[Senate Hearing 117-805]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-805
STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
H.R. 8282/S. 4662
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, FOREIGN
OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER
30, 2023, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
U.S. Department of State
United States Agency for International Development
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-674 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Vice
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California Chairman
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
JACK REED, Rhode Island SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JON TESTER, Montana LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon ROY BLUNT, Missouri
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JERRY MORAN, Kansas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia Virginia
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
MARCO RUBIO, Florida
Charles E. Kieffer, Staff Director
Shannon Hutcherson Hines, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware, Chairman
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina,
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois Ranking Member
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon ROY BLUNT, Missouri
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JERRY MORAN, Kansas
MARCO RUBIO, Florida
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
Professional Staff
Tim Rieser
Kali Farahmand
Sarita Vanka
Paul Grove (Minority)
Katherine Jackson (Minority)
Adam Yezerski (Minority)
Administrative Support
Madeline Granda
LaShawnda Smith (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
hearings
Wednesday, April 27, 2022
Page
U.S. Department of State......................................... 1
Wednesday, May 25, 2022
United States Agency for International Development............... 39
----------
back matter
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements....... 81
Subject Index:
U.S. Department of State..................................... 83
United States Agency for International Development........... 83
STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:35 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher A. Coons, (Chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Coons, Leahy, Durbin, Van Hollen, Graham,
Moran, and Hagerty.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
opening statement of senator christopher a. coons
Senator Coons. I call this hearing of the State and Foreign
Operations Subcommittee, the Senate Appropriations Committee to
order. We have one witness today, the Secretary of State,
Anthony Blinken.
It is great to have you here, Mr. Secretary. We have a lot
to cover, so I will be relatively brief.
We have, many of us, just come from a moving, and a
powerful service in memory of a former Secretary Madeleine
Albright. An extraordinary person who lived a remarkable life
and career, and whose impact on the Department, on the Senate,
on our Nation, on the world rooted in her commitment to
democracy, to advancing the role of women was profound.
I intend to propose naming a portion of the Fulbright
Fellows for her, as we did for one of her predecessors for whom
she also worked, former Senator and secretary, Edmund Muskie.
The National Democratic Institute where she long served as
Board Chair is naming their Annual Democracy Award for
Secretary Albright.
And Mr. Secretary, we very much look forward to suggestions
from you as to how the State Department may want to also honor
her service, especially as a defender of democratic principles,
and someone who advanced the role of women leaders around the
world.
I have just returned from a number of Nations, including
Georgia where the President, in particular, cited the
mentorship and the example of Secretary Albright.
No Secretary of State has an easy job, but yours, in
particular at this moment in our modern history, is
exceptionally demanding. And you have done exceptionally well
at it. We are grateful both for the way in which you have
represented us in the world, and for your recent trip to Kyiv
which we look forward to hearing about, but also for your
responsiveness to the committees of the Senate. You have
testified frequently, at great length, and been very
accessible.
And so I wanted to thank you both for your service more
broadly, leading the State Department, and representing us in
the world, but also for your engagement with this Committee.
We face a number of challenges, more than I need to take
the time to recite in detail. Russia's unprovoked, unjustified,
and brutal invasion of Ukraine, with regional and global
security implications that we need to confront, and will be
felt for decades.
A global food security crisis greatly exacerbated by the
war in Ukraine, now threatening hundreds of millions with food
insecurity, a global pandemic that has infected half a billion,
killed a million Americans, caused immense economic damage, and
that continues to pose threats to all of us as new variants may
emerge, climate change which continues to accelerate and
threatens the entire world.
Iran and North Korea, both, whose non-proliferation, whose
efforts at nuclear proliferation threaten their regions; China
which continues to be a peer competitor, and expands its
influence around the world in ways we need to confront; and a
growing clash between the forces of democracy and
authoritarianism, to say nothing of a record refugee crisis,
and ongoing conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Ethiopia, South Sudan,
Libya.
On the positive side, Mr. Secretary, you and the President
have rallied a NATO in defense of Ukraine, its people, and its
sovereignty. This administration is embracing our alliances and
building coalitions, not embracing isolationism. You have shown
the world that, as Secretary Albright so often said, we are the
indispensable Nation, and the critical role that we can and
must play.
We have provided hundreds of millions of U.S.-manufactured
COVID vaccine doses which, unlike those provided by Russia and
China, are effective against all the variants. You have
reaffirmed, and the role that the United States must play in
advancing democracy and human rights around the world, and
shown strong leadership on tackling climate through a variety
of means, including the Development Finance Corporation.
You are tackling global challenges, like economic
instability, and violent conflict with new tools, like the
Global Fragility Act, and you are addressing deeply rooted
staffing and diversity challenges at the State Department with
new resources provided by Congress.
We here in this Committee have worked hard to find a
bipartisan path forward and to support and promote our national
security diplomacy interests.
I am thankful for my Ranking Member, Senator Graham, who
has been a good partner over a number of Congresses to myself,
and to the former chairman of the subcommittee, and the
chairman of the full Committee. Yet we have genuinely struggled
to get either the allocation that this subcommittee deserves,
or to fully meet the objectives that this subcommittee has
taken on.
We faced huge challenges last year with an allocation of $4
billion below the budget request, and we were able to soften
that impact, really, only by rescinding $2 billion from the
Afghanistan account. An option we will not have again this
year.
We have done nothing to address our UN arrears, we have not
done enough to face the growing food security, and refugee
crisis, and we have a great deal of work to do together. So as
our NATO partners have, we need to demonstrate that we can pull
together and work together in the way this subcommittee
traditionally has.
We look forward to hearing from you, Mr. Secretary, how you
see this year unfolding, what your highest appropriations'
priorities are, and how we can work together to achieve our
Nation's goals. Senator Graham.
opening statement of senator lindsey graham
Senator Graham. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, welcome. You are a very hard worker, and I
enjoy working with you where we can, and we have our
differences.
This subcommittee has had a good track record of trying to
put money into programs that produce value for the American
people, and make the world a safer place. The World Food
Program is under siege so there is a lot of talk in the
building about another supplemental. Count me in. I am willing
to look at Ukraine in terms of what their needs are.
So you are just going to have to come to reality here, that
as the world changes this subcommittee has a role to play when
it comes to the State Department. I want to thank those under
your command.
Mr. Secretary, you know, I have spent a lot of time in the
military, a lot of us go to war-torn regions, but it is the
diplomat, the foreign service officer, the USAID worker, they
are in harm's way just as much as anybody. And the work they do
on behalf of stability can sometimes create a peaceful world,
better than dropping a bomb. And I think the military agrees
with that. So the military is a big fan of this account,
because without developmental assistance in showing up you are
going to lose ground.
I just got back from Japan, Taiwan, and Australia. They
want to do more. There is a backlash brewing against China's
misadventures. One of my colleagues, I think, had a discussion
with you yesterday about: What is the big deal about Ukraine,
it used to be part of the Soviet Union?
I think we can find common ground here that that Putin has
no legitimate claim on Ukraine, it is a sovereign nation. Back
in the '90s they did the Budapest Memo, where Russia, the
United States, and Great Britain guaranteed the sovereignty of
Ukraine if they would turn their nukes over to Russia. That
agreement has been stepped upon.
I think most of us here believe that Putin wants to
recreate the Old Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, Ukraine is
just a warm-up act, Moldova; he will go until somebody stops
him.
So this is not about a buffer zone between Russia and NATO,
it is about a man with an ambition that I think is going to
destroy his country, and has killed thousands of innocent
people. And I appreciate the flow of weapons. It has been on
the increase. I hope we can do more, and I think we should do
more.
But I want you to understand, Mr. Secretary, most
Republicans do not see Putin's endeavors as any way legitimate,
and that we all understand, if we don't stop him in Ukraine he
will keep going.
Now, when it comes to China, Japan is going to increase
their military spending, the Solomon Islands, I haven't heard
about that much since World War II, China is in play there.
Appreciate you sending some diplomatic presence there.
Developmental Finance Corporation is a brilliant idea, I think.
It is now time to have a DFC component for Asia to compete with
the Belt, Road Initiative by China. And I would like to work
with the Chairman and the Secretary in beefing up our
developmental aid presence in Asia to combat China.
Afghanistan is heartbreaking. We will talk about all of
that. It seems to be that the Iranians are making a demand on
the administration to change the designation of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Corps, no longer to be a foreign terrorist
organization. I hope you resist that demand, and we will have a
discussion about that.
But Putin gave a speech today to the Duma. He said he vows
to accomplish the goals of the invasion. He will not be
deterred.
So as we meet in Ramstein where Defense Ministers of NATO,
and the ``coalition of the willing'' talk about providing more
aid to Ukraine; Putin is basically telling his people, through
the Duma that he is committed to see this through.
My commitment is this will be the end of Putin one way or
the other. That when this is over the Russian people will see
they have no future under his leadership, that we keep the
sanctions on, that we increase sanctions at every turn, we
provide the brave Ukrainians the ability to fight back and
that, over time, the world isolate Putin.
I met with the International Criminal Court Prosecutor, Mr.
Khan, yesterday, I think he has a good plan for those who are
committing war crimes in Ukraine wearing Russian uniforms. So
to Putin, you are committed to the invasion. We are committed
to Ukraine's freedom. We are going to win, and you are going to
lose. Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you Senator Graham. Chairman Leahy.
opening statement of senator patrick leahy
Senator Leahy. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I am listening to
the travel--I have been watching, and I have talked with
Secretary Blinken again this morning about the amount of
traveling he has done for us. And I must tell you, I worried
greatly when you and Secretary Austin were going into Ukraine,
because they announced it ahead of time.
I suspect that was not the way you would like to have done
it. But I am glad you went, and I am glad you got back safely.
Senator Coons and Senator Graham have been traveling quite a
bit lately. I went to Vermont, but I am going to be doing some
of those trips later this year.
I missed chairing this subcommittee, but I would note, Mr.
Chairman, that over the years there are different chairs,
myself, Senator Graham, Senator McConnell and I chaired this
Committee. We got things done, always in a unified fashion, and
I can think of no one more qualified, or better suited for the
job than Senator Coons.
And I am delighted that he is here. He cares passionately
about it, not only in public, but in private he talks about
these issues, and scurrying for diplomacy. I think the budget
in this and the budget in the Department of State are extremely
important in what we do in our non-military. I mean the
military is obviously important, but we do in the non-military.
I know that in some of our issues of foreign aid, I
remember former Secretary Mattis said, if you want to cut these
programs, foreign aid, and other things. And the State
Department would say, if you want to cut those programs, buy
more bullets because he is going to need them. And I agree.
But the role you play with President Biden and Secretary
Austin in marshalling the NATO countries, and all, to stand up
united against Russia's unprovoked aggression, brutality in
Ukraine, that is so important. And I know we spoke briefly,
prior to leaving the funeral today, about how we have to stand
up, and the fact that you were able to bring our NATO allies
together. Sometimes they can be a disparate group, but they
came together and this that is extremely important, and it
shows a critical need for our country's leadership in NATO.
I think if it was just a couple years ago, I don't think it
would have happened that way, and here we are facing the
greatest challenge to democracy since the '40s.
Now, we are going to have another hearing on the global
COVID and food security crisis. The pandemic continues to
spread, it is mutating in scores of countries, the food
security crisis has been greatly exacerbated by the
skyrocketing commodity prices due to the war in Ukraine. COVID
is important worldwide, because there is no place having a
covert outbreak that is more than an airplane trip away from
our shores.
And we know that 161 million people are facing starvation,
another 227 million are facing acute food insecurity. We are
the wealthiest, most powerful nation on earth; we have to step
in on that. So I hope, Mr. Secretary, you can get the White
House to ask for additional supplemental funds to address these
global humanitarian emergencies. They have far-reaching
economic security.
I have got to step outside for a phone call, but I am going
to be coming right back in to hear this.
And Mr. Chairman I am so glad you are doing this.
Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Chairman Leahy. And
thank you for your very long, and very effective, and very
engaged stewardship of this subcommittee over three decades.
You have steered this subcommittee ably through some really
hard budget times, political times, global environments, and I
cannot possibly hope to succeed in living up to the record that
you have established, of focus and excellence in delivering on
our role in the world.
Given the challenges we face, Mr. Secretary, if you can
give us a broad overview, both of your insights from your trip
to Kyiv, and the challenges facing the State Department, and
your priorities for appropriations this year, we would be
grateful.
STATEMENT OF HON. ANTHONY BLINKEN, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE
Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, thank you very, very much,
to you, to Chairman Leahy, Ranking Member Graham. I am grateful
for this opportunity to talk about the administration's
proposed budget for the State Department.
Let me just start by saying that later today we will
welcome back to the United States Trevor Reed, who was
wrongfully detained in Russia. We are deeply grateful to our
allies and partners who helped in this effort to bring him
home. And I especially want to thank Special Presidential Envoy
for Hostage Affairs, Ambassador Roger Carstens, known well to
all of you; Ambassador John Sullivan in Moscow, and others in
our Government, including in this Congress, who worked
relentlessly to bring Trevor home, and who continue to press
for the release of Paul Whelan, and other U.S. citizens
wrongfully detained abroad.
As you have noticed, several of us just came from the
ceremony honoring Madeleine Albright. And just to take a moment
to honor her extraordinary service.
She was a friend to me, a mentor to me, someone I sought
counsel in. She had, I think as you all know, an incredible
clarity of voice, a voice that I think we can all still hear,
and an ability to really get to the essence of things. Few
diplomats have so clearly embodied the ideals for which our
country stands, or done more to project them around the world.
We mourn her passing, which is softened only by knowing
that her example is going to continue to guide our Department
and our foreign policy for years to come. I look forward to
finding ways to honor her in the Department.
And Chairman Leahy left the room but I did want to say to
him that this may be the last time that I have the privilege of
speaking on a budget request before a Committee that that he
leads, and let me just simply join in the chorus of people
thanking Chairman Leahy for his extraordinary service, not just
for the service, but for the way that he has served and
continues to serve.
Always championing the vital importance of investing in
diplomacy and development, always insisting that human rights
be at the heart of our foreign policy including, of course, by
authoring a law requiring our government to withhold support
for foreign security forces that commit gross human rights
violations. And always being a partner to Secretaries of State
eight administrations. The Department will always appreciate
Chairman Leahy's support for our people, and for the work they
do around the world.
I read about a surprise tribute that Chairman Leahy
received last week in Vermont's General Assembly. I was struck
by something that he said, and I quote, ``I think Vermont is a
place where you can develop your conscience. I think of the
Senate as a place that should be the conscience of the Nation,
and sometimes is.''
So I would say for a long time, Senator Leahy has, in fact,
been the conscience of this institution, when I served here I
certainly felt that very strongly. Our Nation and the world are
better for it.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Graham, I have a statement
that goes to the budget proposal, it goes to our modernization
agenda, but in the interest of time, I am happy to submit it
for the record so that we can get to a conversation, and to
questions.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Antony Blinken
Chairman Leahy, Chairman Coons, and Ranking Member Graham, I'm
grateful for the opportunity to speak with you about the
Administration's proposed budget for the State Department.
I just returned from Kyiv, where Secretary of Defense Austin and I
demonstrated the United States' stalwart commitment to the government
and people of Ukraine.
Moscow's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has brought into
sharp focus the power and purpose of American diplomacy, and why it's
more crucial than ever to our national security and the interests of
the American people. Our diplomacy is rallying allies and partners
around the world to join us in supporting Ukraine with security,
economic, and humanitarian assistance, imposing greater costs on the
Kremlin, strengthening our collective security and defense, and
addressing the war's mounting global consequences, including the
refugee and food crises.
President Putin's war of choice has achieved the exact opposite of
his objectives. Uniting, rather than dividing, Ukrainians.
Strengthening, rather than weakening, NATO and the U.S.-EU partnership.
Undercutting, rather than asserting, the Kremlin's claims of military
might. And that's not only because of Ukraine's bravery and resilience.
It's also because of effective U.S. diplomacy.
We must continue to drive that diplomacy forward to seize the
strategic opportunities and address risks presented by Russia's
overreach, as countries reconsider their policies, priorities, and
relationships. The budget request before you predated this crisis, but
fully funding it is critical to ensuring Russia's war in Ukraine is a
strategic failure for the Kremlin and serves as a powerful lesson to
those who might consider following its path.
As we focus on this urgent crisis, the State Department continues
to carry out the missions traditionally associated with diplomacy, like
responsibly managing great power competition with China, facilitating a
halt to fighting in Yemen and Ethiopia, and pushing back against the
rising tide of authoritarianism and the threat it poses to human
rights.
We also face evolving challenges that require us to develop new
capabilities, such as the emergence and reemergence of infectious
diseases, an accelerating climate crisis, and a digital revolution that
holds both enormous promise and peril.
Last fall, I set out a modernization agenda for the State
Department and U.S. diplomacy to respond to these complex demands,
built on five pillars. Deepening our expertise in areas that are
critical to the future of America's national security. Continuing to
attract, retain, and develop the world's best diplomats. Fostering
greater innovation and feedback. Modernizing our technology,
communications, and analytical capabilities. And reinvigorating in-
person diplomacy and public engagement--to get our diplomats beyond
Embassy walls and engage the people we need to reach most.
In no small part thanks to the significant fiscal year 2022 budget
approved by Congress, we've been able to make real progress on this
agenda, though much remains to be done.
To give just a few examples, we've strengthened our capacity to
shape the ongoing technological revolution, so it protects our
interests, boosts our competitiveness, and upholds our values. With
bipartisan Congressional support and encouragement, we recently
launched a new bureau for cyberspace and digital policy, with 60 team
members to start.
We're also making headway on ensuring our diplomats reflect
America's remarkable diversity, which is one of our nation's greatest
strengths. Our Department's first ever Chief Diversity and Inclusion
Officer, Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, has spearheaded an
effort to analyze the obstacles that prevent underrepresented groups
from joining and advancing at State, and will soon release a four-year
strategic plan to tackle these problems. We've expanded the Pickering
and Rangel fellowship programs and paid internships at State--again
with strong Congressional input and support.
These efforts are showing results. We recently welcomed a new
cohort of 179 exceptional Foreign Service professionals, putting the
Department on track for its largest annual intake in a decade.
My first 15 months in this job have only strengthened my conviction
that these and other reforms are not just worthwhile, but essential to
delivering for the American people.
Today's meeting marks the 102nd time I've briefed Congress in
meetings or calls, which is one of the ways I've worked to meet the
commitment I made in my confirmation hearing to restore Congress's role
as a partner both in our foreign policymaking and in revitalizing the
State Department. These engagements have also helped further refine and
strengthen our modernization agenda.
Ensuring we can deliver on that agenda will require sustained
funding, new authorities, and most importantly, partnership from
Congress.
If we want to deepen our capability in key areas like climate,
public health, and multilateral diplomacy; expand on Secretary Powell's
vision of a foreign service training float; strengthen global capacity
to prevent, detect, and respond to future outbreaks; and equip our
workforce with the training, tools, and technology that today's
challenges demand--we need additional resources.
If we want to be able to swiftly stand up new missions . . .
deploy diplomats when and where they're needed . . . and make those
decisions based on risk management rather than risk aversion--we need
to reform the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act and
Accountability Review Board statute to enable greater flexibility,
while meeting important security standards.
If we want to rapidly scale up in response to crises like refugee
surges and epidemics, while also avoiding costly overhead, we need more
flexible domestic hiring authorities.
This is not about advancing the goals of any one administration or
party. It's about refocusing our mission and purpose on the forces that
will affect Americans' lives, livelihoods, and security for decades to
come.
So I appreciate the opportunity to speak today about why this
matters, and look forward to continuing to make this committee, and
Congress as a whole, a partner in these efforts.
Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Office of Inspector General, United States
Department of State
Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Graham, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today
for this hearing on the U.S. Department of State's fiscal year 2023
budget.
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of
State (Department) inspects embassies and diplomatic posts throughout
the world to determine whether policy goals are being achieved and
whether the interests of the United States are being represented and
advanced effectively. OIG performs specialized security inspections and
audits in support of the Department's mission to provide effective
protection to our personnel, facilities, and sensitive information. OIG
also audits Department operations and activities to ensure that they
are as effective, efficient, and economical as possible. Finally, OIG
investigates instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement that may
constitute either criminal wrongdoing or violation of Department
regulations. In short, OIG plays a crucial role in overseeing the funds
Congress appropriates to the Department for its many programs and
activities and we believe that our work can assist Subcommittee Members
in making funding decisions.
In this testimony, I will discuss the impact of our work and
highlight some of our recent and ongoing projects, including our
Afghanistan-related work. Finally, I will conclude by discussing some
of the challenges we face in fulfilling our oversight mission in the
current budget environment.
mission and results
OIG's mandate requires us to oversee both Department and U.S.
Agency for Global Media (USAGM) programs and operations, which include
more than 80,000 employees and more than 270 overseas missions and
domestic entities. We also provide oversight for the U.S. International
Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico (USIBWC), a
Federal agency that operates under the foreign policy guidance of the
Department. In terms of dollars, we are responsible for the oversight
of more than $81 billion in Department, USAGM, and foreign assistance
resources.
In pursuit of this mission, OIG provides valuable return on
investment through its audits, evaluations, inspections, and
investigations. In fiscal year 2021, OIG identified more than $700
million in questioned costs and taxpayer funds that could be put to
better use. Additionally, OIG's criminal, civil, and administrative
investigations produced $17 million in monetary results (including
fines, restitution, and recoveries) in the last fiscal year. Most
recently, the contribution of our investigative efforts led to a nearly
$1 million settlement in a false claims case involving a contractor
that provided medical services at Department facilities in Iraq and
Afghanistan.\1\
Beyond the quantifiable, our work produces benefits that add
enormous, if unmeasurable, value. First and foremost, our safety and
security work is a source of immense pride. By helping the Department
improve its security, OIG's work safeguards the lives of the thousands
of people who work in or visit U.S. posts abroad and at home. For
example, our recommendations frequently address inadequate compliance
with emergency planning standards, facility safety and security
deficiencies, and the lack of adherence to motor vehicle safety
standards in the operation of official vehicles overseas.
Finally, our investigative work consistently holds Department and
USAGM employees, contractors, and grantees accountable. In fiscal year
2021, OIG obtained 22 indictments or informations and 17 convictions.
One conviction led to a former Department employee being sentenced to 1
year in Federal prison for wire fraud. OIG special agents determined
that, over the course of 3 years in his role as a budget analyst at
Embassy Port-au-Prince, the employee embezzled more than $150,000.\2\
We also obtained nine debarments in fiscal year 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Justice (DOJ), ``Medical Services Contractor Pays
$930,000 to Settle False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Medical
Services Contracts at State Department and Air Force Facilities in Iraq
and Afghanistan,'' March 8, 2022.
\2\ DOJ, ``Former State Department Employee Sentenced to Federal
Prison for Embezzling more than $150,000 from Department of Defense,''
December 1, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
oversight efforts
Our oversight work has identified persistent challenges that can be
sorted into three categories: safety and security, stewardship, and
staffing. Key findings in these areas are described below.
Safety and Security
Safeguarding people, facilities, property, and information is a
continual challenge for the Department. While the Department's efforts
to promote security are commendable, our work continues to find issues
that pose health and safety risks, including physical security and
safety deficiencies at residences. Many of our reports and findings on
the topic of security are sensitive but unclassified or classified, but
I will share some of our efforts that are appropriate for this setting.
One example of our work exposing a health and safety risk comes
from the inspection of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations'
Office of Fire Protection, which oversees a fire safety program
responsible for promoting safe living and working conditions for
Department employees at overseas posts.\3\ Our inspectors found that
the Department's annual process used to assess management controls
within Department entities did not require chiefs of mission to attest
or certify that their posts had an effective fire protection program.
We concluded that the lack of assurances that missions are complying
with requirements related to fire protection could increase the risk of
fires and expose staff to unsafe facilities.
Another example comes from a wire fraud case that led to a sentence
of nearly 3 years in Federal prison and $200,000 in fines and
restitution.\4\ In coordination with other law enforcement agencies,
OIG special agents helped reveal that a Texas man had been selling
substandard Chinese-made military helmets, body armor, and other
products to the Department and other Federal agencies while falsely
claiming that his company manufactured the goods in Texas. Some of the
equipment had been used at Mission Iraq but was removed from service
when concerns about its quality were exposed.
In addition to the security of people and property, we often focus
on information security, and our oversight of the Department's IT
security program continues to identify numerous control weaknesses. The
fiscal year 2021 Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA)
audit concluded again that the Department had not fully developed and
implemented an effective organization-wide information security
program.\5\ We reported that the Department is operating below an
effective level in eight of the nine FISMA domains, making it
vulnerable to cyberattacks and threats to its critical mission-related
functions.
Another issue of concern is the large number of outstanding
recommendations addressed to the Bureau of Information Resource
Management, the entity responsible for developing and administering the
Department's computer and information security programs and policies.
In a report issued in December 2021 that analyzed open OIG
recommendations addressed to the bureau, we identified 90
recommendations awaiting action, including some that have been open
since 2014.\6\ As a result of the concerns described in the report,\7\
OIG recommended that the Under Secretary for Management verify that the
bureau is developing plans of action and milestones to address each
open recommendation.
Information systems security officers are like frontline enforcers
of Department information systems security policies that ensure the
protection of the Department's computer infrastructure, networks, and
data. Unfortunately, OIG has found widespread deficiencies in the
performance of such duties. In a review of 51 OIG inspections issued
from 2016 through 2019, we found nearly half identified repeated
deficiencies related to reviews of user accounts, information systems
audit logs, or proper configuration, operation, and system
maintenance.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ OIG, Inspection of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations'
Office of Fire Protection (ISP-I-21-22, May 2021).
\4\ DOJ, ``Texas Man Sentenced for Selling Chinese-Made Military
Helmets and Body Armor to Federal Agencies,'' March 23, 2022.
\5\ OIG, (SBU) Audit of the Department of State fiscal year 2021
Information Security Program (AUD-IT-22-06, October 2021).
\6\ As of March 31, 2022, OIG identified approximately 90 open
recommendations addressed to the Bureau of Information Resource
Management.
\7\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Support From the Under
Secretary for Management Is Needed To Facilitate the Closure of Office
of Inspector General Recommendations Addressed to the Bureau of
Information Resource Management (AUD-AOQC- 22-07, December 2021).
