with the common enemy and recognizing 
they have all got to come together, the fight for freedom, you 
know, for those in the National Unity Government that are 
listening to this, that is a step in the right direction. And, 
you know, democracy is inclusive and, you know, we would like 
to continue to see that as you fight for your freedom.
    Let me recognize Representative Kim if she has any 
additional questions she would like to ask. Representative Kim? 
Any addition questions?
    If not, let me recognize myself for an additional question. 
And maybe this is for Mr. Hart.
    One thing that, you know, when I was in Thailand, talking 
to the NGO's, I think Deputy Secretary Sherman heard this as 
well, a long history of refugee camps along the border. And 
this was in late October. Obviously, the violence has 
escalated, the targeted air strikes and the number of displaced 
individuals.
    Can you give us an assessment of what we are seeing in 
terms of the refugee camps, both internally displaced folks--
and certainly we have read open-source stories of, you know, 
refugees fleeing into India as well as, you know, Cambodia and 
Thailand--and kind of your sense from the USAID perspective or 
your implementing partners that are in the camp how well-
equipped the camps are, you know, if the border countries are 
allowing folks to flee across the border or if they are being 
kept, you know, in camps internally within Burma.
    Mr. Hart. Thank you for that question, sir.
    Yes, we have--one of the benefits to having an office both 
in Thailand and in Burma--and we have opened our office almost 
10 years ago in Burma--is being able to have that longstanding 
relationship with civil society, the civil society that will 
both be responding to and is responding to the humanitarian 
assistance crisis but also that same civil society that will 
give voice to the democratic movement. And so we are working 
across the board with local entities to be able to respond to 
the range of issues that are coming up.
    To address your specific question, what we have--we also 
actually, Kim Moy and I, with State counselor traveled to 
Thailand, as well, to have those conversations. We have very 
much working together with our Thai counterparts, as well as 
with our ASEAN counterparts across the board, to be able to be 
creative which it comes to solution sets. We need that 
creativity now because the situation is very much fluid. On a 
week-to-week basis, things are changing based on the conflict. 
And so we need to be responsive, and we need to be adapting to 
the situation.
    That is exactly the type of guidance that we have given our 
partners is to be able to look for opportunities when they 
present themselves. There are definitely a sufficient number of 
roadblocks in our way, but we have partners and standing 
relationships to be able to understand how best we can get some 
of these items and services to a range of those being affected 
by this.
    When it comes to along the border areas, that is an area 
very much that we have been speaking with the Thais about as 
well and have gotten their support as we look at the best way 
in which to address the very complex situation.
    And so we do have partners on both sides of the border.
    Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you.
    And let me now recognize Representative Spanberger, if she 
has additional questions.
    Ms. Spanberger. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    So just to followup a little bit related--well, on an issue 
separate from sanctions, the coup and certainly the ensuing 
conflict has resulted in a spike in the transnational drug 
trafficking challenges that we see globally, particularly from 
drugs emanating and originating in the Golden Triangle region 
of Burma. So I was wondering if you all could address some of 
the spillover effect, whether narcotics, crystal meth, meth 
pills, heroin are destined for countries including the United 
States, emanating out of this region, and what you are seeing 
in terms of what is the actual kind of current status and then 
what is the U.S. response.
    Mr. Moy. Well, thank you very much, Congresswoman.
    Our assessment is that it is one source of revenue for the 
junta and that, since the coup, there has actually been an 
increase in the amount of narcotics trafficking coming out of 
Burma. And so it is a difficult situation for us just because 
of, you know, the instability on the ground.
    We do not have our RDA colleagues who are with us today. 
But I would say this is something that we have noted through 
our information channels, and we are going have to take steps. 
But it is, you know, an issue that is very difficult to resolve 
just because what is happening on the ground.
    Ms. Spanberger. And have we taken either in a collaborative 
way or have we discussed or raised this issue related to the 
increased flow of narcotics emanating from Burma? Has that been 
an issue that we have raised with some of our partners?
    Mr. Moy. I think that our main thrust when we talk to our 
partners has been the path forward or the return to the path 
for democracy for Burma. I think probably increasingly, 
depending on the partner, because there are a number of border 
countries that are very concerned about the opium trade and 
what it might mean to their own, you know, stability and their 
own economies, I think that it may actually become more of a 
conversation piece down the road.
    You know, in the past there has definitely been concern on 
the Chinese side of the border about the opium trade and I do 
not think that they are interested in seeing an increase in the 
amount of drugs or narcotics going into the PRC and I think 
that there are other sort of neighboring countries as well that 
are concerned about that.
    But, again, you know, the situation is unstable as it is 
and the trajectory of Burma right now. And, you know, I do not 
want to return to the terminology failed State but, you know, 
that is where we are headed. There are so many problems that we 
are dealing with, and narcotics would be absolutely one of 
those.
    Ms. Spanberger. Well, certainly in my life before Congress, 
when I was over at CIA, I spent some time working in what was 
then called the counternarcotics center and certainly have seen 
firsthand how an uncontrolled and unbridled or unprofitable 
narcotics trafficking enterprise can really just cut efforts to 
democratize or strengthen democracies off at the knees.
    So I thank you for your answers and I do hope that, moving 
forward, central to our efforts to advocate for democratic 
values that we will look at some of the illicit activities that 