\8\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Department Can Take Further
Steps to Improve Executive Direction of Overseas Missions (ISP-21-14,
June 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stewardship
Efficiently and effectively managing its significant resources is
another longstanding challenge for the Department. OIG's work
demonstrates that the Department could enhance its stewardship of
taxpayer resources by improving its ability to identify and address
weaknesses in financial and property management and contract and grant
oversight. Additionally, identifying and addressing weaknesses in its
internal controls is an element of the Department's stewardship
challenge.
During one audit, we reported that the Department did not
consistently use a general budget object code in accordance with
requirements when recording expenses.\9\ Recording expense data to the
appropriate code is essential for management officials to have complete
and accurate data for assessing spending patterns. Until deficiencies
in the use of the budget object codes are addressed, the Department
will not have a full understanding of the specific purpose of its
expenses or a method to easily identify how billions of dollars of
funds were used.
Property management deficiencies are likewise common, as we
frequently report in our inspections of overseas posts. We often note
problems with managing the acquisition, storage, distribution, and
monitoring of fuel. In a recent review of our own reports addressing
fuel management from fiscal year 2016 to fiscal year 2020, OIG
identified systemic weaknesses in the Department's management of its
overseas fuel stock and we assessed the Department's progress toward
addressing common deficiencies.\10\ The resulting information report
serves as a reference for posts seeking to strengthen fuel management
practices and the Department expressed its intention to use the report
in applicable training. Additionally, a recent referral prompted us to
review gift vault access controls at the Office of Chief of
Protocol.\11\ We determined stronger inventory controls were needed in
order to ensure accountability of office staff and protect items stored
in the gift vault, many of which are of significant value.
Turning to contracts, in a series of audits published last fiscal
year, we examined myriad management and oversight shortfalls related to
contracts in support of overseas contingency operations. Because of the
Department's frequent use of noncompetitive contracts for securing
support services for its operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, we took a
closer look at compliance with Federal regulation and acquisition
policies when awarding such contracts. Our audit found that none of the
awards we reviewed had been publicly justified, as required.\12\ We
also had concerns that the Department did not fully take the required
steps to ensure that fair and reasonable prices were paid on
noncompetitive contract awards, a risk inherent in foregoing
competition when awarding contracts.
Further, we issued a management assistance report calling on the
Department to reduce its use of ``bridge contracts,'' which are sole-
source, short-term awards to the incumbent contractor to avoid a lapse
in service when there is a delay in awarding a follow-on contract.\13\
We found these types of contracts were frequently used in Afghanistan
and Iraq over multiple years to noncompetitively extend contract
services. Such a practice limits the Department's ability to realize
potential cost savings by maximizing full and open competition. Another
audit related to this body of work concluded that the Department, as a
result of poor acquisition planning, noncompetitively awarded two
contracts for essential services at Mission Iraq.\14\ Because Federal
law does not permit poor planning as justification for the use of
noncompetitive awards, we questioned the full value of the two
contracts at a combined cost of $663 million.
Likewise, proper oversight and management of grants and cooperative
agreements continues to be a challenge for the Department. In an audit
to determine whether recipients of certain Department grants and
cooperative agreements complied with the cost-sharing requirements of
their award agreements, we concluded that internal controls meant to
ensure proper oversight of such awards needed improvement.\15\ For
example, we found that monitoring plans were not tailored to awards,
monitoring controls were not adjusted when the pandemic prevented site
visits, and training for oversight staff did not provide adequate
instruction regarding oversight of cost-share requirements. Such
deficiencies led to unsupported or unallowable cost-share transactions
for the Department.
During an ongoing audit related to grants and cooperative
agreements awarded by the Department for countering Iranian influence,
we issued a Management Assistance Report concerning internal control
deficiencies at the Global Engagement Center (GEC).\16\ These lapses
resulted in a situation where third-party contractors were performing
inherently governmental functions on a large percentage of the awards
reviewed. GEC did not ensure that grants officer representatives were
properly assigned and designated throughout each award's period of
performance, which posed risks for award management and oversight.
Finally, in an inspection of the Office to Monitor and Combat
Trafficking in Persons, we highlighted instances where monitoring and
grant oversight activity was not properly documented in award files, an
issue frequently noted in our inspections of other entities.\17\
Our work also highlights the Department's numerous difficulties
related to internal controls. In a review of our own previous
inspection reports, we found that 51 of the 52 reviewed contained
findings that involved vulnerabilities in internal controls, which
placed programs, personnel, resources, or sensitive information at
risk.\18\ OIG found that missions did not effectively use the
Department's annual statement of assurance process to identify and
address these deficiencies. In a more specific example, a recent audit
concluded that internal controls involving the process to prepare
residences for occupancy at Embassy Cairo were not fully effective in
safeguarding expenditures related to this process.\19\ Internal control
weaknesses contributed to questionable expenditures and a potential for
over reliance on overtime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ OIG, Audit of the Department of State's Use of ``Not Otherwise
Classified'' Budget Object Codes (AUD-FM-22-21, February 2022).
\10\ OIG, Information Report: Systemic Deficiencies Related to the
Department of State's Fuel Management From fiscal year 2016 Through
fiscal year 2020 (AUD-MERO-22-20, March 2022).
\11\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Office of the Chief of
Protocol Gift Vault Access Controls (ESP-22-01, November 2021)
\12\ OIG, Audit of Noncompetitive Contracts in Support of Overseas
Contingency Operations in Afghanistan and Iraq (AUD-MERO- 22-03,
October 2021).
\13\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Improved Guidance and
Acquisition Planning is Needed to Reduce the Use of Bridge Contracts in
Afghanistan and Iraq (AUD-MERO-21-37, July 2021).
\14\ OIG, Audit of Acquisition Planning and Cost Controls While
Transitioning Support Service Contracts in Iraq (AUD-MERO-21-43,
September 2021).
\15\ OIG, Audit of Compliance With Cost-Sharing Requirements for
Selected Department of State Grants and Cooperative Agreements (AUD-
CGI-22-12, November 2021).
\16\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Internal Controls Are
Needed To Safeguard Inherently Governmental Functions at the Global
Engagement Center (AUD-MERO-22-19, February 2022).
\17\ OIG, Inspection of the Office to Monitor and Combat
Trafficking in Persons (ISP-I-22-01, October 2021).
\18\ OIG, Management Assistance Report: Department Can Take Further
Steps to Improve Executive Direction of Overseas Missions (ISP-21-14,
June 2021).
\19\ OIG, Audit of the Process To Prepare Residences for New
Tenants at U.S. Embassy Cairo, Egypt (AUD-MERO-22-23, March 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staffing
Our work reveals that many of the critical challenges facing the
Department are caused or compounded by staffing gaps, frequent turnover
in key positions, and inexperienced or undertrained staff. Moreover,
instances of poor leadership, lack of coordination between and within
Department bureaus and offices, and conflicting lines of authority
have, at times, undermined the Department's effectiveness and
negatively impacted employee morale.
We took a closer look at some of these human resources issues
during an audit conducted in the Bureau of Global Talent Management,
which has the critical responsibility of recruiting, developing,
assigning, and supporting the Department's workforce.\20\ We audited
certain human resources services provided to eight other Department
bureaus and found that over 90 percent of competitive hiring
recruitment actions were not completed within required timeframes. Some
of the bureau's difficulties were a result of its own staffing
challenges, which hampered its ability to help other bureaus recruit,
classify, and fill mission-critical Department positions.
Another example of challenges related to staffing comes from our
inspection of the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, a bureau
encompassing a region with many crucial foreign policy priorities,
including U.S.-China relations.\21\ There, we found that inefficient
organizational structures, staffing constraints, large numbers of
temporary staff that frequently turnover, and increasing workloads
hindered operations in some offices.
Our inspectors regularly measure senior officials' practices
against the Department's leadership and management standards and note
where leaders fall short. In one review, we noted numerous leadership
failures in the Bureau of Consular Affairs contributed to a stunning
lack of progress on a long running initiative to modernize and
consolidate approximately 90 discrete consular legacy systems into a
common technology framework.\22\ Even though the office responsible for
the initiative has continually missed deployment dates, we found no
evidence that leadership scrutinized the office or held staff
accountable for missed deadlines. More worrisome, even though the
modernization effort has cost millions of dollars and is critical to
the bureau's ability to meet its mission in the future, leaders were
unable to provide a clear, uniform definition of the initiative, what
components it included, and which contracts supported it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ OIG, Review of the Bureau of Global Talent Management, Office
of the Executive Director, Office of Technology Services' Information
System Processes (ISP-I-21-29, July 2021).
\21\ OIG, Inspection of East Asian and Pacific Affairs (ISP-I-22-
06, December 2021).
\22\ OIG, Review of the Bureau of Consular Affairs' Consular-One
Modernization Program--Significant Deployment Delays Continue (ISP-I-
22-03, November 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
afghanistan-related work
In the wake of the Department's suspension of operations in
Afghanistan last year, OIG devoted substantial time and directed
significant resources to planning and coordinating oversight activities
that focus on key aspects of the situation and its aftermath. Our plans
include reviews of the Special Immigrant Visa program, the resettlement
of Afghan evacuees, and Embassy Kabul emergency planning and evacuation
efforts. The latter work will focus on whether the Embassy followed
established Department guidance in preparation for the evacuation of
U.S. Government personnel, private U.S. citizens, Afghans at risk, and
others from Afghanistan prior to and following the suspension of
operations. These projects are in progress, and we continue to closely
coordinate our ongoing and planned work with other relevant OIGs.
In January, we completed a project that reviewed open
recommendations specific to Embassy Kabul and analyzed whether, in
consideration of the suspension of operations, they should be closed,
redirected, or remain open.\23\ The review allowed us to identify
issues that had been rendered moot by the events of last August. We
have also attempted to add value in ways that do not require new work
to be performed. For example, we published a report on lessons learned
for establishing remote missions when events dictate that Department
operations must cease in another country.\24\ Although not directly
related to Kabul, after the suspension of operations, we provided a
copy to the Embassy Kabul management team to use as a reference when
establishing the Afghanistan Affairs Unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ OIG, Information Report: Office of Inspector General's
Analysis of Open Recommendations Specific to U.S. Embassy Kabul,
Afghanistan (AUD-MERO-22-18, January 2022).
\24\ OIG, Audit of Department of State Protocols for Establishing
and Operating Remote Diplomatic Missions (AUD-MERO-21-33, July 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
resources
We appreciate this Subcommittee's ongoing support of our work. In
particular, we are grateful for the inclusion of supplemental funding
for Ukraine-related oversight work in the fiscal year 2022 omnibus
appropriations bill. The Subcommittee's timely foresight in recognizing
the draw on OIG resources created by Ukraine-related events means that
OIG will be able to initiate important oversight work without
compromising other mission-critical oversight projects as would be
necessary without the additional funds. We are in the process of
planning Ukraine- related oversight projects and will be in contact
with you and your staff as we progress.
However, OIG's budget has remained relatively flat in recent years,
jeopardizing our ability to sustain high-quality oversight work across
the wide spectrum of programs and activities at the Department and
USAGM. Increased IT costs (including costs associated with
cybersecurity), unforeseen pandemic-related expenses, mandated work,
and large-scale oversight projects like our oversight work on
Afghanistan-related events, have resulted in an increasing and alarming
strain on our budget and required us to delay some previously
prioritized work.
OIG has been grappling with these funding challenges while facing
perhaps its greatest challenge--advancing OIG's oversight mission in
the midst of a global pandemic. On this front, I am particularly proud
to highlight OIG's remarkable adaptability. Despite 2 years of
restrictions that made traveling overseas to conduct inspections and
audits of embassies and posts nearly impossible, we continue to meet
our unique oversight requirements under the Foreign Service Act by
performing audit work remotely and by developing and deploying remote
and hybrid inspection models. However, with an anticipated increase in
travel costs in fiscal year 2023, OIG will be forced to decrease the
amount and scope of work we complete in order to support the resumption
of travel unless additional funding is provided.
OIG also has demonstrated remarkable ingenuity and resilience in
the face of ever-evolving IT challenges. After years of operating
within the Department's IT systems, OIG made the decision to migrate to
an independent IT architecture in 2015, a congressionally supported
initiative. We believed then, and continue to believe today, that an
independent IT network is critical to OIG's independence, security, and
ability to fulfill its mission. Since then, OIG has striven to be a
model within the Federal government; in the annual FISMA report, we
received one of the two highest ratings across all five risk
categories, a major and rare accomplishment across the Federal
Government, despite the significant IT challenges we faced related to
the pandemic. Yet, with increasing IT and labor requirements,
adequately providing the necessary maintenance, support, and
cybersecurity for the network is a challenge in our current budget
environment. Moreover, recent IT modernization and cybersecurity
requirements, including Executive Order 14028, ``Improving the Nation's
Cybersecurity,'' issued on May 12, 2021, place additional strain on
existing labor resources and require adequate funding to accomplish.
Beyond making the sustainment of current operations a challenge, a
largely static budget also presents implications for our ability to
take on important discretionary work, including work on big initiatives
of congressional interest such as Afghanistan. OIG developed its
Afghanistan- related oversight plans in close coordination with the
broader IG community. OIG's Afghanistan-related projects will--when
combined with the work being performed by other agencies' OIGs--provide
a comprehensive, whole-of-government review of recent and ongoing
developments related to Afghanistan. In order to fund the timely
completion of this important work, OIG had to abandon or delay plans to
conduct eight non-Afghanistan-related projects and shift an estimated
$5.5 million in resources to the emerging Afghanistan priority.
Unfortunately, without supplemental funding for this unexpected
work, OIG does not have the means to undertake these Afghanistan-
related projects and complete the eight non- Afghanistan projects from
which OIG diverted the required resources. Such work included Worldwide
Protective Services (WPS) II Contracts, the Central America Regional
Security Initiative, Counter-narcotics Assistance in East and Southeast
Asia, Overseas Construction Contracts, the Department's COVID-19
response, and Whistleblower Protection Notifications to Contractor and
Grantee Employees. Due to increasing resource constraints, we are
unfortunately having to delay or cancel projects that were designed to
target high-risk areas and that could have led to significant
improvements in the programs and activities we oversee. I want to take
this opportunity to clearly communicate the nature of these difficult
trade-off decisions so that Members may consider alternative approaches
to funding OIG's operations going forward.
conclusion
I am incredibly proud of the work done by my colleagues in OIG and
the value we provide to the Department, USAGM, Congress, and U.S.
taxpayers. We are a talented and committed team of professionals
dedicated to helping the Department and USAGM successfully accomplish
their respective missions through robust oversight and solution-
oriented recommendations. I want to thank my team for their resilience,
ingenuity, integrity, and leadership.
I also want to again thank Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Graham,
and Members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to submit
testimony. I take my statutory requirement to keep Congress fully and
currently informed seriously, and I appreciate your interest in our
work.
Senator Coons. Terrific. Thank you very much Mr. Secretary.
I will begin what are 7-minute questions. We may get to a
second round, but there is a vote scheduled for 3:30. So if
Members intend to come back for a second round please make sure
that my staff knows.
Thank you for your tireless work on pulling together our
allies in support of Ukraine. Ukraine faces a brutal invasion
by Russia, and I would be interested, first, just in a few
questions about a supplemental that we understand may be coming
soon.
Bridget Brink has been nominated to be the next U.S.
Ambassador to Ukraine. Will you be resuming operations in Kyiv
as well as in the rest of the country, and will the
supplemental include funding to return U.S. Embassy personnel,
and provide for their security; first? Second, in addition to
military and humanitarian assistance do you think this
supplemental will or should include funds for the global food
security crisis, and the pandemic?
And then last, I have just returned from Georgia, many of
us have expressed concern about Moldova, and Georgia, which are
also roughly in the position that Ukraine is, meaning not
members of the EU, not members of NATO, countries that are
receiving Ukrainian refugees, and where there is a real and
present threat of Russian aggression against Moldova and
Georgia.
So if you would, Mr. Secretary; that is my opening set of
questions.
Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman thank you very, very much.
So a few things; first of all with regard to the supplemental,
that should be coming forward in the next couple of days, and
it will include very robust assistance requests for Ukraine,
for partners and allies, and as well as, of course, our ability
to function in Ukraine.
With regard to our diplomatic presence, we have diplomats
going back to Ukraine this week, as we speak, to begin the
process of looking to reopen the Embassy in Kyiv, and my
anticipation is that they will start in Lviv, in western
Ukraine, and look to reopen the Embassy as quickly, but also as
safely as possible. And we look forward to working with you on
that.
A number of other countries that left with the onset of the
Russian aggression are also coming back, reopening their
missions, it was very important for Secretary Austin and I to
go, to show the flag, but we want to be able to show the flag
every day. But it is a process that we take very seriously in
terms of making sure that we do it in a way that ensures the
safety and security of our personnel, but I think this will
play out over the next few weeks.
We very much appreciate the Senate's prompt consideration
of Bridget Brink to be Ambassador to Ukraine, she is
extraordinarily qualified for this job. I think she is known to
many Members of this Committee, and hopefully she will be
confirmed quickly once she is sent formally to the Senate.
I anticipate the supplemental will include a request for
resources for food security, something that we can and should
talk about. This is, as Chairman Leahy said, a very, very
dramatic problem that already existed of course, and has been
exacerbated by Russia's aggression, by the invasion.
We have Ukrainian farmers, who, instead of being able to
deal with their crops, they have been forced to fight or to
flee for their--because of the Russian aggression. We have
Russia blockading Black Sea ports, so that even though Ukraine
is actually producing a lot of wheat, it can't get out of the
country because of this blockade.
And all of that is having an effect, not just in the
immediate region, but literally around the world. And I know in
all of your travels, you have heard this too, everywhere we go,
everywhere I go I am hearing this. We have we have plans to
address this, not just with the supplemental, we are trying to
get countries to support the World food Program with additional
funding, the Food and Agriculture Organization with more
funding, they both have needs for resources.
We are looking at countries that have large stockpiles of
food to use those stockpiles, to not hold them back, to not put
export restrictions on food. The President has incentivized the
production of fertilizer here in the United States, and we are
working in a variety of ways to try to address this.
The last thing I will say on this, Mr. Chairman, is that we
have the presidency of the UN Security Council in May. I intend
to focus our month of the presidency on food security, and I
will be spending some time there as well. And again, very much
look forward to working with this Committee.
Finally, on Moldova and Georgia, I share the concerns that
you have expressed about the vulnerable position they are in.
We are working very closely with both. I was in Moldova a few
weeks ago, our Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees and
Migration, Secretary Noyes, was just there as well. We have
contributed, through a German pledging conference, an
additional $100 million to help support Moldova.
The request that you have before you would fund programs to
do a number of things, including bolstering cybersecurity,
economic stabilization and resilience, to counter
disinformation where they are on the receiving end, to try to
integrate their energy system to Europe. There is, I think a
significant development in the connection of Moldova, as well
as Ukraine to the European security grid, but there is work to
do to make that work.
We also need to get the UN agencies to be prepared for a
potential huge influx of additional refugees to Moldova. They
have already taken in a lot of people. It is a small country.
Anyway, in the interest of time, there is more on Georgia.
I could speak to that as well. But the point that you make is
exactly right, we need to be looking out for these countries
that are at risk, and in between we see, again, in Moldova,
some things happening in Transnistria that we are looking at
very, very carefully as well.
Senator Coons. Thank you Mr. Secretary. To the United
Nations, if I might, just a few points and then I will lead to
the Ranking Member.
First, we did not succeed last year in paying anything in
our UN arrears. We have arrears now totaling a billion dollars,
and in my view failing to pay what we could, and should,
weakens our credibility, and frankly strengthens some of our
global competitors, who would take advantage of that
opportunity.
I was just in Paris, and had the chance to meet with
Director General Azoulay of UNESCO. I would be interested in
your thoughts, on whether in our absence, our competitors have
used that absence to expand their role.
And then last, on the UN Human Rights Council, on March 4th
the UN Human Rights Commission adopted a resolution opening a
Commission of Inquiry for the human rights violations, the war
crimes being committed in Ukraine. I would be interested in
whether the administration supports an ICC or other war crimes
investigation into a prosecution of Russian soldiers and
leaders, and what assistance we could provide there, and how
significant you think it is that Russia has been suspended now
from the UN Human Rights Council, the first permanent member of
the UN Security Council to be so suspended? And whether you
would make a case for our renewing our participation in that
Council?
And with that I will yield to the Ranking Member, if you
would take a minute and answer those.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you very much. I very much share
your view that it is to our detriment to not be making good on
our commitments to the United Nations in terms of the budget,
in terms of dealing with arrears. It puts us in a position of
disadvantage in a place that we should be in a position of
advantage.
And to your point some of some other countries are able to
make the rhetorical case because of this, that U.S. leadership,
U.S. influence can't be counted on, and it also, of course,
contributes to some operational challenges. So we think that
paying our dues, paying into the budget is vital both for the
functioning of the UN, but also for our standing and our
ability to carry the day, and carry the debate at the UN.
I think we have some proof positive of this, by the way, in
what you just referenced, because we are back on the Human
Rights Council we were able to actually lead in the creation of
this Commission of Inquiry for Ukraine. So it is something we
are going to very much support, looking at the atrocities and
human rights abuses that were committed by Russia in Ukraine.
Similarly, we support and welcome the fact that the ICC has
opened an investigation, we found ways to support the ICC in a
number of instances in the past, including most recently with
the prosecution of Janjaweed from Darfur that prosecution
resulted, in no small measure, from information and evidence we
were able to bring forward.
Our main focus when it comes to Ukraine is on helping the
Prosecutor General and her team that is investigating these war
crimes allegations. We have experts who are working very
closely with that team to make sure that they can do their jobs
effectively.
And finally, on UNESCO; this is, I think, a perfect example
of a situation where our absence is clearly to our detriment
because, among other things, UNESCO is in the business of
setting standards, norms around the world for education, for
the way new, emerging technologies like artificial intelligence
are used, to cite just two examples.
So when we are not at the table shaping that conversation,
and so actually helping to shape those norms and standards,
well, someone else is, and that someone else is probably China.
So it really does not make a lot of sense for us to be absent
from that body.
Now, there is a very understandable concern expressed in
the past because of the Palestinians seeking ignition, and that
going forward, that Congress chose to act to make it difficult
for us to continue our participation. We believe that having
waiver authority would be important, and necessary. And I can
say with authority that our partners in Israel feel the same
way. They would support our rejoining UNESCO, and I think it is
in the national interest to do that precisely because these
debates are so important, and we should be at the table making
sure that we shape them, not someone else.
Senator Coons. Thank you Mr. Secretary.
I will yield to the Ranking Member, Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. If it is okay, I will let Senator Moran go
first. He has a hearing to chair in about 5 minutes.
Senator Moran. Someday I hope to chair a Committee again,
but at the moment I am only the Ranking Member. But I
appreciate your willingness, not only to promote me, but to
allow me to go ahead of you. So Senator Graham, thank you.
Mr. Secretary, thank you. I would join in my commendation
for the chair of the full Committee, and the chair of this
subcommittee, and I always appreciate the opportunities I have
to work with them.
Mr. Secretary, yesterday you told the Foreign Relations
Committee that you believe our allies and partners are prepared
to sustain and build upon the sanctions imposed. And I am a
member of the NATO Observer Group, so I am talking about NATO,
and I am talking about the circumstances that we all face in
regard to the invasion, the evil invasion of Ukraine.
From your conversations with our allies, and particularly
Germany, who have pledged to increase their defense budgets,
what do you--what do you see as happening next? Will this last
longer than this particular circumstance? And you indicated
that they would build it----build upon sanctions imposed, what
do you anticipate that building to include?
Secretary Blinken. Senator, thank you very much. And thank
you for your leadership at this critical time on this issue.
A couple of things; first, I think what we have seen to
date is extraordinary, in terms of allies coming together both
in support of Ukraine, but also in exerting pressure on Russia.
We said before this Russian aggression took place, as we saw it
coming we tried to head it off, but Putin went ahead, we said
back in December that there would be massive consequences
imposed on Russia if it went ahead with the aggression.
The reason we were able to say that with confidence is
because for many months we have been working with allies and
partners to build those massive consequences, including
unprecedented sanctions. And I think that many of us would not
have fully expected that we would actually be able to carry
that through.
Thus far we have, and we are seeing, as a result of the
pressure imposed on Russia, an economy in free fall. Most
predictions suggest it will contract by 15 percent this year.
We are seeing capital flight from the country to the extent
that Putin is not able to prevent that. We are seeing an exodus
of companies, more than 600 businesses, international
businesses, with brand names, leaving Russia, denying Russian
consumers the ability to get those products.
And the export controls that we have been able to impose
working with other countries mean that Russia will not be able
to effectively modernize critical parts of its economy, and a
system, including the defense sector.
But to your point, it is vitally important that we sustain
this effort. And that means making sure that as we have done to
date, allies and partners come along as we do this. We are in
constant contact with them. We will continue to roll out
sanctions in the weeks ahead. This is not stopping as long as
Russia is not stopping. And the European Union itself is
continuing to do that.
I think the next step is one of the things that they are
looking at is an oil embargo on Russia. They are working on
that. We are looking to see what they do. We will continue to
focus on additional sectors of the Russian economy to make sure
that we continue to ratchet up the pressure.
I anticipate that this is going to go on for some time, and
all the more reason why we have to make sure that we sustain
what we have been able to put in place.
Senator Moran. Mr. Secretary, thank you. I was on the
border of Ukraine a few weeks, just a couple weeks ago. My
takeaway then, as it was previously, and continues to be, and
what I am looking for is reassurance. I want to make sure the
United States, in my view, it would be immoral for us just to
provide enough assistance for the Ukrainians to survive, and
not win.
And I also think that our help should include more than
defending Ukraine, the offensive capabilities of Ukraine to
attack those areas that are attacking them. Can you assure me
that that is policy; that is what we are doing? Or would you
want to dissuade me from my views?
Secretary Blinken. A couple of things; first, thanks to the
tremendous support, generosity of the American people, through
this Congress, we have been able to date to provide the
Ukrainians with exceptional support. And this is something that
started well before the Russian aggression.
The initial presidential drawdown took place back in Labor
Day of last year, $60 million, then there was another
significant drawdown of about $200 million around
Christmastime. All that was done relatively quietly, the
Russians had not yet committed their aggression, but we wanted
to make sure that Ukrainians had in hand what they needed if
Putin carried this forward.
And when he did, the main reason that the Ukrainians have
been so successful thus far in repelling the Russians is, of
course, because of their own courage, remarkable. But it is
also because they had in hand the tools they needed to do that,
and in particular the Javelins, the Stingers, systems of that
nature were critical in winning the battle for Kyiv.
I can tell you that, broadly speaking, when it comes to
anti-armor systems, and anti-air systems, for every Russian
plane, and every Russian tank in Ukraine, we, and allies, and
partners have been able to provide the Ukrainians to date with
about systems for every plane and every tank.
But to your point, the nature of the battle has now
shifted, and what is happening in the East and Southern Ukraine
is very different than what was happening around Kyiv in terms
of what the Ukrainians need to be able to repel the Russian
aggression. And so heavier artillery has been critical, and we
are working assiduously, and others are, to get them that.
Shore-to-ship weapons, and to deal with the challenges in
the Black Sea are also vital, heavier armor, tanks, et cetera,
all of that is in train.
Secretary Austin was in Germany yesterday, as you probably
saw. A pretty remarkable scene, 40 Defense Ministers sitting
around a huge table, all working on coordinating the effort to
get to the Ukrainians what they need. We spent three hours with
President Zelenskyy, his Minister of Defense, his Chief of the
Armed Forces, the Foreign Minister, et cetera, and a chunk of
that time was spent on going in detail through Ukraine's needs
going forward.
So the short answer is, we are determined to get them what
they need to deal with this Russian aggression, and to push the
Russians out of the country. It is another matter as to whether
the Ukrainians should take actions that go beyond their
borders.
My own view is that it is vital that they do whatever is
necessary to defend against Russian aggression. And the tactics
of this are their decisions, but what we are doing with all of
these systems is making sure the Ukrainians have the means to
defend themselves, that is what this is about, and making sure
that they can do whatever is necessary to push the Russians out
of the country.
Senator Moran. Mr. Chairman, I won't ask another question,
but if I can complement, or at least support a decision that
the Secretary has made. I encouraged you several weeks ago, a
week or more ago, to return to Kyiv with our diplomatic
Embassy, you are headed that direction, it sounds like it is
going occur in stages, but I am supportive of the United States
having its Embassy in Kyiv as quickly as it is safe for our
personnel.
And I want to thank you for a couple of folks, several of
your folks, Nas, Courtney, Paul, Jeff, Consular Affairs folks
who have been exceptionally helpful to us in our efforts to
solve problems for Kansans-Americans around the globe. Thank
you.
Secretary Blinken. Senator, thank you for saying that. We
very much appreciate it, and we look forward to continue to
work with you.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
Senator Coons. Chairman Leahy.
Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Secretary Blinken, I stepped out, but I heard your kind
words outside. I didn't jump back in because I didn't want to
interrupt you guys, enjoying it too much. But thank you, it was
undeserved but greatly appreciated.
And regarding Ukraine, that some have urged the U.S. to
liquidate the Russian Central Bank's nearly--was it $100
billion, I believe, in foreign exchange reserves that are
frozen at the Federal Reserve, to use all those funds to help
the people of Ukraine, does the Department have that capacity
to identify the assets of Russia, and other oligarchs? And can
they coordinate with the Treasury and Justice Departments in
seizing and freezing such assets?
Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, we are working very
closely with Treasury and Justice to look at both how we can
effectively freeze, but also seize assets. And we have blocking
sanctions, as you know, in place against a variety of
individuals and institutions that effectively freezes their
property in the United States.
The question when it comes to the seizure piece, is do we
have the relevant provisions in place, civil criminal
forfeiture authorities, Justice is in the process of reviewing
that. And I know that there are a number of ideas that I find
compelling about finding ways to use these assets to support
Ukraine. The short answer is, the Justice Department lawyers
are looking at all of that.
Senator Leahy. Of course it doesn't help that a lot of
those assets are behind various walls, one after another, fake
corporations, and things of that nature.
Secretary Blinken. Yes. And I think it goes to the
importance of having transparency, beneficial ownership, rules,
et cetera.
Senator Leahy. And I can't think of anything I have seen
more shocking than the scenes of what the Russian soldiers are
doing, machine gunning families as they are trying to run away
from something, the children, innocent civilians have been
murdered. And can that be investigated by the International
Criminal Court? Should it be? And can we help?
Secretary Blinken. We welcome the fact that the ICC has
opened an investigation, one of the critical things they are
doing is making sure that potential evidence of atrocities is
being compiled effectively. As I mentioned, I think when you
are out of the room Mr. Chairman, besides the ICC work, I think
the critical focus that we have is on supporting the work of
the Ukrainian Prosecutor General. And we have experts who are
working every single day with that team to make sure that they
have what they need to document, compile the evidence. And
actually look at potential prosecutions.
But those two efforts, as well as the Commission of Inquiry
established by the Human Rights Council of the United Nations,
with our leadership, are three of the critical vehicles we see,
going forward, to get accountability to deal with this.
And to your point, some of the things we are seeing are, I
think, beyond almost our collective imaginations. For example,
there are very credible reports that the Russians have been, in
retreat, booby-trapping things like people's washing machines,
and toys, so that when people are able to return home and go
about their lives they are killed or injured as a result of one
of these booby traps.
Senator Leahy. I look at some of the land mines, and
cluster mines used this Javelin type----
Secretary Blinken. That is right.
Senator Leahy [continuing]. Mine that you won't even have
to touch it, if you come near it and it's off.
Secretary Blinken. That is exactly right. And Mr. Chairman,
part of our request, and I think this will be in the
supplemental, will be for some additional funds for demining
because, unfortunately, we have to deal with that now as a
result of what Russia has been doing.
Senator Leahy. Thank you for mentioning it, because I know
your request is $18 million below what was requested last year.
I have a feeling you are going to need a lot more for
humanitarian demining. And as you know, I have long sought to
rid the world of landmines, but I think also what the
prosecutors are getting, it is going to be extremely important
for historians. You know, those who don't understand the
mistakes of history, it is almost a cliche, but they are
condemned to repeat them.
The world is going to see this, because there is no
question that it is crimes against humanity. And we are going
to need, I think, the World Food Program, projects the unmet
need of $10 billion. I would hopefully have a request to beef
that up. And the President's budget request is about $8 billion
above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level, but the war in
Ukraine, the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and so on, this
is not the moment--we should be investing more in the State
Department, and other agencies, and more. I know this is
something Chairman Coons has talked about at length, putting
more in Foreign Ops, not less.
Secretary Blinken. Yes.
Senator Leahy. And lastly, and my time is running out, the
Leahy Law, would you and your staff please talk with us, how
that--the one that prohibits assistance, are units of foreign
security forces that are committing gross violations of human
rights, I think you have some money in your budget for Leahy
Law vetting, but are you confident that that is being carried
out as much as it should be?
Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, in my judgment it is, I
think it is being consistently and effectively applied. We have
million dollars in the budget this year to conduct the vetting.
It is a critical part of what we do, and I think we have the
resources, as well as the focus necessary, to carry that out in
the way it was intended.
Senator Leahy. And I would just mentioned, Mr. Chairman,
your plane was delayed, but we had a meeting, some extensive
meeting. I know Senator Durbin and I were there yesterday with
the President, and others, about Cuba. Nobody condones the
crackdown on the people who are peacefully protesting in there,
but I also don't--I don't condone the total rollback of the
policy that we had under the Obama administration.
I hope that attention is given to finding a way that we can
start having normal relations with Cuba for the good of their
own people, and for us.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward
to catching up with the President. I haven't talked to him
since your meeting, but I look forward to hearing from him on
the meeting.
Senator Coons. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. I won't
request a second round; we will try to make this as quick as
possible, but there is a lot going on in the world, and let us
start here at home.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe if we repeal Title 42
authority to deport illegal immigrants because of the threat of
a COVID outbreak that we will have more illegal immigrants
coming?
Secretary Blinken. Senator, two things on that. First, as
you know, Title 42 is a CDC authority.
Senator Graham. Right.
Secretary Blinken. Public health authority.
Senator Graham. Right.
Secretary Blinken. It is not an immigration policy----
Senator Graham. Yes, that is right.
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Authority. The question is
what practical effect would its repeal have? I think we are
likely to see more people seeking to enter the country, but if
they cannot present a credible claim of asylum they will be
returned. That is the policy. That doesn't change. The order is
not opening with the repeal of Title 42, if that is what
happens.
Senator Graham. I am just saying the border is completely
broken. We have 1.2 main illegal crossings since October of
last year, and there will be a tsunami more coming if we repeal
Title 42. Will there be COVID money in the supplemental?
Secretary Blinken. I can't speak to that at this point
because I think the White House is still looking at that.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Secretary Blinken. One way or another, Senator, in my
judgment we need COVID money.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Secretary Blinken. Internationally, whether that is in this
supplemental or in some other vehicle, I don't know, but we
need it.
Senator Graham. Yes. I think we do need money for COVID
internationally, I will agree with that. And I think if you
want to stop, as Senator Leahy said, one country away from an
outbreak, you would revisit Title 42. I would encourage you to
do that.
Let us go to Afghanistan. What is the state of play in
Afghanistan for women right now?
Secretary Blinken. The state of play is extremely mixed to
negative, and the----
Senator Graham. What is the upside for women?
Secretary Blinken. The only upside that we have seen at
all, is that somewhat, ironically, you might say there is, in
the country at large, greater stability, and relative peace
than there has been. That is about the only upside I can think
of.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Secretary Blinken. The downside of course is that we have
seen, including most recently, the Taliban fall back on its
commitment that it had made to ensure that girls can go to
school above the sixth grade. This is, among many things,
something that is a deep, a deep concern.
Senator Graham. Is our homeland more at risk now than it
was before the withdrawal in Afghanistan, from al-Qaeda, and
ISIS presence in Afghanistan?
Secretary Blinken. If you look at the--if you look at the
presence and the threat, I would say there are three things
that are going on. First, there is al-Qaeda itself, and I can
go into more detail in another setting----
Senator Graham. We will do it. It is just a general
question. Is al-Qaeda and ISIS more free to roam now that we
are out of Afghanistan than they were before we left?
Secretary Blinken. ISIS-K is, as you know, is of course an
enemy of the Taliban. And the issue there is not the will of
the Taliban to take them on.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. It is their capacity. That is, right.
Senator Graham. Right.
Secretary Blinken. When it comes to al-Qaeda, and the Arab
al-Qaeda Corps, there are a very, very small number of people
in Afghanistan.
Senator Graham. How do we know?
Secretary Blinken. Based on the--again, without going into
detail in this setting----
Senator Graham. Well, Mr. Secretary, with all due respect,
if you are a Shiite in Afghanistan, it had been a good week for
you. There is no upside to the Taliban in charge, for women
anywhere in Afghanistan, and I think our homeland is far more
at risk now that we have no presence on the ground, no ability
to detect what al-Qaeda, and ISIS-K are up to. So to me, that
is an easy question to ask.
President Biden said he had no regrets about leaving
Afghanistan. Do you have any regrets?
Secretary Blinken. I don't Senator, in the sense that----
Senator Graham. Okay.
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. This was America's longest
war.
Senator Graham. No. That is fair enough. Is the war over?
Have we ended the war between us in radicalism by leaving
Afghanistan?
Secretary Blinken. As much as we--we went to Afghanistan,
as you know well, for one reason which is to deal with the
folks who attacked us on 9/11. We decimated al-Qaeda in its
ability to continue attacks beyond Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden
was brought to justice more than a decade ago. It was time to
end, end the longest war.
Senator Graham. Have you heard the assessment by the
Secretary of Defense, and others that: How long would it be
before an attack against America originating from Afghanistan
would mature? And they said 2 years. Is that a successful
withdrawal? That is what they said. I asked them.
Secretary Blinken. And I don't want to, myself, put words
in their mouths, but the question----
Senator Graham. Anyway I just think it is----
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Goes to if the threat could
potentially----
Senator Graham. Yes. It is just ridiculous to say that we
are safer by letting the Taliban take over Afghanistan, and
that women have any upside.
Let us go to the Ukraine. Are you pursuing Russia being a
state sponsor of terrorism?
Secretary Blinken. We are looking at that. And the question
is----
Senator Graham. What is hard about that?
Secretary Blinken. The question is this, and this is
something that the lawyers are looking at. There is no doubt in
my mind, Senator----
Senator Graham. Right.
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. That the Russians are
terrorizing the Ukrainian people.
Senator Graham. Well, what about Syria?
Secretary Blinken. The question is this, and again, this is
something that the lawyers are looking at, to make sure that we
actually meet the statutory requirements of that designation.
Senator Graham. Well, if you need to change the law so that
Russia fits in, you will have 100 votes. I don't know what more
you would have to do as a country to be at state-sponsored
terrorism. They have decimated the Ukraine--Ukraine, and they
are all over Syria dropping barrel bombs on people. So you
mentioned that you are looking at it. I would encourage you to
look at it, and act upon it.
Putin vowed today in the Duma that he would stay committed,
even though there have been heavy losses to accomplishing the
goal of the invasion. What would you like to say to him?
Secretary Blinken. Very simply, end this aggression. End it
now.
Senator Graham. Well, it seems not to be working. What are
the consequences to him if he keeps this up?
Secretary Blinken. I think we have already seen devastating
consequences for Russia. And let me say this first, in terms of
his actual objectives, as stated in his own words.
Senator Graham. Uh-huh.
Secretary Blinken. He has already failed, because those
objectives were to eliminate Ukraine as an independent and
sovereign country, to subsume it back, in some fashion into
Russia, we know already, as a result of the extraordinary
courage of the Ukrainians, that that is not going to happen.
And as I have said, there is going to be an independent and
sovereign Ukraine around a lot longer than Vladimir Putin will
be on scene. So it is already a strategic----
Senator Graham. From your lips to God's ears. And I want to
help you where I can in that endeavor. When it comes to winning
in Ukraine, describe very briefly what winning looks like for
Ukraine and the United States?
Secretary Blinken. Winning is going to be defined by the
Ukrainians, and we will support whatever they decide is in
their interest.
Senator Graham. Have they told you what winning looks like?
Secretary Blinken. Right now for them, and I don't want to
put words in their mouths, but I think their focus is, of
course, on repelling the Russian aggression, and getting the
Russians out of their country.
Senator Graham. As said by Senator Moran, that our goal was
to get Russia out of Ukraine. Is that our goal?
Secretary Blinken. That is Ukraine's goal, and as a result
that that is our goal as well.
Senator Graham. Okay, great. If Russia uses banned chemical
weapons in Ukraine, what will our response be?
Secretary Blinken. The President has been clear, that there
would be severe consequences for any use of weapon of mass
destruction by Russia. We have been working, not only within
our government, but with allies and partners across.
Senator Graham. Can we put a parameter on what severe
consequences would look like?
Secretary Blinken. I am not going to telegraph in public,
what we would do. I can tell you that a lot of work has gone
into planning against every possible scenario. And again, in a
different setting I am happy to get into that.
Senator Graham. Okay. We will take that up. If Russia
explodes a tactical nuclear device in Ukraine would you
consider that an attack on NATO because the radiation would go
well beyond Ukraine?
Secretary Blinken. All of this, including the potential use
of a nuclear device, attack with a nuclear device is part of
the planning we are doing. And again, we can get into that in
more detail in a different setting.
Senator Graham. Well, just a couple more minutes. Do you
think our policy regarding Russia and Ukraine has been
successful?
Secretary Blinken. To date, in my judgment?
Senator Graham. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. Yes. In the sense that we said this,
Senator, before--when we saw the likelihood of a Russian
aggression, many months ago----
Senator Graham. So you think this is successful?
Secretary Blinken. I would say two things. First, when we
saw this as a possibility, we did two things, and we did both
of them at the same time. We worked to see if we could head it
off through diplomacy, and that----
Senator Graham. And that didn't work.
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. And at the same--that did
not work.
Senator Graham. Right.
Secretary Blinken. But we also said at the same time that
we would make sure that we, and the Ukrainians, and the world,
were prepared if Russia went through this aggression; and we
have been. Ukraine has done an extraordinary job in pushing the
Russians back from Kyiv, the world has come together to support
the Ukrainians as a result of American leadership in American
engagement. The world has come together to impose massive
consequences on Russia for its aggression, again as a result of
the Russia's invasion.
Senator Graham. Well, with all due respects I don't----
Secretary Blinken. So I think in terms of what we set out
to do, so far, this has been successful, but it has to be
sustained.
Senator Graham. I just take issue with the fact that we are
being successful in Ukraine, one, they invaded and we told them
not to, they did. They are killing people right and left, and
you know we are slow getting weapons in. I hope it turns out
well.
But do you think our withdrawal from Afghanistan affected
Putin's decision to invade at all?
Secretary Blinken. I do not. Senator I think he looks at
these things on their own terms when----
Senator Graham. Why did he pick this year?
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. When he went, well, he went
into Georgia in 2008 we had more than 150,000 troops between
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. That did not deter him. When he went
into Ukraine in 2014----
Senator Graham. But he hasn't dismembered the State of
Georgia, he has occupied--you know, there is two provinces
there, but why did he choose to invade Ukraine this year, you
believe?
Secretary Blinken. I think a number of factors came into
play. I think he saw Ukraine moving inexorably to the west, to
Europe, and he saw nothing that was going to interrupt that
process, it was democratizing, it was strengthening its system.
And having a successful democracy on Russia's borders was bad
for Putin, and he had the ambition that he said in his own
words----
Senator Graham. Last year.
Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Ending its sovereignty and
independence, and this was all that----
Senator Graham. He doesn't recognize Ukraine as a separate
nation.
Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
Senator Graham. Yes. So it is not really about them being--
they have been moving toward democracy for a long time. I think
he invaded this year because I thought he----because he thinks
he can get away with it.
So very quickly, 1 minute here. China, I just got back from
the region. The people in Taiwan are very concerned about what
happens in Ukraine. Do you agree that the outcome in Ukraine
can influence what China does regarding Taiwan?
Secretary Blinken. I do. I think China is looking at this
very carefully, and the fact that it is seen, as a result of
our leadership, 40 countries or more, come together in a
variety of ways to impose these massive costs on Russia for its
aggression, that would have to factor into its calculus about
Taiwan going forward.
Senator Graham. Are you, as administration, committed to
following Putin to the ends of the earth in supporting war
crimes investigations and prosecution against him,
individually? Do you believe that we could ever forgive and
forget when it comes to Putin? Do you believe it is the right
policy for the international community to pursue him as a war
criminal in perpetuity?
Secretary Blinken. Senator, we are committed to doing
everything we possibly can for as long as it takes to ensure
that there is accountability for the crimes that have been
committed.
Senator Graham. That includes Putin himself?
Secretary Blinken. That includes--whoever committed the
crimes, whoever ordered the crimes.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you Mr. Secretary. We both went about
10 minutes. We will endeavor to encourage others to stick to
about seven, but I appreciate your forbearance.
I am going to ask Senator Durbin, who is next, if he would
both question, and then preside if I have to run to vote during
the next few minutes. You may uniquely, among the cabinet, be
familiar with exactly how this all works, so thank you for your
forbearance.
Senator Durbin.
Senator Durbin. Thanks Mr. Chairman I want to make a point
of being here today, Mr. Secretary, after I witnessed on
television last night the exchange between you and the junior
senator from Kentucky.
I hope that no one left that hearing, or believes today
that his questioning represents the feeling of America. If
Putin, or the Russians, or anyone take comfort in his
questioning they are making a mistake. I think it should be
clear, and you tried to make it as clear as you could, that we
are not conceding any sphere of influence to Vladimir Putin, we
are not conceding an anxious effort to understand what he is
doing in Ukraine.
I understand what he is doing in Ukraine, it is very clear
what he is doing, he has launched a vicious, barbaric,
genocidal attack on this nation, unprovoked by them, and
unsustained by international law as we know it. And I did not
want any friends and allies of the United States to think that
the junior senator from Kentucky expresses our point of view.
I cannot imagine the reverberations of that comment in the
Baltics, for example. The Baltics were part of the Soviet Union
because of the aggression of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, it
had nothing to do with the people of those countries, asking to
be part of any Soviet Union. And they survived to this day, a
small, vibrant democracy that is loyal to the United States,
because they are part of NATO, and they share our values. And
we are not giving that up to Vladimir Putin under any
circumstances. I hope what I have just said you agree with.
Secretary Blinken. I do.
Senator Durbin. Good. Let me talk to you about a sentiment
that has been expressed by Senator Moran, and also by Senator
Graham, and I share. And the sentiment is this: The earliest
analysis of what would occur when the Russians invaded Ukraine
suggested, and this is before the invasion, that Kyiv would
last a matter of days, the bulk of the country a matter of
weeks, but the resistance that would be formed against any
Russian occupation could go on for months or years.
And Putin would have learned under those circumstances that
he had won a pyrrhic victory, if he even wanted to call it
that. The reality of the situation is much different. Kyiv has
not fallen, you were able to visit that city with the Secretary
of Defense, the bulk of Ukraine is at least stable, though
there are terrible examples of fighting going on at this point,
and my concern is this, we are trying to scramble in the last
53 days; is that correct, 54 days, to readjust our thinking
about the future of Ukraine.
We underestimated the courage and resiliency of the
Ukrainian people, the determination they have shown to defend
their own country. We perhaps overestimated the power of the
Russian Military, and as a consequence we have to readjust to
the fact that Ukrainians have won significant victories.
My concern, as expressed by my Republican colleagues, is
this, are we throwing a 10-foot rope to someone drowning 20-
foot offshore? Are we falling short of what they need for
something decisive to happen in our interest and their
interest? Are we doing enough from a diplomatic or military
viewpoint, from your point of view?
I would hate to be able to--I would hate to see the
situation where we are seeing how proud we are of NATO coming
together with all its strength, and at the end of the day a
devastated Ukraine with refugees by the millions, and people in
unmarked graves is what is left behind by Putin. That is hardly
a NATO victory. Would you comment on that?
Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Senator. What Russia has done
and continues to do to Ukraine every day, the brutalization of
the country, and the parts where Russia is engaged, is a
tragedy that in and of itself can't be undone; people have
died, been killed in the most awful ways, that can't be undone.
People have been displaced from their homes, 5 million
refugees, 7 million displaced persons inside of Ukraine,
including, by most estimates, three-quarters of the children of
the country have been displaced at one point. Some are moving
back; and even if they come--when they come home that is not
going to fully erase the trauma that they have been through.
So some of the--some of the damage that has been done is
quite, literally, irreparable. Having said that, I believe that
we are--the United States, many other countries coming together
to make sure that--to the best of our ability--the Ukrainians
have what is necessary to push back this Russian aggression.
They have done that successfully in and around Kyiv. They
are engaged now in a ferocious fight in Southern and Eastern
Ukraine. And as I mentioned a few moments ago, Secretary Austin
was just in Germany yesterday with 40 Ministers of Defense to
make sure that we are all coming together to get the Ukrainians
the kind of weaponry that they need in a battle that has
changed in its nature, to continue to do what they need to do
to push back this Russian aggression.
We are focused like a laser on that, and on making sure
that they have what they need. Some of that is coming from the
United States, some of it is coming from many other countries
that are engaged, and it is being done in an organized and
coordinated fashion, and it is being done in full consultation
with the Ukrainians. But as I said we have to continue to
sustain that and follow through.
Let me just cite one quick example though, of how this has
evolved. It used to be that when you--the President made a
drawdown order, it might take some weeks for--between the time
the order was given, and the time the equipment in question got
into the hands of those it was going to. This is now happening
in many cases in as little as 72 hours. From the time the
President did the drawdown to the time weapons are getting into
the hands of Ukrainians to use them against the Russian
aggression, 72 hours.
We were just there as you noted, and talked with all of the
folks on the ground who are helping to make sure and coordinate
the security assistance getting in to the Ukrainians. It is a
remarkable operation, and it is working in real time. We have
to keep that going, and we have to make sure that they are
getting what they need to deal with the actual threats that
they face.
Senator Durbin. The President has made it clear that a
patch of Polish real estate is a tripwire. He said that over
and over again. I assume there are other tripwires which you
may not want to be as explicit with us in this Committee
setting in describing. I hope that they will include the
consideration of the genocide which is taking place there as
well, if there is a point beyond which we cannot, with good
moral conscience, justify or even look the other way, or wait
for a day to resolve it.
On the question of war criminals, I was surprised to learn
that current American law does not give us any criminal
authority to prosecute those who committed war crimes in other
countries, nor does it give us any civil, anyone any civil
authority over those same people. I have legislation to change
that.
We should make it clear to anyone that has been engaged in
Putin's strategy, they will never find a comfortable, safe home
in the United States. And I hope that I can bring that to your
attention and that you will--your people will take a look it.
Secretary Blinken. I look forward to looking at that,
Senator. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. If I could mention two or three other
things, Senator Hagerty, I will wrap it up quickly, because I
know you probably are waiting to vote as well.
Afghanistan, Mark Frerichs, I wanted to make a point of
making a record of our continuing concern about this Illinois
resident, who is being held captive in Afghanistan; are you
familiar with this situation?
Secretary Blinken. I am more than familiar with it. It is
something that I am intensely focused on.
Senator Durbin. Thank you. We hope that we can bring him
home.
The Chinese bullying of Lithuania over their decision to
recognize the Taiwanese office; are you aware of this
situation?
Secretary Blinken. Again, more than aware of it; extremely
focused on it. We jumped in very quickly when that happened, to
make sure that we could bolster Lithuania, including with
economic assistance, creating greater opportunities for trade
and investment. We have also rallied countries and partners in
the European Union to do the same thing. The European Union has
stood up against this kind of coercive action by China, to
combat the bullying that it has tried to use. And Lithuania has
been extraordinary in its resilience and fortitude against it.
But yes, very focused on that as well.
Senator Durbin. Is there a path forward in Haiti with the
situation that we currently face?
Secretary Blinken. It is a--it is long path forward, there
are, as you know very well from the time you spent on this.
There are two things that they rely on. First, we need to see
the government, civil society, all actors come together to get
us to elections, free and fair elections, that reestablish a
fully legitimate Haitian Government and leadership. And that
work is in progress. We are trying to facilitate that, and
support that.
But having said that, the problems are so deep-rooted, and
so challenging that I think that the road is very long, the
criminality, violence, the lack of basic law and order is a
fundamental problem that we are working to address, including
by supporting and strengthening the Haitian National Police,
and getting other countries to do the same, that is very much a
work in progress.
The endemic poverty, and lack of economic opportunity, one
of the challenges, Senator, is that, you know we have--we and
other countries, over many years have devoted substantial
resources to Haiti, but to date the honest truth is that it has
not made a sustainable difference. We have to be, and we are,
looking at: How can we do this more effectively, to help Haiti
get to a place where it is sustainable.
And of course, it has been on the receiving end of one
horrific thing after another, including natural disasters that
continue to set back what progress is made. So the short answer
is: This is a long road, we are looking at and focused on
trying to get the elections, and having a government that can
fully represent the people.