are certainly contributing to the proliferation of criminal 
activity and a move away from democracy.
    So thank you very much to both of our witnesses.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Thank you, Representative Span.
    Let me now recognize Representative Young Kim and see if 
she has got any additional questions.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Thank you so much, and I do 
apologize for my technical difficulty here with my computer 
this morning.
    Secretary Moy, since the coup, Radio Free Asia and Voice of 
America both have experienced a dramatic spike in audience. We 
have Facebook and online with millions turning to these news 
sources as the junta mercilessly cracks down on local outlets 
and journalists. But with more Burmese people fleeing unrest 
and to border provinces and zones, where there is less cell 
signal available, people are turning to radio, particularly 
shortwaves, to get potentially lifesaving means of information.
    So is the Administration including the State, USAID, and 
the USAGM aware of that? And how are they coordinating efforts 
to ensure that the shortwave is sustained for the people of 
Burma who rely on outside media but especially the RFA and the 
extensive coverage of what is happening?
    Mr. Moy. Well, thank you very much. And it is actually a 
very good observation about what is happening on the ground.
    And so one of the things that we are aware of is the huge 
crackdown on domestic journalists there. I think that is why 
they are turning to, as you mentioned, shortwave sources. We 
have mentioned how deeply concerned we are. And we have 
actually been, you know, in, you know, in our conversations 
with like-minded partners who are in unison in condemning any 
actions against journalists. And we called for the released of 
those they have detained, and they have detained many.
    And so I think, when I was speaking to Congressman Levin's, 
you know, interest in Danny Fenster, I mean, this is one of the 
great concerns that the Tatmadaw has, right, that there are 
journalists that are reporting all of this information and you 
have so much more social media ought there. This is another 
data point is that there are so many people in Burma on 
Facebook, on other social media platforms. And they are 
exchanging information. This is what makes it so hard for the 
junta to consolidate.
    So I think that, you know, we will continue to push. You 
know, there isn't a free, independent media right now just 
because of the crackdown, but we are definitely in support. We 
are definitely in support of other platforms that might be used 
and so people can get accurate information out there. And we 
have heard from people on the ground that this is absolutely a 
source of why they are so--that sometimes it energizes them 
when they hear about actions that are taken outside. Otherwise, 
they wouldn't have any information sources right now.
    So when they learn about some of the things that other 
countries are doing or the human rights organizations, what 
they are doing out there, it gives them hope. It gives them 
energy to continue to resist the junta.
    Mr. Hart. Madam Congresswoman, if I may, just to add on 
that that answer that Kim has provided, I think one of the 
things that has been very critical--and I have to laud the 
efforts of our partners immediately following the coup, 
supporting each other, including independent media, in very 
pragmatic, practical ways. And so I think that has been an 
excellent first step.
    What we have done about 4 months ago is launch an 
additional activity to be able to support human rights and 
looking at supporting independent media and other civil society 
entities. And I think with that activity, while I cannot say 
too much, I would say that one of the principles is to ensure 
that we are doing no harm because those who are engaged in this 
are very much under threat.
    And so we are establishing communication channels. We are 
making sure that the right people are engaged in those efforts 
and looking to push forward with this extremely critical aspect 
of achieving what the people want to see.
    Thank you.
    Mrs. Kim of California. Thank you very much.
    Thank you both for joining us today.
    And thank you, Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bera. Good. Thank you, Representative Kim.
    Let me make a closing statement.
    First off, to both our witnesses, Mr. Moy, Mr. Hart, thank 
you for your service and the teams there are around you.
    Also I just want to once again thank Ambassador Vajda and 
our Mission Rangoon team that is operating in difficult 
circumstances but continues to support the work.
    And, you know, I also just want to deliver a message to the 
people of Burma. You know, the United States is the world's 
oldest democracy, and one of the values that we uphold is the 
rights of individual people to choose their path forward. And, 
you know, as we see this young democracy in Burma and the 
people standing up for their right to choose their own path 
forward, you know, I cannot speak to every in Congress. But I 
think it is a sentiment, Democrats, Republicans, the 
Administration, and the values of the people as the United 
States is that we stand with you, that we stand and want to see 
the people of Burma in an inclusive way, understanding the 
diversity and the various ethnic groups, find their path 
forward.
    And we know, as was the birth of our Nation in the United 
States, it was difficult and at times violent. But the 
perseverance, the will of the people will prevail. And to the 
democracies of the world, you know, we will continue to stand 
with the people. We will continue to work with the leaders in 
ASEAN, understanding ASEAN's centrality and that Burma is one 
of the ASEAN partner countries and support those ASEAN efforts 
to find a diplomatic path forward, if there is one, but also 
continue to work with the countries in the region to provide 
their support as they address some of the humanitarian issues 
of the people of Burma.
    So, again, with that, I want to thank the witnesses and the 
members who participated in this important virtual hearing.
    And with that, the hearing is adjourned with the virtual 
bang of the gavel. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
    
                                APPENDIX
                                
                                
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                               
                                
                                

            RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]