We are trying to work on basic security by bolstering the
police, and dealing with the criminality, the gangs which are
terrorizing parts of the country, but then there is a much
longer project in helping Haiti to really stand on its feet in
a self-sustaining way.
Senator Durbin. Thank you I am going to send you a written
question related to my efforts to secure the release of
Philippine Senator Philippine Sen. Leila de Lima.
Secretary Blinken. Yes.
Senator Durbin. One of the critics of the Duterte Regime.
Secretary Blinken. Yes.
Senator Durbin. I would like to know your take on the
current state of affairs there? I will save that because I see
Senator Hagerty waiting, I know he has to vote. So Senator,
please take it away.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Durbin.
And Secretary Blinken, it is good to see you again. I
appreciated our interaction yesterday at the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, as we talked about the importance of the
U.S.-Japan Alliance, the Quad, the Indo-Pacific, and I look
forward to continue working with you on those issues.
I would like to turn my discussion with you today, though,
on something else that is related to the region but also it
hits us right here at home. And that is China's refusal to stop
the flow of fentanyl and its precursors into the Western
Hemisphere.
I have raised this issue with your assistant secretaries,
with your deputy assistant secretaries, but I want to raise it
with you today because it is that important. I feel like we
need decisive action, and it is for the safety of Americans, it
is for the safety of our children. We are both parents. I am
sure you feel the same.
Today in America, the number one cause of death for young
people between the age of 18 and 45 is drug overdose, 100,000
lives were lost last year to drug overdoses, and most of those
drug overdoses were fentanyl-related. And the DEA continues to
assess that fentanyl coming from China into Mexico is the major
cause of this.
It is it is something that I talked about with Mexican
officials last May when I traveled to Mexico. They talked about
the fact that Chinese entities are sending technicians, they
are sending equipment, and setting up production in partnership
with Mexican cartels there. And these cartels are multi-
billion-dollar industries that have basically taken control of
the northern border of Mexico.
I met with your counterpart, Foreign Minister Ebrard, and
asked him what we could do to cooperate, what we could do to
help. And he told me that they would greatly appreciate help
with things in the nature of scanning technologies, anything
that would help them determine whether fentanyl, or its
precursors, or the machinery to produce it was coming into his
country.
I appreciated his concern there, and I think it is
something that we ought to continue to focus on. You know, I
was on the phone with White House Staff during the Buenos Aires
G20, when President Trump directly asked President Xi to stop
sending fentanyl to the United States.
My sense is that we need to really double down on our
pressure with China on this. If President Xi and the Chinese
Communist Party can shut down a city the size of Shanghai, one
of the three largest cities in the world, I think they could
certainly shut down the flow of fentanyl and its precursors
into our hemisphere.
And I know you have many difficult conversations with your
Chinese counterparts, but I would like to hear your thoughts on
what our strategy might be, and encourage you to take on this
difficult challenge too?
Secretary Blinken. Senator, thank you for raising that. I
very much share your concern I appreciate your focus on it, and
the efforts you have been making. And I agree with you, this is
a problem that needs intense focus and solutions. We have been
working on this in a number of ways. We have been working to
add some of the precursors to a prohibited list to make clear
that you can't get fentanyl or variants in through the back
door by using precursors that are, for one reason or another,
not on a prohibited list.
We have made some progress there. We are working with the
Mexicans on exactly this question, to reestablished the
security dialogue with them last year, and part of this is
looking at the--of course the flow of drugs of any kind into
the country. And what assistance do they need to more
effectively police it.
I am going to follow up on the specific suggestion that you
referenced, to make sure that we are, if we haven't already
done it, actually looking at that, and doubling up back with
them on what it is they need to effectively police fentanyl. I
can tell you this has come up in engagements between President
Biden and President Xi. So it has been raised to that level as
well,
But I would also welcome working with you and your team on
ways that we can effectively address this problem.
Senator Hagerty. I appreciate that very much. And again in
my conversations with Foreign Minister Ebrard that may have
predated what you have been talking about. But he sincerely
believed that there were technology solutions that we could
help provide that would help them. I have seen some of those
technology solutions deployed at our southern border.
I went to our southern border earlier this month to see
what is happening there, it is a travesty in terms of the flow
of narcotics coming across the border. But again, I saw the
technology that we are putting in place now that sense, in a
very sophisticated manner, the illegal substances that, at
least where they may be hidden. So I appreciate any efforts
that you might make to work on that.
I also wanted to take on, for just a moment longer, the
topic of India, and our U.S.-India relations. The world's
oldest democracy, of course, is the United States, but India is
the world's biggest democracy. And I think they have you know--
I think what I see before us is something I am certain that is
very frustrating in the short term, when we have our
differences, and you deal with that every day.
But in the long term, this strategic partnership that we
have with India I think poses the opportunity to do more good
in the 21st century, and have more consequence, more impact
than anything that the CCP could do, coming from their
perspective. And I believe that there is great, untapped
potential there in terms of developing that partnership for the
good of all.
And I would look forward to hearing your views in terms of
what concrete steps the United States and India could take
together to deepen our strategic alliance.
Secretary Blinken. Senator, I very much share your
perspective. I think this partnership has the potential to be
one of the most important and foundational partnerships that we
have going forward, over the next decades. This has actually
been, I think, a success story over multiple administrations,
going back to the end of the Clinton administration, through
the Bush administration, particularly with the Peaceful Nuclear
Cooperation Agreement that, by the way, now President then
Senator Biden helped shepherd through this institution; through
the Trump administration as well, and prior to that, the Obama
administration; and now through ours.
President Biden spent a lot of time directly engaged with
Prime Minister Modi and India's leadership. Of course, as you
know very well, we have energized the Quad that brings India
together with Australia, and Japan, and us. This has been a
very important vehicle for strengthening our collaboration
across a whole variety of fronts with India, I have spent a lot
of time with my Indian counterpart, and very much agree with
you.
What is interesting, and we talked about this a little bit
yesterday at the Foreign Relations Committee is, this is a
moment of, I think, strategic inflection, by which I mean this:
A number of countries are now re-looking at some of their
relationships, and some of their interests, particularly when
it comes to their relationships with Russia.
And of course in the case of India, there is a relationship
that goes back decades, and Russia for India was out of
necessity, a partner of choice when we were not in a position
to be a partner. Now, we are. And we are investing in that
effort. I think there is a growing strategic convergence
between the United States and India, and of course China is a
big part of that.
Senator Hagerty. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. But I very much share your perspective,
and this is a major area of focus for the administration, and
for me, to make sure that we are doing everything we can to
strengthen and to build on that partnership going forward.
Senator Hagerty. I appreciate that very much, Mr.
Secretary. And I would just add one more point of
encouragement. On my recent trip to Japan I spoke with Prime
Minister Abe, who developed a very good relationship with Prime
Minister Modi, and I know you know Prime Minister Abe as well.
And I would encourage you, as you talk with your Japanese
counterparts, to engage them in finding good ways to work
together with India, because they seem to be on the same track
and the same mindset as we are. Thank you very much for your
comments today.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
Senator Hagerty. Appreciate your testimony.
Senator Coons. Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me
start by congratulating you on assuming the chairmanship of the
subcommittee first hearing. And look forward to working with
you, and the Ranking Member.
And I also want to commend the Chairman of the Full
Committee, Senator Leahy, as others have done, for his
incredible service.
Mr. Secretary, good to see you. We had a chance to talk
yesterday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, so I am
not going to retread that ground. But I do want to circle back
on the sanctions issue now, because I think you, and the
President, and the Secretary of Defense, the whole team have
done a really good job in accelerating now the deployment of
weapons. And also isolating Russia to the extent we can, at the
UN and other places, and moving forward on sanctions.
But as the sanctions go on, sustaining them is going to be
key, and expanding them is going to be key. And leakage in the
sanctions only helps Putin. And there are countries that right
now, and other entities, that are violating the sanctions. As
you indicated yesterday when I asked, we have not applied any
secondary sanctions, so far. I think we have got to use the
secondary sanctions authority the administration has, including
against countries, and entities and countries that are not
simply maintaining their current or pre-war imports of Russian
oil and gas, and other commodities, but have increased them.
And I would just urge you to do it, because I think you are
going to see growing movement for mandatory sanctions in the
Senate and the House if you don't use the existing authorities
that you have got within the administration. I just want to
make that really clear.
Let me say something about the Czech Republic, and you and
I, and others, just came from a beautiful memorial service for
Secretary Albright. Of course she and her family came the
United States from then Czechoslovakia when I think she was
about 11 years old.
I had a meeting with the Czech Foreign Minister yesterday
and, yes, he indicated that they were willing and wanting to
provide some of their Soviet-era helicopters Mi-24s to Ukraine,
but wanted sort of a swift agreement for us to replace those
with Vipers, and if not new Vipers, with some of the Vipers out
of our inventory now. So I just want to encourage you to move
forward on that as fast as possible.
Secretary Blinken. And Senator, just on that.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. The Defense Department is looking at
that right now.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Secretary Blinken. This is something that I think is very
important across the board, which is a number of allies and
partners have provided weapons from their stocks to the
Ukrainians, in some cases that leaves a void that
understandably they want to fill. One of the things that we
will be coming forward with in the supplemental, are funds to
help provide additional foreign military financing to partners,
and allies. That is one vehicle by which they can make up any
of the systems that they have shared with the Ukrainians that
leave a void with them.
At the same time, of course, we are looking at what we have
on hand. The Pentagon is focused on this particular case, as
well as a number of others.
Senator Van Hollen. Great. No, I appreciate that. No, I
know you are trying to overturn every stone, but anything we
can do to accelerate that effort.
Of course something else Secretary Albright was very
involved in was trying to stop the bloodshed and atrocities in
the Balkans at the time, and I also had a chance to meet with
the Foreign Minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina yesterday, and I
think Senator Shaheen raised this issue, and I just want to
underscore it. I think we are worried about what will happen in
November when, as I understand the process, the UN Security
Council has to continue to authorize the presence of
international forces, and if Putin exercises that sanction--
that veto it is a real problem.
I know it is on your radar screen I think. I am pleased to
see the actions the United States has taken with respect to a
DODIC in the IRS, I hope we will encourage our European allies
to work in that direction. As you said yesterday to try to
accelerate the integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina into the
European family.
A couple other issues; Senator Menendez raised yesterday,
the fact that Turkey had now, essentially, convicted Osman
Kavala to a life sentence; you know, clearly a political
prosecution, no legitimate basis for it, the administration did
make a sort of a tepid statement, you know, showing
unhappiness. But this combined with the fact that Turkey is
continuing to move forward in their effort to ban the main
Kurdish Party in Turkey from participating in the elections,
seems to me something that the administration really needs to
press hard on.
In the case of the HDP you have got, just last Tuesday,
April 19th, you know, they were challenging it in the court,
this effort to ban them, but Turkey's top court accepted an
indictment filed by the prosecutor seeking closure of the HDP.
I mean this is just a blatant disregard for any standards of
democracy. And so I just hope we will be very strong on it, and
obviously we have a complicated relationship with Turkey, there
are lots of pieces. But this, something you have been involved
in for years trying to support our allies, the Syrian Kurds
that, you know, Turkey continues to try to take them out
whenever they can, so I think we have a lot of work to do on
that front.
Let me just close by asking you about the President's
pledge during the campaign. And I think you reemphasized again
when you were asked last October, about the Consulate in
Jerusalem, to establish, you know, greater--reestablish that
Consulate for our relations with the Palestinians. Can you give
us an update on where that stands?
Secretary Blinken. We are committed to reopening the
consulate in Jerusalem for the Palestinians. It is something
that we are working on with the Israeli Government. I was in
Ramallah just a few weeks ago, and saw President Abbas. We
talked about that, among other things.
As you know, we reestablished support for the Palestinians
a year ago, January, including significant humanitarian and
economic assistance that had been previously held back. We have
reengaged them across the board, and the consulate is a piece
of that.
It does, of course, require coordination with and support
from Israel including, for example, providing privileges and
immunities for the staff of the Consulate to be. So it is a
work in progress, but it is something that we continue to work
on.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. I appreciate your efforts.
And thank you for going through a whole lot of issues very
quickly.
Secretary Blinken. All right.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have got to
go vote I think.
Senator Coons. Thank you. And Mr. Secretary, it is my
understanding we have no other members seeking recognition.
If I might; I just have two or three quick questions on
some very specific programs that Senator Graham and I have
worked together on over a number of years, both to get them
authorized in law, and then to fund them. I have a lot of other
questions I would be happy to ask, but we both have other
things we need to get to.
The Global Fragility Act, as you know, one of the things
that Secretary Albright contributed to was the development of
Plan Colombia. And the whole concept of a coordinated plan
between diplomacy, development, and security came out of Plan
Colombia. Senator Graham and I worked over several Congresses
to, ultimately to get the Global Fragility Act signed into law.
And I would welcome a chance to talk in more detail about the
selection process, the path forward, the strategy to prevent
conflict, and promote stability.
I would be interested just in hearing briefly now from you,
a timeline for the development of implementation plans, and the
requests for funding were very modest relative to the scale of
the problems. We have many other areas where we have requests
that outstrip the budget of this Committee, I would just be
interested in your view on the timeline for implementing these
strategies, and what we might be able to do together to improve
the focus, and investment in this area?
Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, the timeline for
implementation of that is now, because just a few weeks ago the
President signed off on our proposed focus, including the
countries in question that we would focus on, and so this is
something we are moving out on, and very much welcome working
with you on, as we move forward in actually implementing it.
But it is right on the--right on the front burner.
Senator Coons. Thank you. The Development Finance
Corporation, I am planning to have a hearing with Scott Nathan,
the CEO, to discuss their fiscal request. But I just wanted
your view of their performance to date, and their role in
supporting the administration's priorities.
Senator Graham asked about China, there are a number of
other members that see its significant potential, whether it is
in climate resiliency, and combating climate change, whether it
is in the West Bank, or in developing better opportunities for
economic development that might promote stability in other
areas. What is your view of how they have performed?
Secretary Blinken. And I am sorry could you just repeat
that the last part of that?
Senator Coons. Well, the Development Finance Corporation--
--
Secretary Blinken. Yes.
Senator Coons [continuing]. Has a, potentially, very broad
range of areas of activity, each senator has their own view as
to whether it should be principally countering China, or
dealing with climate, or working in the Middle East, in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict or elsewhere. I would just be
interested in your overall view as to whether they have
achieved the potential that the Act that created the
Development Finance Corporation imagined for.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you. First, I am a very strong
supporter of the DFC. I think it is a very important and
powerful tool, one that that I appreciate. And it gives us the
ability to do a number of things. One of the things it gives us
the ability to do is to more effectively offer an affirmative,
positive alternative to China's development programs, including
Belt and Road.
We can make this a race to the top, not a race to the
bottom, including by using DFC, not only of course with its own
resources, but the fact that it has the ability to leverage
significant private-sector resources.
And so that is one area of focus for me, is making sure
that we use this effectively as a way of actually advancing
concrete projects that are, again, attractive and affirmative,
and don't bring with them, for example, many of the burdens
that we see countries take on when they are, for example,
working with China. Debt, workers brought into--from China to
actually build the projects instead of using local workers, no
respect for the environment, for worker rights, corruption, et
cetera. But we needed the tools to do that, the DFC is one of
them.
We also have to make sure, and this is an area of real
focus, that we have, and the DFC can be engaged in viable
projects. So the money may be there, we have got to make sure
that the projects are there, and in a way that really brings
the private sector in, so we are very focused on that.
It also joins up with a couple of things. It joins up with
Build Back Better World, which I think is a very important
initiative that the President has undertaken. Again, to make
sure that in critical areas, including energy, and climate,
health, and technology we are investing in, engaged in projects
that will be a race to the top for the countries that are--that
we are doing them with.
And DFC is one of the tools that we can bring to bear on
making Build Back Better World effective. We have been
identifying projects in different parts of the world that makes
sense. I think we will be moving out on a number of them
shortly.
Now, having said that, I think we need to look at ways to
maximize the potential of DFC. I am not convinced that we have
gotten to that point yet. So we have a lot of focus on it. I
actually, by statute, chair of the Board. The Deputy Secretary
of State for Management and Resources, Brian McKeon, is
intimately involved with DFC, and working on that on a regular
basis.
I would welcome, actually, sharing ideas with you about how
we can use it even more effectively going forward.
Senator Coons. Thank you. As of right now, the way that the
equity provisions of it are scored, is causing me some--I
respect and understand the concerns of long-standing staff on
the Appropriations Committee about the secondary or follow-on
consequences it might have if we were to change the treatment
of the DFC Equity Authority.
But I think we are under utilizing a very powerful tool,
and I would welcome interacting with you, and with my other
colleagues on this Committee, and the administration, on how we
can make sure that the DFC and Build Back Better World fund
together, are allowing us to really combat China's pernicious
influence.
In my first 6 years here as Chair of the Africa
subcommittee, I saw it in country after country, all over the
Continent. I was with former President Sirleaf of Liberia last
night, and was reminded of my very first conversation with her
a dozen years ago now, where she was asking for U.S. help
rebuilding the Mount Coffee dam that had been destroyed in
their civil war.
And after several meetings she basically said, well, I
guess the United States doesn't do this anymore, we will have
to take Chinese funding. Ultimately our partners in Europe were
able to provide funding for the restoration of that critical
source of clean energy, and stability for Liberia. But there
are dozens of countries around the world that would rather work
with the United States than work with China, if we can just
provide them with the source of funding. And I think DFC could
be a critical part of the answer, to that, Secretary.
Secretary Blinken. I couldn't agree with you more. And I
think one of the things that we really have to work on with DFC
and other vehicles is the speed with which we are able to
engage on things, because what exactly what you described, I
have heard again and again, that the process across different
agencies, I am not--I am not just talking about DFC, is slow,
laborious.
Now, we have to do the right due diligence. That is vital.
But I think there are ways to make what we do more efficient,
quicker, more responsive to needs. And I agree with you the DFC
is a major--can be a major part of that so we should work on
making it work even more effectively.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your
testimony before the subcommittee today. I think the conflict
in Ukraine, Russia's completely unjustified and unacceptable
brutality against the civilians of Ukraine, its attempt to
rebuild the Russian Empire, and the ways in which it is shaking
the very foundations of peace in Europe, the rules-based
international order, is the most pressing issue of the day.
I am grateful that you and Secretary Austin have taken the
initiative to engage with our allies, to deploy resources, to
travel to Kyiv, personally, and to testify before this
Committee today when you have just returned, at a moment when
it is so critical. That we continue to work in close
partnership to show the impact of American diplomacy, and to
show the impact of the resources that we can and should provide
to support our critical NATO allies, to support the Ukrainian
people and their resistance, and to meet the pressing
humanitarian needs of all impacted by this conflict.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Coons. Questions for the record will remain open--
they need to be submitted--excuse me--by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday,
May 3. So the hearing record will remain open until that point.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
No questions were submitted for the record.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Coons. And again, Mr. Secretary, thank you for your
testimony.
Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., Wednesday, April 27, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:35 p.m., in room S-124, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher A. Coons (Chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Coons, Leahy, Durbin, Shaheen, and
Graham.
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CHRISTOPHER A. COONS
Senator Coons. I call this hearing of the Subcommittee on
State and Foreign Operations and Related Programs to order.
Good afternoon. The subcommittee is meeting today to review
the fiscal year 2023 budget request for the United States
Agency for International Development, and it is our honor to
have Administrator Samantha Power before us. She is a champion
for global development and democracy. She's engaged in critical
efforts for America's leadership and our role in the world and
is today, along with thousands of people who serve as part of
USAID around the world, making big headway against a whole wide
panoply of critical changes.
So I am going to wait for a few minutes for the arrival of
the Full Committee Chairman before making broader remarks, but
I've just returned from Europe on a codel led by Chairman Leahy
and was reminded of just how much of an impact he's had in his
service as Chairman of this subcommittee and of now the Full
Committee.
Let me just briefly review the scope of challenges that we
face. An unprovoked and unjustified Russian invasion of Ukraine
which is creating not only a vast refugee crisis into Central
and Eastern Europe but also a hunger crisis, a humanitarian
crisis across more than a dozen other countries, an ongoing
global pandemic which, although many of us would like to be
done with it, it is not done with us, and we continue to see
variants emerge around the world and greater risk to our
country and to many others, a warming climate and an increasing
number and severity of climate shocks that affect vulnerable
communities here and around the world, and a whole series of
humanitarian crises that predate the pandemic and the Russian
invasion of Ukraine.
So countries from Ethiopia to Yemen, Afghanistan to Syria
to Venezuela have domestic and regional challenges. We've seen
democratic backsliding, the challenges of corruption and
development, human rights, Rule of Law, all around the world,
and as a backdrop to much of this, competition to the United
States and our role in the world and our way of life from China
and other authoritarian actors.
But I'll say just by way of opening framing that I see
these challenges as also being opportunities, opportunities to
demonstrate American leadership, to recommit to advancing
democracy and human rights in the world, to diversify our
partnerships with other development partners in other
countries, to increase locally-led development, and to work to
make our aid more effective and responsive.
I commend President Biden for proposing strong investments
to address the challenges I just laid out and to seize
opportunities this coming fiscal year for us to demonstrate our
role in the world.
I am concerned that our needs are far outweighing our
ability to respond, given what has been the allocation to this
subcommittee over the last couple of years.
The President's budget request is 14 percent above the
previous year-enacted level. That increase, just by way of
comparison, in absolute terms would be just 1 percent of our
total Defense budget, and I think it would be an important head
start on meeting our actual needs to address these crises.
The budget requests increase for humanitarian assistance,
pandemic preparedness, climate adaptation and mitigation,
democracy programs, and locally-led development.
I look forward to discussing these and other elements of
this budget request with you, Administrator.
We also have to recognize the challenge of getting to a
fiscal year 2023 SFOPS bill. If we are to fail and instead have
a full year continuing resolution, U.S. foreign assistance
would be on autopilot. We would fail in our challenge of making
strategic updates and would not be delivering on good foreign
policy and responsible budgeting.
So I also think it's urgent we pass the COVID-19
Supplemental for both domestic and foreign needs that was
debated, considered, but not ultimately enacted. We continue to
face the challenge of billions of unvaccinated people and in
countries where the vaccination rate is below 10 percent and
where we face the risk of possible new variants developing
there.
So the pandemic, climate change, the war in Ukraine, Madam
Administrator, I very much look forward to your testimony
today, and I'll hand this over to Senator Graham.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSAY GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number 1, the increase in funding is something all of us
should consider given the problems that we have in the world.
USAID is a very valuable part of our national security
strategy. I see it as part of our national security in another
form.
Your agency is present in some of the most dangerous places
in the world. People working for you directly and USAID
contractors put their lives at risk working overseas, and that
is very much appreciated.
We have some differences on family planning, climate
change, mandatory spending, and the global pandemic but,
generally speaking, the subcommittee with Senator Coons and
Senator Leahy has been able to pound out, I think, a good
budget and I hope we do so this time.
The supplemental appropriations bill had $18.9 billion for
assistance for Ukraine, $5.458 billion went to food and
humanitarian assistance, and I'm very interested in hearing
about how this money gets out the door and on the ground to
people who need it as soon as possible, so that we can head off
a lot of problems.
One of the things I think is missing and not a particularly
Republican-Democrat problem is: what is the strategy concerning
the international affairs part of our budget and what is the
role of the United States in the world? What do we get out of
Ukraine? Why are we helping Ukraine but get out of Afghanistan?
I'd like to help both.
From the national security perspective, the international
affairs budget is 1 percent of spending. Is it being
coordinated in a fashion to get the best results when it comes
to our national security?
China, we all see China as a rising threat to democracy.
What should we do in Asia? The U.S. International Development
Finance Corporation (DFC), how does it interact with the USAID?
Half of our problem in Asia is not showing up. The Solomon
Islands is a good example of where China has filled a vacuum.
So, you can count me in for spending more in this space if
it's part of an overall plan and part of showing up in Africa
and Asia and not through military uniforms as much as through
economic assistance and entrepreneurial opportunities.
The DFC is a good concept. The Millennium Challenge
Corporation is a good concept. USAID. How do all these agencies
work together to get an outcome?
So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to trying to not only do a
fiscal year 2023 budget, but to make sure that if we do another
supplemental, the money's well spent. To the American people,
the combination of wars and famine and climate change, you name
it, has led to a historic number of people without food who are
going to move to a place where there is food if somebody
doesn't come in and find a way to keep them where they live.
This $5 billion in supplemental funding is a generous
allocation by the American people.
I just want to let my colleagues on this Committee on both
sides of the aisle know it's not enough. We'll be doing this
again because I don't see anything getting better any time
soon.
So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I enjoy the Committee. I love
the work we do, and it's one area in the Congress where I think
we tend to come together, and I want to keep it that way.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Madam Administrator.
Ms. Power. Thank you so much, Chairman Coons, Ranking
Member Graham, Senator Durbin, good to see you, incoming
Distinguished Members of the Subcommittee.
I am grateful above all for your leadership as Chair and
Ranking, that of your teams. You know, you have an oversight
role but honestly you have a brainstorming, a collaboration, a
how do we stare at the puzzle and the predicament of a
confluence of crises together and come up with tools that are
fit for purpose in the here and now. I really feel like we are
one team.
I'm grateful for the chance to discuss the fiscal year 2023
President's budget request for USAID, and I look forward to
having the chance to wade into some of the issues that you've
touched upon in your opening statements, but I think echoing a
couple of the points that have been made, I'd like to just step
back and try to frame the discussion ahead by starting with the
idea that I think it is no overstatement that right now right
here we are gathering at a juncture in our history at an
inflection point.
For 16 straight years we've seen the number of people
living under democratic rule decline. The world is now less
free and less peaceful than at any point since the end of the
Cold War, and for several years, as we have seen vividly,
graphically, horrifically in recent days in Ukraine,
autocracies have grown increasingly brazen, claiming that they
can get done for their people things with a speed and an
efficiency that they claim democracies lack, taking advantage
of our open systems also to meddle and that's true of countries
with democratic environments all around the world.
We see with what Putin is doing in Ukraine just how empty
that rhetoric is, just how dark the road to and from autocracy
is, Putin's brutal war on a peaceful neighbor in Ukraine, the
People's Republic of China's campaign of genocide and crimes
against humanity in Xinsheng.
Now with autocracies on their back heel, now is the moment
for the world's democracies to unite and to take a big step
forward after so many years of losing ground.
If the world's free nations with the United States in the
lead are able to unite and catalyze the efforts of our allies,
the private sector and our multilateral institutions, if we can
marshal the resources necessary to help partner nations and
freedom-loving, freedom-coveting populations, we have a chance
to extend the reach of peace, prosperity, and human dignity to
billions more people.
This has been USAID's mission since its inception more than
six decades ago and to reiterate, I am so truly grateful to you
for your continued bipartisan support of our efforts to save
lives, to strengthen economies, to prevent fragility and
conflict, and to promote resilience to all of the shocks that
we have been discussing already here today, as well as your
support in helping bolster freedom and the cause of freedom
around the world.
USAID's work is a testament to the fact that America and
the American people care about the plight of others, that we
can competently accomplish mammoth goals that no other country
can, and that the work we do abroad also matters to the
American people here at home. It makes us safer. It makes us
more prosperous. It engenders goodwill that strengthens
alliances and global cooperation.
Thanks to your past support, the U.S. has helped get more
than a half a billion COVID-19 vaccines to people in a 115
countries. We've led life-saving humanitarian and disaster
responses in 68 countries, including Haiti, Ethiopia, and
Ukraine, of course. We've helped enhance pathways for legal
migration to the U.S. while working to strengthen worker
protections, and we've assisted the relocation and resettlement
of Afghan colleagues and refugees under the most dire of
circumstances while pivoting our programming in Afghanistan to
address ongoing food insecurity and public health needs and
continuing to push to keep women and girls in school.
We're also making strides to become a much more nimble
agency at a time of immense demands that you've alluded to,
shoring up a depleted workforce by welcoming new recruits and
operating with greater flexibility, including some that you
have afforded us in the recent appropriations cycle.
The Biden-Harris Administration's fiscal year 2023
discretionary request of $29.4 billion will build on these
steps forward, giving us the ability to invest in the people
and the systems to meet the world's most significant challenges
so that the United States can seize this moment.
Last week with bipartisan support you passed a nearly $40
billion package for Ukraine that will provide vital assistance
to our support of displaced peoples, to the country's recovery,
and to the secondary effects on food, fuel, and fertilizer that
we're witnessing as a result of the Russian Federation's
belligerence.
Your bipartisan support for a robust fiscal year 2023 top
line for the State, Foreign Operations Senate bill will help us
meet this moment and advance American interests and the
critical foreign policy and development priorities before us.
The challenges, of course, in Ukraine and beyond are
significant. Putin's war has displaced more than 14 million
people, including two-thirds of Ukraine's children. It has led
to serious disruptions to global food, fuel, and fertilizer
supplies around the world, further taxing an already
overwhelmed international system.
Up to 40 million additional people could be pushed into
poverty and food insecurity in 2022 due to Putin's war.
Two difficult years of the COVID-19 pandemic have set back
development gains and despite the U.S. leadership in
vaccinating the world, leadership which has accrued such
benefit to the health of citizens in the countries in which we
work but also indirect benefit to the American people, that job
remains unfinished.
Multibillion dollar climate shocks appear each year with
more frequency and these challenges only compound suffering in
places where there are already humanitarian crises, like
Ethiopia, Syria, and Yemen. Yet as grave as these challenges
are, I sincerely believe that this opportunity, this moment,
this point of inflection provides us a huge opportunity to meet
the moment and meet the needs to advance U.S. foreign policy
objectives.
By providing the resources necessary to seize this moment,
the United States can galvanize commitments from our allies and
our private sector partners. We can help reserve years of
democratic decline and we can demonstrate to the world that
democracies can deliver in a way that autocracies certainly
cannot. With your support USAID will move aggressively to seize
this opportunity.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Administrator Samantha Power
Thank you Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Graham, distinguished
Members of the Subcommittee. I am grateful for the opportunity to
discuss the fiscal year 2023 President's Budget Request for the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID).
It is no overstatement to say we gather at a profound juncture in
history.
For 16 straight years, we've seen the number of people living under
democratic rule decline--the world is now less free and less peaceful
than at any point since the Cold War. And for several years,
autocracies have grown increasingly brazen on the world stage, claiming
that they can get things done for the people with a speed and
effectiveness that democracies cannot match.
Today, we see just how empty that rhetoric is, and just how dark
the road to autocracy can be. Vladimir Putin's brutal war on a peaceful
neighbor in Ukraine has shown a callous disregard for human life,
global stability, and the very idea of truth itself. The courage of the
people of Ukraine and the stalwart support of the United States and our
allies and partners has unified and inspired people around the world
striving for peace, democracy, human rights and freedom. Meanwhile, the
People's Republic of China continues its campaign of genocide and
crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, forcibly detaining more than one
million Uyghurs and members of other ethnic and religious minority
groups.
If the world's free nations, with the United States in the lead,
are able to unite the efforts of our allies, the private sector, and
our multilateral institutions, and marshal the resources necessary to
help partner nations stand up to autocracies, manage the aftershocks of
Putin's war against Ukraine, end the pandemic, fight climate change,
prevent conflict and promote stability, and safeguard democratic
reforms, we have a chance extend the reach of peace, prosperity, and
human dignity to billions.
This has been USAID's mission since its inception six decades ago,
and I am immensely grateful to you for your continued bipartisan
support of our efforts to save lives, strengthen economies, prevent
fragility, promote resilience, and bolster freedom around the world.
USAID's work is a demonstration to the world that America cares about
the plight of others, and that we can competently accomplish mammoth
goals that no other country can. But the work we do abroad also matters
to Americans here at home--it makes us safer, more prosperous,
engenders goodwill that strengthens alliances and global cooperation,
and creates a better future for the generations to come. Your
bipartisan support for a robust fiscal year 23 topline for the State
Foreign Operations Senate bill will help us meet this moment and
advance American interests and the critical foreign policy and
development priorities before us.
The Biden-Harris Administration's fiscal year 2023 request of $29.4
billion fully funding foreign assistance that is partially implemented
by USAID is a reflection of the critical importance of development and
humanitarian assistance in advancing U.S. interests around the world.
The fiscal year 2023 request also includes vital assistance to respond
to the growing number of development priorities and global humanitarian
crises. The request additionally includes $6.5 billion in mandatory
funding for the State Department and USAID to make transformative
investments in pandemic and other biological threat preparedness
globally, including financing for the new pandemic preparedness and
global health security fund being established this summer, with
leadership by the Indonesian G20 presidency and other partners around
the world.
We know, though, that the mammoth needs around the world--from the
COVID-19 pandemic's continued effects to multi-billion dollar climate
shocks to a spike in global food, energy, and fertilizer prices due to
the Russian Federation's belligerence--are far larger than any single
nation's ability to meet them. The request will allow the United States
to lead, and in leading, allow us to mobilize allies, organizations,
and private sector partners to contribute more to the causes critical
to our nation's interests.
Thanks to your past support, the United States has helped get more
than half a billion COVID-19 vaccines to people in 115 countries; led
life-saving humanitarian and disaster responses in 68 countries,
including Haiti, Ethiopia, and Ukraine; helped enhance pathways for
legal migration to the U.S. while working to strengthen worker
protections; and assisted the relocation and resettlement of Afghan
colleagues and refugees under the most dire of circumstances, while
pivoting our programming in Afghanistan to address ongoing food
insecurity and public health needs, and continuing to push to keep
women and girls in school.
We are also making strides to become a much more nimble Agency at a
time of immense demands, shoring up a depleted Agency by welcoming new
recruits, and operating with greater flexibility. The fiscal year 2023
Request will build on these steps forward, giving us the ability to
invest in the people and systems to meet the world's most significant
challenges so the United States can seize this moment in history.
Supporting the people of Ukraine and managing the global food crisis
stemming from the Kremlin's war of aggression
As we enter the third month of the Russian Federation's full-scale
war of aggression against Ukraine, the humanitarian situation has grown
dire, especially in the country's east, even as Ukraine continues to
put up stiff resistance on the battlefield. We are actively programming
resources passed in the March 15th Ukraine Supplemental Act and seeking
additional supplemental resources to continue supporting the people of
Ukraine and address rising global food insecurity as they continue to
defend their sovereignty and their country. These resources are
critical to making sure that Russia's war against Ukraine is a
strategic failure for the Kremlin, while easing the global suffering
their actions have caused.
Since the war began, more than 13 million people have been
displaced--over a quarter of Ukraine's population including two-thirds
of the country's children. That includes 5.7 million refugees, 90
percent of whom are women and children. An estimated 7.7 million more
people are internally displaced inside Ukraine. An estimated 15.7
million people inside Ukraine will need humanitarian assistance over
the next 4 months.
These supplemental resources that Congress provided have been
instrumental in surging critically-needed assistance to those in need
in the country, and to mobilizing the humanitarian systems required to
coordinate a significant response. To date, our implementing partner,
the World Food Program--which was not present on the ground in Ukraine
when the conflict broke out--has scaled up its presence, and has now
provided nearly 3.5 million people with rapid response rations, bread
distributions, and cash-based transfers, with plans to increase
distribution to reach 6 million people by June. With support from the
United States and other donors, UNICEF and its local partners have
provided critical health supplies to support access to primary
healthcare for over 1.5 million children and women and ensured access
to safe water for nearly 1.3 million people in affected areas as of May
3. While much has been accomplished, we recognize that more must be
done, particularly in securing humanitarian access to reach those in
active conflict zones with the assistance they urgently need.
To support the Ukrainian government's ability to administer
services and manage its budgetary needs, USAID has contributed $500
million to the World Bank's Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Ukraine (MDTF),
and as President Biden announced recently, we plan to transfer an
additional $500 million from the fiscal year 2022 Ukraine Supplemental
Appropriations Act, for a total of $1 billion. The supplemental funding
will also enable us to provide assistance to Ukraine and neighboring
frontline states like Moldova. This plan focuses on economic
stabilization, countering disinformation, and promoting energy
independence.
Of course, Putin's war has effects beyond Ukraine's borders. The
Kremlin's invasion of Ukraine has led to serious disruptions to global
food, fuel, and fertilizer supplies, while also denting crop production
and household incomes, and causing already high food prices to rise
further, thereby taxing the international humanitarian system. USAID is
coordinating with other U.S. Departments and Agencies to respond to
immediate, medium-, and long-term impacts on global food security and
nutrition. Estimates suggest that up to 40 million additional people
could be pushed into poverty and food insecurity over the coming year--
in addition to the over 800 million people around the world who already
face hunger. These populations are mostly focused in the Middle East,
and West and East Africa, where higher fertilizer prices today threaten
crop yields and harvests tomorrow. With the main planting season about
to begin, countries like Ethiopia and South Sudan face the possibility
of significant reductions to projected crop yields, food accessibility,
and household incomes.
Putin's attack and its devastating effects on global food security
comes on top of 2 years of record food insecurity as a result of the
COVID-19 pandemic and climate change. In fiscal year 2022, nearly two
thirds of our Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance's programming was to
address food insecurity and prevent famine through emergency food
assistance and related programming. This year, a similar proportion of
funding will go to address growing food insecurity, however, due to the
skyrocketing costs of food and fuel, the same amount of funding will
reach 10 million fewer people.
In light of the food crisis, USAID, together with our partners at
USDA, have made the exceptional decision to draw down the full balance
of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust--$282 million--which will be
used to procure U.S. food commodities to bolster existing emergency
food operations in six countries facing severe food insecurity:
Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, and Yemen. We are
immensely grateful to USDA, which will provide $388 million in
additional funding through the Commodity Credit Corporation to cover
transportation and other associated costs so that food can get to
places around the globe where it is needed most.
Yet even as we meet short-term food assistance needs, we must
continue to invest in long-term food security and build resilient food
systems so that countries have the ability to feed themselves, lower
their dependence on Russian wheat and agriculture, and manage future
food shocks.
The United States Government has long been a global leader in
addressing global food insecurity. In the first 7 years since the
launch of the U.S. Feed the Future Initiative, the program is estimated
to have lifted 23.4 million people out of poverty, 5.2 million
households out of hunger, and 3.4 million children from risk of
stunting. That's in addition to the program's measurable benefits for
farmers and agribusinesses here in the U.S. and around the world, due
to increased agricultural productivity, trade, jobs and income, and
U.S. exports.
And yet, new disruptions to food security around the world indicate
that our need for funding will continue to be significant. That's why
the fiscal year 2023 request includes over $1 billion in State and
USAID economic and development funding for global food security. This
money will go towards bolstering Feed the Future initiatives around the
world, strengthening food systems, supporting farmers, and building
community resilience.
controlling covid-19 and strengthening global health leadership
Much has changed from the haunting early days in March 2020. Thanks
to funding from the American Rescue Plan Act and additional
supplemental appropriations, the United States has been the clear
leader in the international response to COVID-19, and our Agency has
already invested over 95 percent of the funding Congress has generously
provided to us, and we expect to obligate virtually all of the
remaining funds by July.
We have expanded testing, treatment, and surveillance in countries
around the world. In hotspots in Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and
the Caribbean, we have provided rapid responses for urgent healthcare
needs, critical commodities, and technical assistance. And we have
helped support developing countries in mitigating the transmission and
morbidity of COVID-19, while also helping those countries prevent and
mitigate food insecurity, gender-based violence, and other secondary
effects of COVID-19.
Our Agency has also helped lead the effort to vaccinate the world.
In partnership with the Department of Defense, we have procured 1
billion Pfizer vaccine doses for up to 100 countries around the world,
free of charge and with no strings attached. We are addressing the most
urgent vaccine delivery and country readiness needs in more than 100
countries, including surge support to 11 countries in sub-Saharan
Africa, under the U.S. government's Global VAX initiative. We are
leading Global VAX as a whole-of-government effort in close partnership
with the Centers for Disease Control--and we are already seeing
significant vaccination progress in these countries such as Uganda,
where vaccination coverage increased fivefold between January and May,
and Nigeria, where vaccination rates increased nearly threefold during
that same time period.
And yet, our job remains unfinished. Many countries are still off
track to hit their vaccination coverage targets this year. Global
testing, treatment, and health services still lag. Without additional
resources, many of our programs will begin wrapping up activities and
closing down this fall. And we risk a significant loss of progress in
our other global health programs if we cannot secure needed emergency
funds. That's why President Biden requested $22.5 billion in
supplemental funding to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, $5 billion of
which would be dedicated to global efforts.
Additional supplemental funding would enable a significant
expansion of our international vaccination drive, provide surge support
to an additional 20-to-25 undervaccinated countries in significant
need, countries like Liberia, where 24 percent of the population is
vaccinated, and Haiti, where less than 2 percent of the population is
fully vaccinated. It would also support other international COVID-19
response priorities like providing boosters and pediatric vaccinations,
testing, treatments--including the newest, high-impact antivirals--as
well as additional health services that would reach an additional 100
million people.
Such funding is essential if we are ever to turn COVID-19 from a
damaging global pandemic into a manageable respiratory disease.
Barring additional funding, the United States will have to turn its
back on the countries that need urgent help to boost their vaccination
rates and access lifesaving treatments. Failing to help these countries
get shots into arms and reduce severe disease means we will leave their
populations unprotected and allow the virus to continue mutating into
new, potentially more dangerous variants. Scientific research has
established that new variants are more likely to emerge from a long-
term infection in immuno-compromised individuals who lack access to
vaccination or treatment. These variants will inevitably make their way
onto American soil, close down American cities, and infect and cost
American lives.
On May 12,the United States, Belize, Germany, Indonesia, and
Senegal co-hosted the second Global COVID-19 Summit. Summit
participants made major new policy and financial commitments to make
vaccines available to those at highest risk, to expand access to tests
and treatments, and to prevent future health crises. Specifically,
leaders from governments and other key partners, non-governmental
organizations, the private sector, and philanthropies committed to
provide $3.2 billion in new funding, in addition to previous 2022
pledges. This includes nearly $2.5 billion for COVID-19 and related
response activities and $712 million in new commitments toward a new
pandemic preparedness and global health security fund at the World
Bank. This funding will be complemented by significant policy
commitments from lower-income countries to accelerate their domestic
responses to COVID-19 and enhance their global health security
capabilities. These commitments are critical, and show that others have
been inspired to step up to fund this response and future pandemic
preparedness. However, significant financing gaps remain, and they are
no substitute for sustained leadership and significant investment from
the United States to control what continues to be a deadly pandemic and
prevent the emergence of new variants.
As we race to end the pandemic, USAID continues to push ahead on
our broader global health efforts. The fiscal year 2023 Request for
USAID includes $3.96 billion to advance American leadership in Global
Health and Global Health Security. These funds will help to prevent
child and maternal deaths, bolster nutrition, control the HIV/AIDS
epidemic, expand the global health workforce, and combat infectious
diseases. Funding in USAID-managed assistance will respond to the
ongoing impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on global health programs
including tuberculosis and malaria, as well as strengthening health
systems and global health security to better prevent, detect, and
respond to future infectious disease outbreaks.
In addition, the fiscal year 2023 request includes $6.5 billion in
mandatory funding for the Department of State and USAID for critical
pandemic preparedness activities. These funds will make transformative
investments in pandemic and other biological threat preparedness
globally by strengthening the global health workforce, advancing
pandemic vaccine development, replenishing emergency response capacity,
and providing health security financing to prevent, detect, and respond
to future infectious disease outbreaks.
bolstering democracy, human rights, and governance and fighting
corruption
As the pandemic stretched into a second year, pro-democracy
movements in many countries faltered, while governments, under guise of
ending the pandemic, enacted new restrictions on human rights and
fundamental freedoms. Disinformation ran rampant and sowed division
within and between free nations. And the Chinese and Russian
governments have worsened these trends by supporting authoritarian
actors all over the world.
At the same time, corruption has increased in scale and scope.
Today's corrupt actors are highly networked, agile, and resourced--and
for the most part, they outmatch those who stand against them. USAID's
Anti-Corruption Task Force found that USAID Missions have extremely
limited--and in some cases, no--resources to defend against corruption.
While this is incredibly concerning, it's also a historic window of
opportunity for reform.
This opportunity, combined with the increased threats of corruption
and democratic backsliding, is why the fiscal year 2023 Request
includes over $2.94 billion to revitalize global democracy. These funds
will empower local partners, provide transparency in political systems,
and address authoritarianism and disinformation. Of this foreign
assistance request for democracy, roughly $2.6 billion is in accounts
that USAID will fully or partially manage. The request will advance the
Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal introduced at the Summit
for Democracy, a landmark set of policy and foreign assistance
initiatives that support free and independent media, empower
historically marginalized groups and democratic reformers, and help
develop open, secure, and inclusive digital ecosystems.
Traditionally, our democracy assistance has emphasized media
training, election monitoring, and human rights advocacy. But as we've
seen, countries in the midst of a civilian transition or with a newly
elected leader who rose to power on the back of a campaign to fight
corruption or expand the rule of law, need not only traditional
democracy assistance and investments in civil society to hold
governments accountable, but resources that can immediately deliver a
democratic dividend that demonstrate the value of good governance and
strong institutions and services for citizens. That might include
support to acquire vaccines, establish a social safety net, or invest
in a power utility to keep the lights on. This funding will give us the
flexibility to support countries in the event of a democratic opening--
so-called democratic ``bright spots''-- with the resources they need to
demonstrate that democracies can deliver for their people. This amount
also includes $100 million to fight transnational corruption by
empowering anti- corruption champions, strengthening partner countries'
ability to detect and prevent corruption, and exposing and disrupting
the flow of illicit money, goods, and natural resources.
The President's fiscal year 2023 request includes $2.6 billion for
USAID and the Department of State to promote gender equality and the
political, economic, and social empowerment of women and girls; prevent
and respond to gender-based violence; expand access to child, elder,
and home care services and address gender discrimination and systemic
inequities blocking the full participation of women and girls, men and
boys, and individuals of other gender identities-- all by integrating
gender equality across a range of development, humanitarian and
security assistance. This historic request would more than double our
commitment to women's empowerment and gender equality.
Advancing gender equality reduces poverty, promotes economic
growth, increases access to education, improves health outcomes,
advances political stability, and fosters democracy. The full
participation of all people is essential to economic well-being,
health, and security.
restoring u.s. climate leadership
Recently, USAID launched a new Climate Strategy that will guide our
efforts to tackle the existential threat of climate change over this
decade in a way that is truly transformational.
Our Climate Strategy lays out six ambitious targets to be achieved
between 2022-2030, which together would represent a dramatic increase
in our Agency's efforts to stem the climate crisis. These targets
include preventing six billion metric tons of global greenhouse gas
emissions--the equivalent of taking 100 million cars off the road for a
decade--and conserving 100 million hectares of critical landscapes, an
area more than twice the size of California. We would also support 500
million people to better prepare for and adapt to the impacts of
climate change that are already wreaking havoc on marginalized
communities.
The President's fiscal year 2023 request includes $2.3 billion in
international climate financing, and given the substantial gap in
climate financing globally, USAID's Climate Strategy places a special
emphasis on catalyzing substantial new private investment for climate
mitigation and adaptation; our goal is to kickstart $150 billion in new
public and private climate finance by 2030. We are also focused on the
conservation, restoration and management of 100 million hectares of
carbon critical landscapes by 2039--land that captures and stores
carbon while preserving biodiversity and helping to prevent zoonotic
transfer of diseases driven by habitat destruction.
We also continue to work closely with the Government of India
through the support of their global climate initiative, the Coalition
for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure. The United States is a founding
member of the coalition, and we have invested in supporting its
technical leadership and formalization, with a goal of creating a
global body that will advocate for the creation of infrastructure that
can withstand climate and disaster risks and disseminate best
practices. Since its founding in 2019, the Coalition now has 35 global
members and over 400 companies, all working to share expertise and
strengthen resilient infrastructure development across the globe.
addressing irregular migration from central america
In the past 6 months alone, USAID programming in Central America
has created more than 40,000 jobs, provided life-saving humanitarian
assistance to 1.8 million people, supported distribution of more than
10 million COVID-19 vaccine doses, and helped mobilize $1.2 billion in
private investment. Because one of the most effective ways to counter
irregular migration is to provide legal means for securing seasonal or
temporary migration, we have helped expand labor migration pathways
from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras through the H-2B seasonal
visa program. And we have used policy, development, and diplomatic
tools to pressure leaders in the region to govern democratically and
transparently.
But as demonstrated by the continued arrival of migrants at
American borders, much more work is needed. Individual migration
decisions are complex, but they are rarely made on a whim, and we use
data from multiple sources to understand their root causes and target
our programs accordingly. As documented by the Government
Accountability Office, the decision to suspend most assistance to
Northern Central America in 2019 adversely impacted over 80 percent of
USAID projects, and we continue to work aggressively to restart,
optimize and scale our programs. For fiscal year 2023, USAID and the
Department of State are requesting $986.8 million to support the second
year of implementation of the U.S. Strategy to Address the Root Causes
of Migration in Central America.
Using this money, we will continue working with partners in civil
society, government, and the private sector to address the drivers of
migration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras-- drivers like lack
of economic opportunity, corruption, violence, human rights abuses,
absence of quality public services, and declining trust in government.
We will continue building and implementing a robust monitoring,
evaluation, and learning plan designed to track progress under the
Strategy. And we will defend democracy, human rights, and civic space
throughout Central America so that citizens believe they have a voice
and a future in their countries of origin. Nicaragua is a case in
point. The Ortega regime's gravely concerning wide-scale crackdown on
civil society and rejection of democratic norms and processes in
Nicaragua has coincided with a major rise in out migration of
Nicaraguans fleeing political repression and economic stagnation under
Ortega.
responding to humanitarian crises in places like ethiopia and
afghanistan
Stopping the threat of famine and addressing atrocities in Ethiopia
is a top priority for the Biden Administration and for USAID. Fighting
has left as many as 9 million people in northern Ethiopia in desperate
need of food and forced more than 2 million people to flee their homes.
Food insecurity projections from February 2022 to May 2022 show that up
to a million people will face famine-like conditions in northern
Ethiopia by June--700,000 of those in the Tigray Region. In the Tigray
Region alone, more than 90 percent of people depend on assistance.
At the same time, there have been multiple, credible reports of
gross violations of human rights related to the conflict in northern
Ethiopia Since last appearing before this committee, I visited the Um
Rakuba refugee camp in Sudan, where I met with victims of the conflict
in Tigray and heard their heartbreaking stories of abuse and violence.
Recently, the Government of Ethiopia and Tigray regional
authorities reached a truce in their fighting--the source of so much of
this human misery. And since the truce on March 24, over 200 trucks
have arrived in Tigray in April alone, with the number of trucks slowly
increasing. But to meet the immense humanitarian needs in Tigray, more
than 500 trucks carrying tons of food and life-saving supplies need to
arrive each week. The current flow is woefully insufficient.
We will continue to push for significant, sustained, unconditional,
and unhindered delivery of much-needed aid to all those in need. We
will also continue working with interagency partners to address and
mitigate ongoing human rights violations and credible reports of
atrocities by countering hate speech and mis- and disinformation,
strengthening protection of freedom of expression and peaceful protest,
supporting independent media outlets and watchdog organizations,
strengthening local conflict mitigation, supporting the rule of law,
building an enabling environment for national dialogue, and monitoring
and documenting human rights abuses.
In Afghanistan, an estimated 22.8 million Afghans face food
insecurity following the Taliban's seized power in August 2021.
Currently, the United Nations estimates that 95 percent of the Afghan
population is in need of assistance. And to truly end the humanitarian
crisis, we must also address the roots of Afghanistan's economic and
development crises as well as advocate for the promotion of human
rights for all Afghans. On March 23, the Taliban abruptly reversed its
decision to allow girls to attend school past the sixth grade. On May
7, the Taliban imposed additional restrictions on Afghan women and
girls freedom of movement, employment, and access to society, all of
which jeopardize the human rights and agency of Afghan women The
Taliban have also threatened civil society organizations through media
crackdowns, intimidation, unjust detentions, and assaults of
journalists.
While we continue to work through diplomatic channels and
likeminded donors to press the Taliban to reverse course and allow all
girls to go to school, women to work and participate in the economy and
protect the rights of minorities and civil society; we remain committed
to supporting the people of Afghanistan. The United States has been the
single largest donor of humanitarian assistance since the fall of Kabul
in August 2021. Since then, the U.S. Government has contributed $719
million. Alongside us, the humanitarian community provided another
$1.82 billion towards the humanitarian response in 2021. And we are
working with our partners to support basic needs like health,
livelihoods, agriculture, and education.
We will continue programs to enable the direct delivery of
humanitarian assistance. Our aid helps support rural livelihoods,
improve food security and develop resistance in food systems in
Afghanistan, enable women and girls to access quality healthcare,
education, support for gender- based violence, civil society
organizations, and training and livelihood programs. And we support
journalists and media organizations, while also working to counter
human trafficking.
supporting community-led development
Across all our efforts, it is crucial that we engage more
frequently and more intensely and sustainably with a broader range of
partners. That's especially true of the community-led organizations and
companies based in the countries in which we work. When we partner with
these local NGOs and businesses, we have an opportunity to double our
impact--to not just manage a project and deliver results, but to grow
the local capacity of that business or organization so its impact will
be sustained long after its relationship with USAID ends.
Our current approach to community-led development draws upon more
than a decade of the Agency's prior experience. It aims to devolve more
power and leadership to local actors, elevate diversity and equity in
our partnerships, and address some of the systemic and operational
constraints at USAID. We have to approach localization as a shift in
not just with whom we work, but also in how we work: creating
intentional shifts in the way we design and implement our programs so
that we are putting local communities and stakeholders in the lead.
This is about deeper, more systemic change.
Our efforts to advance community-led development have been warmly
embraced by more than 1,000 local development organizations, as well as
by many of our implementing partners and some of the largest
international non-governmental organizations. Thanks to your support,
the fiscal year 2022 appropriations bill provided an initial $100
million in the fiscal year 2022 appropriations bill to support our
Centroamerica Local initiative, along with the authority, flexibility,
and staff resources to prioritize working with local organizations in
Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.
With more support from Congress, we can deepen this approach across
our Agency and our Missions. The fiscal year 2023 request includes
$47.6 million for the Centroamerica Local initiative--$40 million for
direct awards to local organizations and $7.6 million to help staff
this effort.
investing in our people and building a stronger culture
Of course, none of what we set out to achieve would be possible
without USAID's dedicated team of development professionals serving our
nation throughout the world. Many of our staff are still reeling from
the COVID-19 pandemic, having lost loved ones even as they sought to
protect others in their community from the virus.
With your support, we are also increasing the size and agility of
the career workforce to better advance U.S. national security
priorities. Since last year, we have hired approximately 500 career
employees and are working to reach our target levels of 1,850 Foreign
Service and 1,600 Civil Service employees this year.
The fiscal year 2023 request includes $1.7 billion to continue
these efforts to invest in our people and build our institutional
capacity, increasing the number of U.S. direct-hire positions that
advance our most critical and effective foreign assistance program.
This funding covers salaries and benefits of our direct hire Foreign
Service and Civil Service workforce, overseas and Washington
operations, and central support, including human capital initiatives,
security, and information technology. The fiscal year 2023 Request also
includes resources for the launch of the Global Development Partnership
initiative, a workforce expansion program, that will focus on democracy
and anti-corruption, global health security, national security, climate
change, operational management, and a more permanent humanitarian
assistance workforce.
But in reconstituting our workforce, we want to recruit and retain
talent differently than we have before, with an emphasis on hiring and
nurturing a workforce that truly represents America. Thanks to the
sustained leadership of our staff, we've taken several steps toward
these aims. Their work and advocacy over many years enabled one of my
first acts as Administrator, which was signing the USAID Diversity,
Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Strategic Plan--a framework
document to guide the Agency's efforts to integrate DEIA into every
aspect of our work.
Since signing this document, we've taken concrete steps to advance
our DEIA goals. We have conducted assessments that provided us with
data and employee experiences to help us decide how to prioritize our
efforts and resources. We onboarded five DEIA Advisors in Washington
operating units and are actively recruiting more. And we have
established the Office of the Chief DEIA Officer and welcomed our
Agency's first-ever Chief Diversity Officer. We also launched our first
recruitment conferences for students at both Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions, with
another planned for Arab American students later this year.
Since appearing before you last year, I have had the chance to
travel to three HBCUs--Delaware State, Tuskegee University, and Alcorn
State--as well as Florida International University, the largest
Hispanic-Serving Institution in the U.S., to sign new agreements that
will help expand our recruitment and research partnerships.
Additionally, we are addressing current DEIA data gaps by making
our data collection process more inclusive. We're expanding our talent
recruitment pipelines and lowering barriers to entry for development
partnership opportunities by collaborating with minority-serving
institutions, increasing engagement and career development
opportunities for underrepresented students, and establishing hiring
goals to increase the number of employees who are persons with
disabilities.
However, it is not enough just to recruit talent, we must nurture
and develop it. We will expand access to professional development and
learning opportunities and equip our managers with the tools to lead
talented and diverse teams. We are also developing commitments to our
locally- employed colleagues to codify entitlements, benefits, and
career advancement and professional development opportunities for our
Foreign Service Nationals, who constitute 70 percent of our overseas
workforce.
conclusion
The challenges we have encountered in the past year are grave and
loom large, but I sincerely believe the opportunity before us is even
larger. By providing the resources necessary to seize this moment, the
United States can galvanize commitments from our allies and our private
sector partners; support the people of Ukraine in their moment of need
and help manage the impact the Kremlin's war is having on the world's
food supply; control the COVID-19 pandemic while laying the groundwork
to detect and prevent future pandemics, strengthen health systems, and
quickly rollout future vaccines; help countries adapt to the worst
effects of climate change while embracing new renewable technologies
and green jobs; and demonstrate to the world that democracies can
deliver in a way no autocracy can.
With your support, USAID will move aggressively to grasp this
opportunity. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Acting Inspector, General Thomas J. Ullom, U.S.
Agency for International Development
Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Graham, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a written statement for
the subcommittee's hearing on the U.S. Agency for International
Development's (USAID's) fiscal year 2023 budget request. The USAID
Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides independent, objective
oversight to safeguard and strengthen U.S. foreign assistance. We
appreciate your continued support of our office as we work across USAID
as well as the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the U.S. African
Development Foundation, and the Inter-American Foundation to promote
effectiveness and efficiency in foreign assistance programs and
identify and deter the fraud, waste, and abuse that can jeopardize
those programs' success.
USAID's mission is to advance a peaceful and prosperous world
through its development and humanitarian assistance activities, and in
doing so advance U.S. national security and economic priorities. The
Agency's budget request speaks to ongoing and planned development and
humanitarian work around the globe with ambitious aims--from saving
lives to fighting transnational corruption to tackling root causes of
irregular migration. It also includes elements intended to provide for
a secure and skilled workforce to enable USAID's success. As in prior
years, supplemental funding to address new crises may augment USAID's
responsibility on the world stage and increase demands on the Agency's
capability to act.
USAID must overcome complex challenges while executing its mission
across over 100 countries. It often works in close coordination with
other U.S. government agencies and international donors while
overseeing an array of contractors, grantees, and other recipients of
U.S. funds worldwide. Our work highlights the importance of
implementing controls and building partnerships in even the most
difficult settings to manage, monitor, and sustain results. The U.S.
government's response to the conflict in Ukraine illustrates the
multifaceted risks. There, USAID is called to overcome supply chain
constraints to support the Ukrainian people's most critical needs,
coordinate with domestic and international partners to advance
objectives, and support the safety of its own staff.
This statement draws upon our annual report on the top management
challenges facing USAID and aligns with our five priority oversight
areas:\1\
--Advancing global health outcomes
--Managing aid in emerging and protracted crises
--Leveraging local strengths for sustainable development
--Advancing foreign assistance priorities through coordinated efforts
--Strengthening core management functions
As discussed below, our work points to key lessons for USAID and
other stakeholders to both amplify strengths and address potential
risks in U.S. humanitarian and development programs. This is especially
critical with respect to managing urgent and ongoing crises and
addressing emerging priorities of the administration. Overall, amid
long-standing development challenges and an ever-changing geopolitical
landscape, our work underscores the constant need for responsible
stewardship among agencies and implementers alike.
advancing global health outcomes
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to pose an unprecedented global
public health crisis with more than 500 million confirmed cases and 6.2
million deaths as of April 2022. USAID contributed to the U.S.
government's international pandemic response to combat the virus and
prevent decades of development gains from being lost due to the
resulting economic, democratic, and social backsliding effects. In
addition, USAID has committed to reinforcing U.S. global health
leadership in pandemic preparedness and decades-long advances in
responses to HIV/AIDS, maternal and child health, and infectious
diseases like malaria.
Our oversight of USAID's COVID-19 response and broader global
health portfolio identifies specific challenges planning, implementing,
and monitoring activities:
--USAID had limited control over some key decisions. Starting in
April 2020, the National Security Council (NSC) made key
decisions for USAID's COVID-19 ventilator donation program of
over $200 million, including which ventilator models to send
and where to send them.\2\ This marked a significant departure
from USAID's customary practice for responding to public health
emergencies, and the NSC's decisions did not align with USAID's
planned pandemic response. For example, most of the countries
that USAID had proposed to support were categorized as low- or
lower-middle income by the World Bank, but well over half of
all ventilator donations were made to upper-middle- or high-
income countries, as directed by the NSC. The Government
Accountability Office further reported that USAID had limited
information on the location or use of the ventilators once
delivered.
--Procurement and delivery challenges could affect COVID-19 vaccine
donation effectiveness. We reported that USAID may need to
adapt oversight to mitigate the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse
for USAID's $4 billion contribution to Gavi, the Vaccine
Alliance.\3\ We also reported that USAID, in finalizing its
vaccine strategy, was working through constraints with human
resources, supply chains, and public trust in countries
receiving donated vaccines. By March 2022, USAID had delivered
half a billion vaccines to more than 110 countries but noted
that in-country constraints as well as funding shortfalls could
keep vaccines from reaching those who need them.
--Stronger planning and evaluation processes are needed for global
health supply chain awards. Weaknesses hindered USAID's ability
to support key design and award decisions for its $9.5 billion
global health supply chain contract issued to Chemonics
International in 2015.\4\ In addition, while Chemonics
International generally delivered health commodities in the
right quantities, more oversight was needed to improve
timeliness and performance. USAID still has work to do to
address open recommendations on procurement, oversight, and
risk mitigation, including improving guidance for evaluating a
bidder's management information systems--a critical component
of a global health supply chain--prior to making a future
award. These improvements are key for USAID to make as it
prepares to award its $17 billion NextGen global health supply
chain contracts.
USAID continues to make progress addressing challenges and
strengthening its global health approach. For example, in April 2022,
the Agency revised its Framework for USAID's Response to Infectious
Disease Outbreaks, which it first developed in July 2018 in response to
our oversight work on the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. However,
continued diligence is imperative as global conditions evolve. We will
keep strategic focus on USAID's global health portfolio, including the
COVID-19 response and programming for the President's Emergency Plan
for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). In the coming year, our planned oversight
activities include a series of COVID-19 audits covering topics to
include USAID's coordination of related efforts, rapid response, and
vaccine readiness activities.
managing aid in emerging and protracted crises
USAID responded to over 80 crises worldwide in fiscal year 2021 to
provide life-saving support in dire situations, whether brought on by
conflict, natural disaster, or a combination of factors. Over the past
5 years, assistance for humanitarian needs as a portion of USAID's
budget has doubled, reaching nearly 40 percent of USAID's net costs in
fiscal year 2021. As needs grow and crises expand due to worsening
weather events and prolonged pandemic effects, rigorous planning,
monitoring, and risk mitigation are critical to safeguard U.S.
assistance.
Our work highlights some of the difficulties conducting sound
planning, monitoring, and risk mitigation in humanitarian settings:
--Fraud risk mitigation strategies must include the right actors and
level of detail for accountability. Otherwise, USAID faces
increased risks of fraud and diversion, as we found in our
oversight of USAID's humanitarian responses in Syria\5\ and the
Venezuela regional crisis.\6\ USAID recently developed a new
framework for managing fraud risk in response to our oversight
that includes defined roles and responsibilities and
requirements for risk assessments, control activities, and
monitoring. Assessing, mitigating, and monitoring fraud risks
remains critical for USAID in the coming year as crises unfold.
We have received dozens of reports of diversion and loss of
assistance intended for beneficiaries in Northern Ethiopia and
alerted USAID to instances when intimidation and demands from
the Taliban compromised humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan.
--While USAID aims to bolster oversight with third-party monitoring,
doing so effectively has been a challenge. The extreme poverty
and chronic food insecurity of Africa's Sahel region draw
reoccurring emergency interventions, but the monitoring efforts
USAID relied on to track progress and make course corrections
fell short, which we found could affect its follow-on
programming.\7\ In Afghanistan, USAID reported that while the
end of armed conflict has improved humanitarian access, USAID-
funded organizations continue to face access restrictions
affecting their female aid workers.\8\
--With lives and livelihoods at stake, looking beyond immediate need
is daunting but essential for a more stable future. This was
the case with the Venezuela regional crisis, where we found
USAID had not prepared strategies to guide in-country
development efforts or programs to manage Venezuelan migration
in neighboring countries. In Iraq, we found that USAID's
guidance and practices did not encourage transitioning from
more immediate humanitarian assistance to longer term
solutions.\9\ While USAID has taken steps to address related
recommendations, the importance of deliberate planning remains
paramount for protracted and evolving scenarios, like in Syria
and Iraq, where drought now threatens food insecurity and
destabilizes the transition from humanitarian assistance.\10\
We continue to examine humanitarian oversight and fraud risks in
priority areas, including the Northern Triangle, Burma, and Yemen, and
are planning new work on USAID's response to the circumstances in
Ukraine and Afghanistan. We are also engaging directly with USAID's
teams, program implementers, and our oversight partners on the ground
to enhance awareness for preventing fraud, diversions, and losses that
threaten the integrity of U.S. foreign assistance.
leveraging local strengths for sustainable development
USAID has long encouraged locally led development to achieve
enduring results. In its fiscal year 2023 budget request, USAID
reiterated its commitment to local investments by partnering with new,
nontraditional, and diverse actors; empowering local organizations; and
promoting transparent investments. Under this strategy, broad goals for
sustained economic growth, gender equity, climate change, and more
depend on leveraging the skills and interests of local partners,
governments, and private sector entities.
Yet, locally led development brings certain risks that USAID must
accept or work to mitigate:
--The quantity and capability of local partners may be insufficient
to lead some development efforts. When we looked at PEPFAR
programs in Africa, we found USAID was not on track to meet the
goal of channeling 70 percent of PEPFAR budgets through local
partners by September 2020 due to low baselines and challenges
identifying and developing capable local organizations.\11\
Thus, some missions focused on programmatic rather than
budgetary goals. USAID faced similar issues with supply chains
in some countries and balanced risks by doing work on behalf of
local officials or by operating parallel supply chains.\12\
--Local internal control and compliance systems may be weak. In the
past 10 years, we have made over 3,500 recommendations to USAID
citing internal control and compliance issues and questioned
over $1.1 billion through our reviews of local partner
financial audits. In the last 2 years, these financial audits
found over 20 instances in Africa where USAID's local partners
did not perform required due diligence checks, including
verifying whether potential employees and suppliers were
restricted from receiving U.S. government funds.
--To optimize private sector engagement, USAID needs more guidance,
data, and dedicated staff.\13\ Otherwise, USAID risks falling
short of its private sector goals. We also found USAID needs
more guidance for monitoring cost-share contributions for
building local commitment.\14\
--Weaknesses in controls and oversight can have undercutting effects.
One example is evidence suggesting corruption at a Kenyan
state-run corporation and recipient of a $650 million award
with USAID to store and distribute donated medical commodities.
The situation compromised the provision of goods to vulnerable
Kenyans and complicated USAID's ability to manage its
investment. Other examples from recent investigations include
the theft and resale of equipment intended for Jordanian
project beneficiaries and substandard construction of USAID-
funded projects in West Bank.
Whereas USAID looks to local organizations to bring both tailored
solutions and have the capacity to implement them, our oversight
examines how USAID executes its role to ensure that its local partners
are equipped to responsibly implement and account for U.S. foreign
assistance. In addition to investigations and financial audits, our
ongoing work includes a performance audit of USAID's New Partnerships
Initiative, a performance audit of USAID's approach to reviewing and
vetting Northern Triangle program implementers, and a performance audit
of USAID's $845 million cash transfer to the Jordanian government.
advancing foreign assistance priorities through coordinated efforts
Achievement of U.S. foreign assistance aims often depends on
effective coordination between USAID, other Federal agencies, bilateral
donors and host nations, private and public sector organizations, and
multilateral institutions. This coordination takes place at both
strategic and operational levels and in a wide variety of forums as
USAID delivers aid and assistance alongside other donors working in the
same areas. USAID must also balance executive and legislative branch
mandates and priorities, align efforts to counteract malign actors, and
deconflict activities to avoid internal and external duplication.
Our work highlights some of the challenges USAID faces when
coordinating on key decisions and strategic priorities with other
stakeholders:
--Funding decisions by other actors can take USAID's programs in a
different direction than planned, as occurred with donated
ventilators early in the COVID-19 response.\15\ Similarly, the
Senator Paul Simon Water for the World Act of 2014 directed
USAID to prioritize countries based on needs-based criteria and
opportunity indicators.\16\ However, we found USAID lacked
final authority for funding decisions and, at the State
Department's direction, ended up providing funds to some
countries that had low demonstrated needs.
--To increase resilience against Russian aggression, USAID produced
the Countering Malign Kremlin Influence (CMKI) Development
Framework. However, in developing the framework, USAID did not
engage all internal and external stakeholders, including other
regional bureaus within the Agency and external donors such as
the European Union's Eastern Partnership Program.\17\
--In response to statutory requirements over concerns that resources
were not reaching persecuted communities in Iraq, USAID took
efforts to channel more funds through religious and ethnic
minority groups. Due to a State Department-led staffing
reduction in Iraq, USAID faced obstacles managing the
increasingly complex Iraq award portfolio. While the Agency
sought to increase staffing levels in Iraq, these attempts were
unsuccessful.\18\
--A concern affecting global development and humanitarian assistance
is sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), a topic we have worked
ardently with USAID and oversight partners to address since
2019. In August 2021, we alerted USAID to concerns about the
World Health Organization's lack of cooperation with our
investigative inquiry into SEA allegations against its aid
workers. USAID is also still working to close our audit
recommendations to strengthen guidance and controls and improve
incident reporting and tracking in an effort to prevent and
respond to SEA against beneficiaries.\19\
We continue to examine opportunities to enhance coordination with
existing and potential stakeholders through our oversight and other
outreach efforts. This includes leveraging information-sharing
relationships through collaboration with 12 international oversight
counterparts, including Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the World Health
Organization; and other U.N. agency oversight counterparts enabling us
to cast a wide net to confront corruption allegations affecting
programs across the aid sector.
strengthening core management functions
In executing its annual budget, USAID relies on support functions
for managing finances, awards, information, and human capital. The
fiscal year 2023 budget request ties these core management functions to
a revitalized workforce that advances critical foreign assistance
programs and ensures prudent accountability of taxpayer dollars.
USAID shows continued diligence in strengthening related controls.
For example, just over 7 years ago, a material weakness with USAID's
reconciliations with the U.S. Treasury kept us from providing an
opinion on the Agency's financial statements.\20\ Since then, USAID has
worked to fix the gap, so that its financial statements are presented
fairly and in conformance with applicable principles. However, as USAID
adapts its development and humanitarian assistance programs for
emerging priorities, attention to core management functions remains
critical:
--Challenges in the areas of award design and monitoring can lead to
opportunities for fraud, waste, and abuse. For example, after
confirming a Jordanian firm engaged in a pass-through scheme to
obtain an award for which it was ineligible, we issued a fraud
alert flagging that USAID small business set-aside awards were
susceptible to being awarded to pass-through or shell companies
with no actual presence in the United States, contrary to the
Small Business Act.
--The increasing threat and number of cyberattacks on government
agencies demands effective protection of personally
identifiable information. We determined that USAID needs
additional controls to protect personally identifiable
information.\21\ Moreover, our annual audit mandated by the
Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA)
identified weaknesses in four of nine FISMA reporting metric
domains--including identity and access management and supply
chain management--for USAID's information security program in
fiscal year 2021.\22\
--Nearly one-third of our performance audits issued in the last
decade identified staffing or training gaps as the root cause
of programmatic shortfalls. We are concluding an audit
examining the extent to which USAID met congressionally
mandated staffing goals, identified skills gaps, and measured
progress toward assessing those gaps. We are also concluding an
evaluation of USAID's prolific use of personal services
contractors in humanitarian settings and an evaluation of the
Africa Bureau's human capital management practices.
We will maintain focus on core management functions through
mandated and discretionary oversight activities. We will also continue
to raise awareness for strengthening controls and accountability,
including identifying loopholes that hinder the government's ability to
enforce civil fraud remedies against USAID-funded organizations based
outside of the United States.
concluding observations about continued oversight
We appreciate the subcommittee's enduring support for our office's
independent oversight mandate and the resources to meet current and
emerging requirements. The fiscal year 2023 request seeks $80.5 million
for USAID OIG. These funds will support audit, evaluation, inspection,
investigative, and other oversight work to promote positive change in
the delivery of U.S. foreign assistance and help ensure that USAID
prudently uses every dollar it receives.
Our fiscal year 2021 audit and investigative returns amounted to
$1.75 for each dollar we received to support our operations. In
addition, our recommendations have triggered foundational changes in
policy and programming around global health and humanitarian
assistance, Agency procurements, and accountability related to the
prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse. We will build on these
accomplishments, utilizing recent funding for oversight of programs
responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine, and
continue to provide timely, relevant, and impactful oversight of U.S.
foreign assistance.
We stand ready to execute our priorities and plans for ensuring
effective oversight of U.S. foreign assistance in fiscal year 2023.
This includes a special focus on addressing pressing oversight
requirements related to COVID-19 as well as programming in the Northern
Triangle, the West Bank, and Gaza; expanding our inspections and
evaluation capability; and advancing adaptations to a hybrid work
environment. We will continue to maximize our impact by taking a
strategic approach to oversight; leveraging key partnerships within the
oversight community and with the agencies we oversee; and keeping
agency leaders, Congress, and other stakeholders informed of the
results of our work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As required by statute, we annually identify and report the top
challenges facing the agencies we oversee and the progress made in
managing them.
\2\ USAID OIG, USAID Had Limited Control Over COVID-19 Ventilator
Donations, Differing From Its Customary Response to Public Health
Emergencies (4-936-21-002-P), February 24, 2021.
\3\ USAID OIG, U.S. COVID-19 Vaccine Contributions: USAID Should
Consider Enhancing Oversight to Mitigate Risk of Fraud, Waste, and
Abuse (E-000-21-002-M), September 1, 2021.
\4\ USAID OIG, Award Planning and Oversight Weaknesses Impeded
Performance of USAID's Largest Global Health Supply Chain Project (9-
000-21-004-P), March 25, 2021.
\5\ USAID OIG, Weaknesses in Oversight of USAID's Syria Response
Point To the Need for Enhanced Management of Fraud Risks in
Humanitarian Assistance (8-000-21-001-P), March 4, 2021.
\6\ USAID OIG, Enhanced Processes and Implementer Requirements Are
Needed To Address Challenges and Fraud Risks in USAID's Venezuela
Response (9-000-21-005-P), April 16, 2021.
\7\ USAID OIG, USAID's RISE Program in the Sahel Aligned With
Resilience Policies but Lacked Robust Monitoring (4-000- 21-003-P),
September 25, 2021.
\8\ USAID OIG, Operation Freedom's Sentinel Lead Inspector General
Quarterly Report to Congress October 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021,
February 11, 2022.
\9\ USAID OIG, Enhanced Guidance and Practices Would Improve
USAID's Transition Planning and Third-Party Monitoring in Iraq (9-266-
21-003-P), February 19, 2021.
\10\ USAID OIG, Lead Inspector General for Operation Inherent
Resolve Quarterly Report to the United States Congress | October 1,
2021--December 31, 2021, February 7, 2022.
\11\ USAID OIG, PEPFAR in Africa: USAID Expanded the Use of Local
Partners but Should Reassess Local Partner Capacity to Meet Funding
Goals (4-936-22-001-P), December 13, 2021.
\12\ USAID OIG, USAID's Global Health Supply Chain Would Benefit
From More Rigorous Risk Management and Actions To Enhance Local
Ownership (4-936-20-002-P), July 10, 2020.
\13\ USAID OIG, Improved Guidance, Data, and Metrics Would Help
Optimize USAID's Private Sector Engagement (5-000- 21-001-P), December
9, 2020.
\14\ USAID OIG, Cost Sharing: USAID's Asia Bureau Should Enhance
Guidance and Training to Ensure Missions Verify Awardees' Contributions
(5-000-22-002-P), November 26, 2021.
\15\ USAID OIG, USAID Had Limited Control Over COVID-19 Ventilator
Donations, Differing From Its Customary Response to Public Health
Emergencies (4-936-21-002-P), February 24, 2021.
\16\ USAID OIG, Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Programming:
USAID Faced Challenges Providing Assistance to Countries with Greatest
Need (8-000-22-001-P), January 3, 2022.
\17\ USAID OIG, Countering Malign Kremlin Influence: USAID Can Do
More to Strengthen Its CMKI Development Framework (8-199-22-002-P),
January 26, 2022.
\18\ USAID OIG, Significant Events Surrounding USAID's Iraq
Religious and Ethnic Minority Portfolio and Award Management Challenges
(E-000-22-001-M), November 1, 2021.
\19\ USAID OIG, USAID Should Implement Additional Controls To
Prevent and Respond To Sexual Exploitation and Abuse of Beneficiaries
(9-000-21-006-P), May 12, 2021.
\20\ USAID OIG, Audit of USAID's Financial Statements for fiscal
years 2014 and 2013 (0-000-15-001-C), November 17, 2014.
\21\ USAID OIG, USAID Needs to Improve Its Privacy Program to
Better Ensure Protection of Personally Identifiable Information (A-000-
21-001-P), August 11, 2021.
\22\ USAID OIG, USAID Implemented an Effective Information Security
Program for fiscal year 2021 in Support of FISMA (A-000-22-005-C),
December 7, 2021.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Administrator, and if I might,
before I proceed to my questions, since this is likely to be
the last of the budget hearings for this subcommittee, I just
wanted to recognize my friend and colleague and our Full
Committee Chairman who for decades has served as either the
Chair or Ranking of this subcommittee.
I've just returned from a wonderful trip to NATO
Headquarters in Brussels and to Davos, to the World Economic
Forum conference, and was just reminded of the dramatic and
lasting impact that Chairman Leahy has had in his role over
decades, the high regard in which he's held by our leaders
around Europe and around the world and wanted to thank him for
his leadership of this subcommittee.
He has been inseparable from Tim Rieser for 33, I think,
years on this subcommittee, as well, and Tim, from the very
first trip I got to take with both of you to Colombia and Haiti
and Cuba, I have been moved and impressed by the impact that
you've had.
So please know how grateful all of us are to your
dedication of a lifetime of service to making a difference in
the world.
Senator Graham. May I add a few comments?
Senator Coons. Please add a few comments, if you will.
Senator Graham. And I compliment you. Well, I hope not to
ruin your reputation in Vermont, but I consider you a friend.
That probably went down 20 points there.
So what Chris said is true. I've gone all over the world
and Senator Leahy's a known figure in terms of the United
States Senate. When he speaks people listen. Tim Rieser and
Senator Leahy have done a heck of a job affecting people's
lives through this subcommittee.
Compared to our budget, a small amount of money, but I
daresay I've never seen a better bang for the buck in terms of
improving people's lives and making the world more stable than
this subcommittee, and it's been our harbinger of
bipartisanship. I know Senator McConnell worked with Senator
Leahy a very long time.
I've had that pleasure and I just want to echo what Senator
Coons said. This has been a delight to be part of this
subcommittee. Senator Leahy, you have much to be proud of. Tim,
you've worked hard for a long period of time and I'm sad to see
it end. We still got months to go here, but this will probably
be the last budget cycle.
As Senator Coons said, it's an appropriate time to say
thank you in a bipartisan fashion for decades of service to
your community and the world, and the same goes for Tim.
Senator Leahy. Mr. Chair, if I might just take a moment, I
appreciate the comments from both of you. I've worked with both
of you. We have traveled around the world I think a number of
times.
Senator Graham and I, whether I was Chair or he was Chair,
the same with Senator McConnell, whether he was Chair or I was
Chair, we passed the Foreign Ops bill virtually unanimously.
Senator Coons, who was greeted by more heads of State than
I could keep track of when we were at Davos and I sat quietly
holding his briefcase for him, but we'll do the same thing.
I think we're most effective in what we do if we do show
the rest of the world that two parties can work together, and I
especially wanted to be here, of course, with Administrator
Power. I've known the Ambassador, the Administrator Power for
years and years, and she forgives me for only being half Irish,
but I applaud her for what she's done.
So thank you both.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Administrator, as we talked about beforehand, unfortunately
we are in a series of votes. So you will see members come and
go.
Let me, if I might, just start by thanking you for your
dedication over decades as a journalist, as a diplomat, as an
administrator to upholding the very best of American values.
As I think was the case with my dear friend, the late
Secretary Madeline Albright, it is so often those who come to
America from other places in the world initially who believe in
us even more than we believe in ourselves and who help the
United States to live up to its greatest aspirations and
standards.
As you mentioned in your comments, your opening remarks, we
have an opportunity here to demonstrate to dozens of countries
around the world that we're a reliable partner, but in both
COVID and in hunger relief we are missing that moment as of
right now.
We just delivered a $40 billion supplemental, most of which
is dedicated to Ukraine directly or indirectly.
If you would just speak for a moment to how much of that is
being delivered through partnerships with local organizations
in Ukraine, how much are you constrained and how much are you
able to deliver sort of flexible, adaptable responses,
particularly in an environment like Ukraine where there's lots
of potential partners on the ground, and what mechanisms are in
place in terms of auditing and tracking to ensure that aid to
Ukraine is being spent effectively?
Ms. Power. Thank you. Well, you'll forgive me if I add my
voice to the voices paying tribute to Senator Leahy and Senator
Rieser. The two of you are just synonymous with this Committee,
with the securing of resources for things that matter out in
the world for vulnerable people, just the ethic behind your
respective dedication is just--it's the stuff of legend, both
of you, and it's been really, really even moving to watch you
over the years--sorry--because I won't get to see them again in
this setting, but you just both, you care so much, you care so
much.
Senator Coons. As so clearly you do.
Ms. Power. Well, I do, but I also care about these guys.
To be very specific, and I will come and speak in my normal
mile-a-minute way when it comes to the substance of what you've
asked, Senator, but the legacy of the Leahy law, Senator, the
people will be vetting military units in a way they never would
have for the rest of time because of that law. It matters so
much.
People around the world, the ability to get assistance if
they have been injured because of unexploded ordnance or
landmines specifically, it's because you all cared, because you
invested the time, because you built the laws and the
structures and those are going to be here forevermore.
I think less, you know, sort of easy to conquertize the
number of NGOs that have received support, whether it's a
crack, you know, anti-corruption NGO or, you know, some local
media or people who are tracking civilian casualties, there's
so many non-governmental actors around the world who got
support because you all embedded support for those programs and
mobilized bipartisan support for it, and I really again credit
Senator Graham and other Republicans on the Committee for
supporting that over the years.
But what's so amazing is the lasting effect of that, its'
just the ripple effects because so many of the people who work
for and with or are trained by those NGOs go on to serve in
Parliament or to become heads of state and that legacy is going
to be something again that is felt for generations to come.
So sorry to get a little extra Irish on you there, Senator,
but it's extremely moving and there's no tribute that can
really do justice, I think, to your impact as Chairman, your
impact as a Senator, and that of Tim, who I don't know what I'm
going to do when I have no one to call at 3 in the morning, you
know, still working in his office, you know, other staff. Paul,
I'm going to have to be able to find you. We've got to keep
Rieser hours. But, anyway, very grateful to you.
Senator Leahy. Thank you.
Ms. Power. Thank you. Okay. On the substance, you put your
fingers, Mr. Chairman, on a challenge and we've got to get the
right balance here and the balance is between wanting to move
quickly, wanting to move with proper safeguards in place,
wanting to be able to scale, and so that leads you very quickly
to, for example, the very large contributions we've made to the
World Food Program, UNICEF, the International Organization of
Migration that's working a lot of the protection issues and
inside Ukraine and beyond, but we do also want to make sure
that the assistance we provide puts the country in a stronger
position in the medium and long term.
And so what we are seeking to do in the humanitarian domain
is diversify our partner base and that is likely to include
several consortia where we work through an international non-
governmental organization and the first of these consortia have
already been agreed upon with Mercy Corps and where they then
provide sub-grants to local organizations, Ukrainian
organizations that are going to be there for the test of time.
The first of those is about a $120 billion, so again not
comparable to what we're at the present funneling through World
Food Program, but even World Food Program and other UN
organizations are themselves working with local organizations
much more than they have traditionally in the theaters in which
they operate.
So that's on humanitarian. I think, though, to distinguish
the other significant assistance that has been provided, there
is a large sum for direct budget support, as you well know, and
that is because Ukrainian authorities own burn rate in terms of
keeping their State going, keeping their country going is about
$5 billion a month.
So we've already provided $500 million through the World
Bank, the World Bank Trust Fund. There will be an additional
$500 million passing through there and then with the
supplemental $7.5 billion on top of that. It's unclear exactly
what the vehicle is going to be for the second supplemental
direct budget support sum which is significant but likely the
World Bank or a mechanism like it and there you have the
progress reports, I think it's written into law that every 90
days the Secretary or I need to be reporting on how the
Ukrainians are spending that money.
The capacity to audit is, of course, there and will need to
be done vigilantly. The World Bank is used to operating in
environments like this, and then we have our developing
programming which is also going to be in part to strengthen
Ukrainian actors to do anti-corruption work so that they can
monitor our assistance.
So again I think across the board we have to be thinking in
the short term how do we meet the needs in the here and now,
but how do we leave Ukrainian civil society, the Ukrainian
Government, and the country stronger by virtue of the
assistance that's flowing in, not something that vacates when,
for example, an international organization departs which we
hope Ukraine is in a position to have that happen sooner rather
than later with the onset of eventual peace.
Senator Coons. It does seem, to your last comment there, it
does seem premature now to be talking about reconstruction, but
at the conference the Chairman and I were just at, there was
repeated talk by Swiss leaders about their hosting of a
conference later this summer, I think in Lugano, if I'm not
mistaken, to begin planning for rebuilding and reconstruction.
Virtually every European leader, head of state that we talked
to made some reference to the Marshall Plan which is, you know,
a generation where even two generations later still remember it
as a landmark investment by the United States in stability and
security.
What sort of planning is underway for reconstruction
hopefully after this war concludes successfully with victory,
and what role would USAID play in planning or executing that
reconstruction, and what kind of budget planning should we be
doing around the scale of the need for reconstruction?
Ms. Power. Thank you. First, let me say that USAID just in
the last week has been able to deploy our Mission Director back
in Kyiv at the newly-opened Embassy and why do I mention that
in the context of your question? Because it's going to be
incredibly important as the Ukrainians transition from
humanitarian emergency to development, which will include
reconstruction but also reconstruction will happen alongside
development, that we have a presence there to be working hand-
in-glove with the Ukrainians and so we have our local staff, of
course, our Ukrainian staff, many of whom never left Ukraine,
but those who left Kyiv, many have returned, but that presence
is going to be a very important piece of thinking through what
the appropriate structure for the U.S. Government is going to
be as it relates to the massive reconstruction task ahead.
Second, this is going to be Ukrainian-led, Ukrainian-
scoped, and right now USAID's role both in presence and
virtually has been to support the Ukrainian Prime Minister's
Office and the variety of Ministries that have themselves been
tasked to develop reconstruction plans alongside their current
programming plans.
So, for example, I spoke a couple weeks ago to the Health
Minister who is simultaneously dealing with the fact that
hundreds of health facilities have either been destroyed or
damaged and how do you provide medical care in such
circumstances. How do you now train your physicians in trauma
and your psychologists and psychiatrists in, you know, PTSD
associated with conflict, and so the real-time medical and
psychological, psychosocial needs and then also developing a
plan to be able to present to donors about what the
reconstruction of those medical facilities and how do you, to
coin a phrase, build back better, you know, how can the medical
facilities brought back online, you know, take advantage of
advances in medicine and in energy efficiency and everything.
So each of the Ministries is itself embarked upon that
process and our mission right now is to support them and to
scope.
I think the third point I'd make is just the centrality of
the international financial institutions because, you know, I
don't think USAID would be budgeted, you know, to manage what
could be eventually a trillion dollar reconstruction task, but
what you'll have are the European Bank for Reconstruction
Development has already announced its intention, I think, to
lead on this and the World Bank and other international
financial institutions, of course,----
Senator Coons. I'm almost out of time. Before I yield to
the Full Committee Chairman, if I might, and, by the way, on
that last point, the IMF, the Head of the IMF and I spoke
repeatedly about SDRs and their potential as a way to help
rebuild the financial capabilities of the Ukrainian state.
Senator Graham and I are continuing to work to get through
the Foreign Relations Committee an authorizing bill, the
Democracy in the 21st Century Act, that creates a framework and
authorizes new resources to counter authoritarian tactics,
particularly disinformation, election interference, digital
authoritarianism.
Have you had any chance to review that? Do you have any
input for me on that and its potential constructive role in
modernizing the democracy toolkit for AID?
Ms. Power. Thank you. First of all, I think that the
President's Democracy Summit and the initiatives that President
Biden rolled out in December, the summit that is to be followed
a year hence with a second summit so we can drive action in
between, I think a lot of the ideas that you saw rolled out
there again grew out of the collaboration that I referred to
earlier where our teams were in touch trying to take a fresh
look at the Democracy Promotion Portfolio that, you know, had
adapted over time here and there but maybe wasn't as fit for
purpose as IO think we need right now and so I think that's
reflected both in your bill, in the emphasis on everything from
election security and the fight against disinformation and the
importance of having open digital infrastructure to the
emphasis on corruption programming, anti-corruption
programming, which is the Achilles heel of the undemocratic
forces for sure globally.
You will see reflected in our budget sort of in parallel I
think to your bill requests for stand-alone resources for anti-
corruption programming which I think again is a central pillar
of this effort.
But, you know, again, the democracy promotion community,
you know, the efforts that we have made, I think, definitely
need to pivot and recognize the gravity and the modern nature
of the threats to democracy, and I think that's what your bill
attempts to do. That's what the President's Democratic Renewal
Initiative does, as well.
Senator Coons. Thank you. I look forward to working with
you more closely on that.
My understanding is I'm going to depart to vote. The
Ranking Member will return. Staff tells me that Senator Durbin
will act as the Chair in my brief absence and is going to
question next. Is that our understanding?
Senator Durbin. Sure. Why not?
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. Welcome. I'm concerned about Haiti. We've
spoken about it before. I don't know if you've had time to read
that lengthy series in the New York Times about the legacy of
death and ransom and the treatment of the West in Haiti, but
it's a heartbreaking history of the country which tried to
emerge out of slavery and still is burdened by it.
It appears that developing a functioning government in that
country is a challenge. How do you see it?
Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator, and thanks for always caring
about Haiti, and it does feel like the world's attention kind
of flows in when there's some big event, like an earthquake or
the recent case of the assassination of the President.
USAID is there day-in/day-out, but I have to say that the
political stalemate coupled with the spiraling violence,
kidnappings, the gains that the gangs have made has made it
increasingly difficult for us to do our work. I think we still
have partners who are out and about who are willing every day
to brave those risks, whether in the health space, in
education, or in, you know, attempting to do youth programming,
to attract people so that they aren't drawn to gangs, but it is
increasingly challenging.
I think with an emphasis on security as foundational for
development with our State Department colleagues increasing
their support for the Haitian National Police, we are trying to
help young people with new citizen security programming. You'll
see that reflected I think in our--I think it's a $245 million
budget request for USAID-managed resources in Haiti, and trying
to apply lessons in the violence reduction space from Central
American countries and elsewhere in the Caribbean to Haiti.
I think the biggest challenge, as you know, on the
political front is how can a broad and inclusive dialogue
actually give rise to elections that are deemed broadly free
and fair and there again the political process does not seem to
be advancing in the way that we seek.
Senator Durbin. I say it in the most complimentary terms,
but NGO assistance in that country seems like a free-for-all.
There doesn't seem to be any governmental coordination,
country-wide coordination. Tell me I'm wrong.
Ms. Power. Well, I think the development gains in Haiti are
significant, for example, in the health space. So, you know,
think of Paul Farmer and Partners in Health, right. That's an
NGO. That is an incredibly effective investment in resources
for just every individual who is touched by being provided with
quality health care but also the investments made in training,
you know, of Haitian medical students and physicians so they go
on to provide support elsewhere.
So, you know, I think that the challenge is that whether
it's an NGO or an international organization, like a UN partner
and they're, of course, very active in Haiti, as well, having
drawn down the large peacekeeping presence that you and I know
well from a decade ago, if you don't have political leadership
willing to come together to forge compromise, to get the
country back in a cycle in which people get to hold their
leaders accountable at the ballot box and can't get a grip on
the security situation in part because of rivalries among
politicians, you know, it's very, very challenging, but again I
think we're not asking for resources that are going to be, you
know, thrown into the wind. I think sector by sector, we are
showing a return on the investment in the socioeconomic realm
but meanwhile again these broader structural dynamics have to
be addressed by the leadership.
Senator Durbin. Are you familiar with Philippine Senator
Leila de Lima?
Ms. Power. I am. I wrote something about her in Time
Magazine. She was one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential
People a few years ago.
Senator Durbin. Been in prison 5 years. Duarte's' vengeance
against her politically, now a new regime on the way. Is there
anything more we can be doing to help her?
Ms. Power. Well, I hesitate to give you advice on political
prisoners, Senator, since you and your team have gotten, you
know, innumerable people out of jail just by your
relentlessness.
I think with the new government that itself, you know,
isn't/wasn't invested in the prior decision to arrest Madam de
Lima. You know, it seems like a very good occasion to make a
diplomatic push and I think the ones that are the most
effective are Executive and Legislative Branches together
operating in unison. So we can follow up on that.
Senator Durbin. Can I close by telling you that I succeeded
a man you knew, Paul Simon, and he made it clear throughout his
life and his political life he didn't want anything named after
him. He thought that was just an exercise in vanity and so the
only thing I could think to do in his name was Water for the
World, Water for the Poor, and we have, we think, through USAID
and the leadership under many Presidents since he's been gone
really established not only water but sanitation in some of the
areas of the world that desperately needed it the most.
USAID has been a fabulous partner in that effort. I thank
you for that.
I also say there's a little project that is emanating from
a town that I'm honored to present called Chicago providing
bicycles to Africa, mobility opportunities that change,
transform lives, and sometimes the little things are the big
things, water, sanitation, basic mobility. It just gives people
a chance.
USAID is the agency I look to when I think of those ideas.
So thank you for your cooperation in that.
Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator, and just know that the Water
for the World Act and our Water Strategy, all of that has to be
tapped now in light of the food crisis gripping much of Africa,
many parts of the world, and Feed the Future and the next
incarnation of that, you know, integrates water policy, water
management into USAID programming.
So there's dedicated water and sanitation programming and
then there's the integration, I think, of the spirit of Paul
Simon and that piece of law into a lot of our other
programming.
Senator Durbin. Thanks.
Ms. Power. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. Pat.
Senator Leahy. Thank you very much, and again,
Administrator, I thank you for the kind words and also the kind
words for my boss, Tim Rieser.
As you've probably often heard me say, we Senators are
merely constitutional impediments to the staff. They do all the
work.
Senator Durbin mentioned the Haiti article. I know as I
read that article I was just taken with one--I mean, you know
this as somebody who's written such definitive things that the
amount of work that went into going back through these almost
indecipherable paper records of banks and others that didn't
exist and yet they did and they found them. It's amazing the
complicity of the French Government and the U.S. Government.
I've been there to Haiti a number of times. Even my wife
Marcelle's a medical-surgical nurse, she's gone into surgeries
and other hospitals and talked with the people and in French, I
might say, but I also looked at the last earthquake and went
down there. We used the Leahy War Victims Fund because of the
number of amputations that had to happen so that you could then
give an artificial limb to a young boy who looked so much like
one of our grandchildren so he could walk again.
I saw what our people did and tried to help, but, you know,
the others came from around the world to help. I'll never
forget the orthopedic surgeon came at his own expense from
Brussels and he was going to come there for a month, it had
been now several months, and he'd been helping and I was
speaking with him and I told him in French how much I
appreciated what he did. I'll never forget, he turned to me and
just grabbed my arms, he says, ``Senator, for the children, for
the children, for the children.''
I mean, that's the whole thing. I know people like Sean
Penn who came down there as a volunteer and getting people
together and cleaning up things. I did see others in the
country, aid groups concerned about what kind of an issue being
there, they have to get around it. I was more concerned of what
they were doing to help.
But since then I've seen with all the work that AID and
everybody else that I just see this getting worse and worse,
the assassination of the last president obviously and now the
bribes and everything else to help people. It just is so awful
to see that, but you also see others around the world and now
we look at COVID. It wasn't very long ago, nobody knew what
COVID was. Now it's killed more than a million Americans, 15
million more around the world, going to infect another 700,000
Americans.
A few months ago almost no one believed that Russia would
seek to re-establish control over the country of Ukraine, 44
million people. They've decimated whole cities, bombed
hospitals and schools, markets, machine-gunned families walking
down the street.
Then you have drought and other conflicts in Africa and
none of these articles talk about the fact that USAID has to
respond to almost every one of these because they do have
direct consequences on not only the people there but the
Americans there.
The President has asked for a 6 percent increase. That's
billions of dollars short of what Senators of both parties are
going to request from this subcommittee. I mention that because
I've been urging all the subcommittee Chairs and I know Senator
Coons works as hard as anybody to try to get the bills
together.
I'm hoping people will move quickly to pass all our
appropriations bills. You're not helped by a continuing
resolution. No other part of government is.
So let me just mention a couple things that you have to do
here and there where you're working, prevent famine, stop COVID
from spreading, prepare for the next pandemic, create
opportunities for Central Americans so they don't become
migrants, help countries cope with climate change.So, you know,
you've got a full day's work there on those, but do you have
enough resources? Do you need more resources? Do you have the
kind of partners you need in foreign governments? I mean, how
do you deal with this?
Ms. Power. Thank you. There's a lot there. The only thing
worse than having to deal with that set of converging crises is
to imagine doing so without you, Senator, and without Tim
Rieser here to partner with. So I will say that's an additional
compounding factor here in this perfect storm.
I guess I'd just say one thing. First, your point at the
end about partners, do you have partners, I think that is
critical. You know, we view development, we have to view it as
three legs on the stool. This is the security piece, this is
the security of citizens. We were just talking about Haiti and
the impossibility for so many Haitians even to get from one
side of town to the next or even to get to school for fear of
kidnapping, even our own staff at the Embassy, you know, just
gripped with this physical anxiety, and so baseline countries
need to have security.
The Ukrainian people lack it because Putin's decided to
wreak havoc on them and their lives.
Then there's the economic development piece which, you
know, is where that's USAID's wheelhouse. You know, how do we
spur economic growth? How do we provide loan guarantees to
small- and medium-sized entrepreneurs? How do we provide micro
finance to women, you know, which can completely transform
communities and families?
But the economic and the security piece and then the third
piece is governance and the Rule of Law and respect for human
rights and accountability and honestly the lapse over these
last years in so many places in this third domain, as well, you
know, the economics hit by COVID, hit by climate disasters and
so forth, security, we see more and more State weakness, more
and more State fragility.
Thanks to you all for the Global Fragility Act and the
resources around conflict prevention, but this is why the
emphasis on democracy and governance is so important, too,
because we need to have partners with whom we can work, and
we've seen unfortunately in countries like El Salvador and
Guatemala where we're doing really important programming in the
communities to reduce violence, to provide support for people
who suffer gender-based violence, to try to spur economic
growth even against the backdrop of a pandemic, but it's really
challenging when we go to the private sector and want to draw
investment to those countries and are reminded about, you know,
how the government has, you know, appointed an attorney general
that herself has shut down investigation, prosecution of
corruption cases, taken away the security details of judges
that are investigating really sensitive cases.
I mean, that makes it very challenging and so I just think
for you as a Committee and for us as an agency to somehow be
getting the right balance between our investments in economics,
our investments in crime reduction and physical security, and
other agencies do that in great measure, and then governance
and the Rule of Law and to note that it's no coincidence that a
less democratic world is a less stable world and that's what
we're dealing with now.
Senator Leahy. Let me give one example of a conundrum and I
don't know what the answer is. After the Vietnam War, we kept
basically a trade embargo against Vietnam for 20 years. Two of
our good friends, John Kerry and John McCain, urged us to move
forward and I applaud President George H.W. Bush who worked
with them and we brought the Leahy War Victims Fund there and a
lot of other parts of government fully opened up and, as you
know, Vietnam today is a lot different than it was a generation
ago.
Go to the Fulbright School and ask a sophomore, a young
woman who, when she was 10 years old, did not speak English and
was learning it through our educational programs. I asked her a
question. She said, well, when you stop to think about it, that
would be indicative of, and off we went.
You know, but now we've frozen billions of dollars for many
good reasons in Afghanistan but the economy is collapsing
there. Famine's a possibility. Contrary to what the Taliban
says, girls aren't allowed to go to school I think past the
fifth or sixth grade, I believe.
I mean, what can we do with some of that frozen money to
help stop famine and help improve the situation for women and
girls and not just have it go in the hands of the Taliban or is
there any way?
Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator. I think our emphasis so far
has been very much on flood the zone with humanitarian
assistance and, you know, could really still be and certainly
starting about 6 months ago looked as though it really may well
become the biggest humanitarian crisis of our time.
The UN Appeal for Afghanistan was the largest for any
country in the entire history of UN appeals which speaks to the
level of need. So we have contributed half a billion dollars
since the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban. I was heartened
because we really need other donors to step up and for us to be
able to leverage our funding to get other donors to step up.
There was a March Donors Conference where there were pledges of
2.4 billion and that'll go to organizations, like the World
Food Program and others, who are meeting immediate acute food
needs.
But at the same time, we are managing to do some
development work. Again, the work that we do cannot benefit the
Taliban. So we've needed to come up with work-arounds. I think
we've been in close consultation with you and your teams about
them and so, you know, our budget request is coming to you now
requesting, I think, $71 million in agricultural funding that
we think we can distribute to farmers, including getting seeds
and inputs to them to deal with this particularly challenging
time accessing fertilizer and so forth, $81 million in economic
growth where it's again those entrepreneurs who are out and
about, and then something we call have an interest in $61
million in health and continuing vaccination drives and other
health programming, you know, inside Afghanistan.
But my bigger sort of response beyond what we as a
government are doing, what we can get other donors to do, given
the core point that the Taliban, you know, tragically is in
charge of the country, is that the economy is in free-fall, you
know. It is people in charge who don't know how to manage the
economy and the reserves, some portion of them, as you know,
have been set aside for the people of Afghanistan. The State
Department and Treasury Department are in discussions about how
the Central Bank of Afghanistan can be strengthened but also
how it can be ensured that it is independent of the Taliban
because fundamentally what the country needs is markets. It
needs liquidity. It needs those reserves to be accessed but it
just needs a functioning economy or we will be in whack-a-mole,
you know, the sort of stopgap humanitarian business and there's
no amount of humanitarian assistance that is going to be able
to meet the needs indefinitely of a people who are that
vulnerable and an economy that is that broken.
Senator Leahy. And needs to allow all their young people to
have an education, men and women.
I have a vote. I'm going to leave and submit other
questions for the record, if I might, but again I appreciate
your kind comments and the very kind comments of Senator Coons
and Senator Graham.
Senator Coons. Well deserved. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much.
So let's just take a quick trip around the world. There are
27 nations in the European Union. There are 30 countries in
NATO. I'm not asking for this today, but on my side, I want to
make sure that the Republican Party is out there leading,
working with other nations to build up systems to keep all of
us safe, keep people fed that need to be fed and with better
health care so that countries don't collapse and we wind up
having to pay the price of that collapse.
You have counterparts in virtually every one of those
nations, is that correct?
Ms. Power. The substantial donors specifically.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Ms. Power. Foreign ministers often take the task.
Senator Graham. Can you do me a favor? You don't have to do
it today, but give me some indication of what other countries
are doing in comparison to us because when David Beasley from
the World Food Program was here, he said that Saudi Arabia had
given them like $11 million and the UAE was zero. So that stood
out to me.
I try to tell the taxpayers back home that you pay now, you
pay later in these areas. Let's get in on the ground, shape
events, rather than being overwhelmed by them, but there's also
a legitimate concern by all Americans that are we doing this by
ourselves. So we've got to make the case that other nations are
helping and when they're not, we got to make them help. Does
that make sense to you?
Ms. Power. It does.
Senator Graham. Okay. All right. So we'll go to work on
that, Mr. Chairman, and see if we can come up with some dynamic
of how parts of the developed democracy world is doing compared
to us.
We did a push for a global fund for food security. Does
that make sense to you?
Ms. Power. I think more resources for food security make
sense. We should talk about the modalities, just particularly
given some, I think, important positive developments that align
with your first question/comment, like the World Bank setting
up a $30 billion Resilience and Solidarity Fund, the modalities
in which we're still digging into to understand how that's
going to be used.
So something that coordinates bilateral donor assistance,
the multilateral development banks, both regional and global,
like the World Bank, could be very important.
Thank you.
Senator Graham. Okay. Well, I want to be helpful there. I
want to let the taxpayer know that we're pushing other
countries to do more when they can do more and should do more,
and we'll say thank you to those who are doing their part and
then some.
We sent a letter to you 4 months ago, myself and Senator
Risch, regarding USAID's efforts to hunt for and research novel
viruses, including in China. We haven't gotten a response. Can
you please answer our letter?
Ms. Power. Yes.
Senator Graham. Okay. Good. Now the bottom line for me
about Afghanistan is can you think of a scenario of where we
help the Central Bank of Afghanistan without the Taliban being
benefitted?
Ms. Power. Senator, right now I certainly see grounds for
skepticism, given that the Central Bank of Afghanistan is run
by a Taliban Minister,----
Senator Graham. Right.
Ms. Power [continuing]. But at the same time with the
country's economy unraveling, with the Central Bank for nay
country----
Senator Graham. Was that a predictable consequence of our
withdrawal?
Ms. Power. Was what a predictable consequence?
Senator Graham. That the country would fall apart under
Taliban control.
Ms. Power. Well, I think that there were views that have
been talked about up here that the Afghan forces would be able
to withstand----
Senator Graham. We have a list of the pluses and minuses.
One of the minuses had to be that the Taliban get in charge and
the country would go to hell in a handcart.
Ms. Power. I think I can't speak for the President here
today, but I think,----
Senator Graham. I mean,----
Ms. Power [continuing]. You know,----
Senator Graham [continuing]. From your lane, were you
worried about that if we----
Ms. Power. I think all of us who care about the Afghan
people, of course, were worried about the consequences that
would ensue, you know, with any----
Senator Graham. Are you surprised the Taliban are not
letting girls go to school in a robust way?
Ms. Power. Well, let me just say that am I surprised
compared to what I thought of the Taliban before they took
power? Of course not. That's their world view. That's their
ideology. They made no secret of that. Am I surprised? I'm not
at all surprised when they break their word, but they had in
fact committed to work with UNICEF and other international
actors to allow donors to bypass the Education Ministry to be
able to support girls to be able to be in school and so, as you
know, they went back on a commitment that they had made and
that we thought we were going to be able to actually continue--
--
Senator Graham. So here's the question.
Ms. Power [continuing]. To support girls in school.
Senator Graham. Given their history, I'm not surprised and
I share your concern about the Afghan people. They're living in
hell. So if you can find a way to convince me of how we can get
outside organizations effectively working in Afghanistan to
keep people from starving, I'd be willing to help.
Finally, when we look at what's on the horizon through the
end of this year going into the next, I hate to be a Debby
downer here, but 40 countries rely upon to 50 percent of the
grain supply that comes from Ukraine and most of them are in
developing world. I don't see the war in Ukraine ending any
time soon. Famines have hit Africa in unprecedented levels. Are
we ready for this?
We've had a supplemental, but how do we deal with this?
What's your advice to this Committee because everybody doesn't
want to spend any more money than we have to, but I just don't
see a way out of dealing with this, Mr. Chairman, without
putting some resources in the pipeline.
I would end with this. America's national security
interests are well served when there's a certain amount of
stability in the world, but we can't do it by ourselves. Will
you pledge to this Committee not only to give us sound advice
about how we can do more efficiently, save some money in other
places, but also how we can push the world to do their part?
What do you see for the next year?
Ms. Power. Well, let me say this, Senator. First, just
underscoring the premise of your question which is according to
the World Bank, 10 million people are thrust into poverty for
every 1 percent increase in food prices and food prices are
already up 34 percent but, you know, given Putin's blockade of
the grains and sunflower oil and other oils coming out of
Ukraine, you know, there's no guarantee that that has capped.
So I'm a former UN ambassador. I very much share the
predicate for your whole kind of line of inquiry which is we
need to leverage what we do to get other countries to do more.
I do think that the Europeans have stepped up both in terms
of, you know, opening their doors and hearts and homes and
resources to Ukrainians who've crossed into Europe.
Unfortunately, though, and I'm not sure how closely everybody
is tracking this, in many European budgetary processes the
resources to help Ukrainian refugees are coming out of overseas
development assistance, and so if you combine that with the
cuts that we've seen from the United Kingdom over the last year
and what we know are going to be the demands inside Ukraine
around reconstruction but also just around tending to the acute
needs of people who are still under siege and who've been
displaced, I worry about a shrinking pie and it places a
premium on getting new donors or donors or who have
contributed.
Saudi Arabia was contributing, was increasing steadily its
contributions every year to humanitarian assistance and then
that tapered off and now has dropped. They have made
substantial new announcements for Yemen which is very useful
because there's so many needs in so many places, and so, you
know, particular countries are going to help particular parts
of the world that they maybe feel a closer attachment to, but
what everyone needs to do is to do what you have done which is
to recognize that we're in an extra budgetary moment.
You know, if we're just, you know, taking money out of our
Food Security Program in order to, you know, support energy
diversification so that people can wean themselves off
dependence on Putin's energy, that's not going to work.
You know, if we are not supporting journalists who are
uncovering the crimes and corruption of their leaders, that's a
big loss because this is a moment in which when people feel the
needs that they are feeling, they have a right to democratic
accountability and we should be supporting that aspiration that
they have.
So, you know, everything is connected to everything else
and we can't--I know you alluded to this in your opening
comment, Senator. I wasn't sure exactly what you meant, but it
would be a huge missed opportunity for the United States to
give up also on the incredibly effective COVID-19 work that we
have been doing.
I mean, from your travels you must see the gratitude, the
fact that our vaccines and our PPE and our therapeutics and
tests don't come with strings attached. You know, they're not
in exchange for, you know, some country doing this back or
taking on some debt to us. You know, these are donations. These
come out of generosity and compassion and self-interests of the
American people. People understand that connection.
But, you know, to emphasize food security and give up on
COVID, that can't be an option, right, given that the food
security crisis predated Russia's invasion of Ukraine in part
because of what COVID has done to supply chains around the
world.
Senator Graham. Just one quick question. I got to go.
What's the vaccination rate in Africa? Do you know?
Ms. Power. Excuse me. It's around 17 percent.
Senator Graham. Yes. So we all agree that it's low, but I
don't see it changing much for a variety of factors.
One thing that people on our side of the aisle think about,
Mr. Chairman, is therapeutics, is to keep people out of
hospital, get them well as quick as possible. I hope that this
combination that we're talking about for COVID would look at
therapeutics.
Senator Coons. If I could follow up on that, Madam
Administrator, before my colleague leaves, in terms of the
timing of additional funding around COVID, both for
therapeutics and for finishing the delivery of vaccines we've
already produced, already been delivered, what's the difference
if there's an additional several billion dollars for COVID
relief for therapeutics and for vaccines? What's the difference
between that happening in June versus September versus
December?
Ms. Power. Well, Senator Graham, I know you have to go, but
I hear you on the low vaccination rates, but I don't agree that
we can afford to embrace a fatalism around the ability to
dramatically lower infection, hospitalization, and death rates,
and I actually think we started this initiative called Global
VAX with your support in December which was aiming to put shots
in arms, not just, you know, COVAX was delivering the vaccines
that the American people donated generously.
You know, we've committed 1.2 billion vaccines in total and
gotten 500 million out there, but it turned out that once the
vaccines began flowing the best-laid plans that many countries
had for vaccine delivery were overcome by Russian
disinformation, by cold chain challenges, by the absence of
accessibility for pop-up clinics, and so we have met those gaps
in the infrastructure in the countries that we've been able to
afford to provide delivery support to and that was the Global
VAX Initiative.
To your question, Senator Coons, I think right now we are
continuing the work in the 11 surge countries and we are seeing
the results. I mean, you're seeing vaccine rates of eligible
adults that were 18 percent in December in a country like Cote
d'Ivoire up to now 38 percent of eligible adults. So I could go
country by country where we are surging resources. It is
working.
To your question, we will not be able to expand that to
some of the countries that are in Africa that are under 10
percent and where we have begun to plan with those countries to
receive new resources to train health workers or to get them to
be able to work overtime or to have the pop-up clinics but nor
will we have the resources for what Senator Graham was talking
about which is therapeutics and an ability to try to wrestle to
tame COVID when you have an outbreak and we know there will be
more outbreaks going forward.
I think if we were to -- in a sense what you would see is
our vaccination drive ground to a halt----
Senator Coons. Right.
Ms. Power [continuing]. In around August of this year if
that $5 billion supplemental is not appropriated, you know, in
the next month or two.
Senator Coons. If we could, I'm expecting one more Senator
and then I have a 4:15 event at the White House I'm trying to
get to, just a few quick back and forth here if we could.
The DFC's role in supporting regional vaccine
manufacturing, do you see that as holding promise and being
something that we can possibly stand up and make more
effective?
You've got a request for 6.5 billion in 5 years in
mandatory spending for global pandemic preparedness. What are
the key elements of that?
And then to what extent do you think we can work together
to craft more flexible and sustainable public/private
partnerships around hunger, pandemics, and conservation?
I'm happy to repeat those. Let's go one at a time.
Ms. Power. Okay.
Senator Coons. The DFC has taken on a role in helping
finance regional vaccine manufacturing. So, for example, in
South Africa, there's another site there possibly developing in
Kenya. Are you supporting those efforts and do you think in the
long term boosting regional vaccine manufacturing is an
important investment?
Ms. Power. So in brief, we are working very closely with
the DFC on this. I think that we would like to see more
promising initiatives in the pipeline than we currently have. I
think the next investment--USAID provided a grant funding for
the Louis Pasteur Institute in Senegal which I think is
probably next up where the African Development Bank, the World
Bank, and now the DFC are also looking to come in.
So, you know, I think it's important, particularly just as
here attention has receded a little bit from COVID, that we
think of vaccine manufacturing structurally, not just about
this vaccine at this time but about the fact that 99 percent of
Africa's vaccines even prior to the pandemic came from outside
Africa and so there's a structural need.
Senator Coons. Any input you can briefly give me on the 6.5
billion 5 year mandatory? Like what would that accomplish? If I
think about the things that you could do with more funding and
that you won't be able to do if we don't get you full funding,
providing predictable global pandemic surveillance and
preparedness both for the public health workforce and for
sustained resources would strike me as near the top of that
list.
Ms. Power. Indeed. What it boils down to is do we want to
be in a position to detect viruses before they have become
pandemics. You know, every country has some form of health
infrastructure. Do we want it to be stronger or do we want it
to be more fragile? We want it to be stronger. We want lab
turnaround times to be shorter. We want communities to be
educated on animal-to-human transitions, zoonotic diseases and
the like.
We want the ability to take samples and move them into some
of our global health infrastructure at CDC or at NIH more
quickly so that countermeasures can be developed sooner.
So your question, it's a matter of taking the global health
security foundation that we have in I think 10 countries and
expanding it to an additional 25 and so we can show the good
that we have done in the countries we are operating in the
global health security space at this point and now we need to
spread it and scale it because viruses aren't looking to see
where we have a global health security program and where we
don't. Viruses are doing what viruses do and we have to prevent
them before they spread.
Senator Coons. I look forward to a more detailed briefing
as we go ahead with this year's process.
Public/private partnerships, something that a number of
colleagues have asked about, and I think you're getting a
bipartisan letter led by Senator Warner. They're looking for
flexibility in Ukraine in terms of delivering hunger relief.
World Central Kitchens has been brought up to me a number
of times as an example of the kind of partner that can flexibly
respond to a rapidly-evolving humanitarian disaster, one of the
things Senator Graham and I have talked about, and there was
some funding in the fiscal year 2022 bill for this, supporting
public/private partnerships for long-term conservation
management in Africa.
I wondered if you had any thoughts on the fiscal year 2023
request for sustainable landscapes and for planning around
wildlife conservation, wildlife trafficking, sustainable
landscapes, and conservation on the continent.
Ms. Power. Well, I can't resist saying something about
World Central Kitchen with whom even though USAID is not a
funder of World Central Kitchen and they have been wonderfully
and appropriately successful in fundraising from private
citizens and from companies and foundations, we work hand-in-
glove with them, but their ability to get to places, you know,
where even, you know, the UN hasn't been able to get is really,
really admirable and a tribute to their staff.
They also procure locally and so we are partnering with
them in terms of we have agricultural programs in Ukraine where
we're trying to get seeds to farmers so they don't miss the
planting season. Jose Andres is involved in discussions about
granaries and how those granaries can get emptied so that more
supplies can go in, and we've done just in brief a wonderful
partnership with them whereby Moldova's apples, because we all
want Moldova to succeed, tremendous leadership there in
fighting corruption and building the Rule of Law, but Moldova's
apples used to all go to Russia and Herzegovina now that's not
happening and so what did World Central Kitchen do? They agreed
to procure apples from Moldova, thereby helping the Moldova
apple industry in order to feed people in Ukraine.
So those kinds of--you know, it's not always about, you
know, what kind of money does USAID contribute, you know, or
leverage with the private sector, but sometimes it's just about
knowing what a private sector actor's comparative advantage is
in meeting a development or humanitarian challenge.
On conservation, I believe there's already a public/private
partnership of sorts underway between us, NASA, Unilever, and
Google as it relates to land use forecasting, you know, and
actually going to farmers with the data about how they can in
the long run be advantaged by alternative uses of farmland, but
I think there's much more we can do.
Senator Coons. There is. Give me 2 minutes on workforce and
the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit. This bill increases your
personnel. Something I've been concerned about is making sure
that both the State Department and USAID have the resources to
recruit, train, diversify, retain highly-qualified workforce.
How important is it that you get the additional 260 million
you're requesting for that purpose and what are the key
challenges around your workforce?
Ms. Power. It's critical. I mean, first of all, we have to
move faster as an agency given the swirl of events and the
urgency of all of these crises, and if you take a USAID
contracting officer, they are contracting roughly three or four
times the amount as a comparable DOD contracting officer
because of the paucity of contracting officers and the
attrition over time.
We have the largest Foreign Service class in sometime that
has just entered. It's also the most diverse class. So we're
building out those numbers, but you also, Senator, have
prioritized rightly, and one of your questions today spoke to
this, the importance of working with local organizations so
that our investments can be more sustainable over time.
The increases that we've requested in operating expenses, a
portion of which you granted in the 2022 Appropriations bill
but we need more of, are also used to be in a position to in a
sense mentor and help build capacity in local organizations so
that they can be partners to USAID.
So it's a front-end investment that will pay lasting
dividends over time.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
While Senator Shaheen comes forward, my last question to
you was about the African Leaders Summit. I had the chance to
meet with a number of African heads of state who had
participated in the one previous such summit we held now quite
a few years ago and to be blunt, they're somewhat skeptical.
I'd welcome any input you've got about what sorts of plans
are being made and what kind of role USAID might take and then,
frankly, I'm going to hand the gavel and the closing questions
to my friend and colleague from New Hampshire while I run to
the White House for an event.
Thank you for everything you do and for your leadership.
Senator Shaheen, when she answers this question, I'm going
to hand you the gavel and the closing statement to make about
keeping the record open so that I can flee to an event at the
White House.
Ms. Power. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
So I think what I will say is that food and fertilizer are
foremost on the minds of many, many African ministers right now
and certainly many African heads of state and so in the
supplemental, in addition to the $4.3 billion in emergency
humanitarian assistance, which, of course, some of which will
reach African acute and vulnerable communities in Africa, I
think looking also at the food security assistance and the
knock-on effects of the war in Ukraine and how we can utilize
some of that food security ESF money in order to help farmers,
you know, better target the fertilizer they have in order to
help them supplement the fertilizer that they have with, you
know, composts and manures they have, the Ethiopian Government
is now encouraging.
So the sort of how do we get through the crisis piece of
this but also how to diversify imports and exports, how to
build more resilience. We've been talking about resilience for
a long time in the climate space and we in the United States
are talking constantly about supply chain resilience and what
the pandemic has revealed about some of the downsides of
globalization, the vulnerabilities of globalization.
Well, this is another example of that in Africa and I think
what I hear from the leaders that I engage with is a desire for
more USAID and more DFC and other support in helping them
thicken their ability to withstand what we know are just going
to be a growing number of shocks that come at them and so I
think that's a huge challenge but a major opportunity and I
hear the skepticism for sure but there's also a lot of buyer's
remorse about the huge debt incurred by virtue of----
Senator Coons. China refuses to be transparent, refuses to
be partner with anything like the same--you know, a generation
ago dozens of African countries had significant debt burdens
relieved in no small part through the leadership of Bono and
the One Campaign and the Chinese are doing nothing like that
now, and I am convinced that many African countries would still
prefer to be close partners with the United States but they
view us as unreliable and I have heard some significant
pushback.
I think the vote at the UN about condemning Russia's
invasion of Ukraine in which a significant number of our
otherwise close partners on the continent either abstained or
voted the other way was meant as a wake-up call for us about
our lack of delivery on vaccines, on humanitarian relief.
This is no way to be critical of you or your agency but
just something I say to my colleagues quite a bit, that we have
a moment where we could make that right and where we could
deliver and where we could engage and I agree with you that
meeting human needs and agricultural development challenges is
a big part of it, but showing up, showing up robustly through
AID, DFC, MCC, and through other partners and, frankly, re-
engaging in UN entities in a way that contests that space are
absolutely critical.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you to my colleague
from New Hampshire. I look forward to continuing to work with
you in the year ahead.
Ms. Power. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding
the hearing open so I could get here. I was at another hearing
and thank you very much, Administrator Power, for being here
today and for the great work that you're doing and so many at
USAID are doing.
I really wanted to be here to talk with you a little bit
about the Western Balkans, a part of the world I know you know
very well, and I had a chance to visit the end of April with
Senators Murphy and Tillis. We were in Serbia, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and Kosovo, and I think it's fair to say that,
first of all, with respect to USAID, we saw particularly in
Bosnia some--heard about some really exciting and interesting
work that you're doing there that was very positive.
But I, for one, came away feeling like each of those
countries had gone backward in terms of their road towards
democracy and European immigration since the time I first
visited each of them, and I think we were all very concerned
about what was happening in Bosnia and the fact that I think
after the Dayton Accords, after U4 set up the mission in Bosnia
and Europe seemed to take some responsibility that there has
not been as much attention to the region as we really need.
Corruption is rampant. Their political structures are not
working in the way that at least the people we talked to in the
country felt were in the best interests of residents.
So talk, if you will, a little bit about what more we can
be doing there, what more can USAID do to address particularly
young people who are moving out of Bosnia and the out-migration
rate is significant there, and how do we help address the
challenges that they're facing?
Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator.
Obviously there's no silver bullet because certainly when
it comes to Bosnia, like you, President Biden, you know, has
been a champion of Bosnia's sovereignty, its territorial
integrity, its democracy for such a long time. I think, you
know, we have engaged, you know, intensively because of the
risk that really feels quite acute and, you know, I have been
traveling back to Bosnia every few years since I left in 1996
and, you know, every time I traveled back in the past I would
hear Dayton's broken, it's not working. You know, there was
always a sense of some kind of political paralysis, but on my
more recent trip which was a few months before yours, you know,
it was the first time that I encountered people who actually
had packed their bags in the event of a more dire scenario and
that is attributable, I think, to particularly the leader
Milorad Dodik but other political leaders putting their own
kind of power grab and their own economic ill-gotten gains
above the interests of not only young people but all of the
people of a country that has been through so much and has so
much to offer but the politicians are definitely getting in the
way.
And so I am sure you saw some of the same unbelievable
anti-corruption and environmental kind of crusaders and the
independent media that USAID has invested in so much over the
years and it's still, you know, speaking truth to power but
just power isn't listening in the way that it needs to be and
the idea that Dodik, you know, Republica Srpska could see fit
to secede from, you know, some of these very technical but very
important, you know, joint institutions at the time of a
pandemic, at the time of spiraling food and fuel prices, at the
time of even more severe out-migration from Republica Srpska
than any place else in Bosnia-Herzegovina, it's just missing
the point, right. It's about meeting the needs of the people
and giving them reason to stay and I'll get to what we're going
to do about it in a second, but, you know, I met with one. I
went and played or pretended to play volley ball. They played
and I pretended to play volley ball with a group of young
Serbian women and I said how many of you see a future for
yourselves here in the country and not one raised their hand
and these women, oh, my gosh, you know, they could do anything.
I mean, you could just tell their potential and their
dynamism and all they wanted to do is go take it elsewhere
because they just feel like again political leaders will never
do what is required to create the kind of economic
opportunities we need.
So we're, you know, still chugging away there and
continuing to try to invest. You and I talked about this a
little bit on the phone once, I think, but trying to support
more local government where, you know, just as in this country
we see sometimes partisanship and polarization give way at the
mayor or city council level.
So, too, some of that is happening in places like Tuzla and
so migrating our programming in a more decentralized way. I
think the tourism industry, you know, who knew that Bosnia and
Herzegovina was the mountain bike capital of the world, I
certainly didn't, but supporting actors on the ground to build
those mountain biking trails and again create jobs and looking
for tourist opportunities that cross lines.
I did a joint event with the Minister of Tourism from the
Federation and the Minister of Tourism from so-called Republica
of Srpska and, you know, it was amazing to imagine how many
more tourists would come to take advantage of all Bosnia has to
offer if there weren't the political gridlock, if people didn't
always have a sense that things might unravel. So that's there.
I will say that I thought you all showed great foresight in
both supplemental in taking also note of how vulnerable these
countries are to the current crisis, both because Putin is very
active----
Senator Shaheen. Right.
Ms. Power [continuing]. In the Western Balkans and we're
seeing a spike in disinformation and so we need to be in a
position to come back and, you know, again support independent
media for telling the truth or, you know, name the
disinformation as it's coming out as we're doing more and more
here in the United States.
So I think the nearly $31 million in the first supplemental
will go to programming across the Western Balkans. You know,
there are some encouraging developments in Bulgaria and in
Kosovo. You have leaders who are pushing an anti-corruption
agenda and looking for resources to help on procurement laws
and sort of structural reforms that could make also the
business climate more attractive which in turn could have
knock-on effects in stemming migration, but again the
psychological insecurity around unsettled grievances and
disputes, you know, fundamentally, the political leadership
across the region just has to act, you know, especially at a
time of crisis like this, with society and the people first in
mind, and again I think there are pockets where that is
happening and nothing like a crisis to focus the mind and
certainly you see in public opinion polling, you know, the
moment of opportunity now in light of Russia's aggression
because that has broken through, notwithstanding all of the
disinformation, but being there with these new resources to
help small- and medium-size enterprises, to help anti-
corruption reforms, to help STEM education as they seek to
build out their IT sectors, and I will say Kosovo's one
example, last point I make is there's also an opportunity as so
many private sector actors leave the Russian Federation where
they might have been able to set up shop.
We see every day, you know, the names of new companies who
are leaving. We at USAID are thinking through, okay, how do we
work, for example, with the leadership in Kosovo to try to
attract, you know, some of those investments. There just may be
opportunities now out of this otherwise horrific crisis that we
need to be in a position to move on.
So that's why the additional resources in the second
supplemental, as well, would be very helpful in that regard.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I really appreciate that.
I think it's also important to point out that when I first
visited the region in 2010, there was a real sense among the
countries that I visited at the time and that included the
three we just visited that there was a regional opportunity,
that the opportunity was to look to the EU, to NATO, to the
West, and to work together and Serbia and Croatia at the time
had a real opportunity to play a very positive role in what was
happening in Bosnia. That is still the case. The question is
will they take advantage of it? Will they recognize that it's
in all of their interests to look at what's important
regionally because it's important to their own countries, and,
you know, I think it's important and incumbent on us to do
everything we can to try and encourage that.
Ms. Power. Well, let me just say, Senator, last thing, that
I'm just so grateful because I do think that the attention
generally across our government to this region, you know, of
course, the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina was drawing
attention, the dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo, you know,
always generating episodic engagement, but, you know, if I look
at Eastern Europe as a whole, you know, USAID did shut down our
programming, you know, and shut down missions, you know, in
countries like Slovakia and elsewhere in Eastern Europe outside
the Western Balkans and I think this provides us all with an
occasion to sort of reset and to say okay, you know, there are
real vulnerabilities here. There are also real opportunities to
enlist, you know, more congressional delegations to travel to
the Western Balkans.
You know, again, USAID's role to try to broker with the
DASPR communities, as well, more interest in getting
engagement. I came back from Bosnia, I did a big DASPR call and
did the same with the Moldovan President looking at Eastern
Europe and again the shocks that predated the war in Ukraine
and now that are stemming from that.
So maybe, you know, as people's attention kind of drifted
from that period when this was such a centerpiece of American
foreign policy, maybe now is an occasion where we can really
concentrate the mind, concentrate resources, and I think you
alluded to European attention also, you know, flagging. I think
the risk of Ukraine is that everything is focused on Ukraine
and a very, very fragile situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina
could be neglected, but I think at the highest levels we've
been engaging our European counterparts.
So that any push we make is a joint push which always makes
it more effective.
Senator Shaheen. Good. Well, thank you. Thank you very much
for your testimony this afternoon.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Agency for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
No questions were submitted for the record.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen.The hearing record will remain open until 5
o'clock on Wednesday, June 1, for any written questions and the
hearing is now concluded. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:14 p.m., Wednesday, May 25, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
Blinken, Hon. Anthony, U.S. Department of State:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 7
Statement of................................................. 6
Coons, Senator Christopher A., U.S. Senator From Delaware,
Opening Statement of
Graham, Senator Lindsey, U.S. Senator From South Carolina:
Opening Statement of......................................... 3
Statement of................................................. 40
Leahy, Senator Patrick, U.S. Senator from Vermont, Opening
Statement of................................................... 4
Power, Samantha, Administrator, United States Agency for
International Development, Prepared Statement of............... 44
Ullom, General Thomas J., Acting Inspector, U.S. Agency for
International Development, Prepared Statement of............... 51
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
Page
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 38
Afghanistan-Related Work......................................... 12
Mission and Results.............................................. 8
Oversight Efforts................................................ 9
Resources........................................................ 13
__________
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Additional Committee Questions................................... 79
Addressing Irregular Migration from Central America.............. 49
Advancing:
Foreign Assistance Priorities Through Coordinated Efforts.... 55
Advancing Global Health Outcomes............................. 52
Bolstering Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance and Fighting
Corruption..................................................... 47
Concluding Observations About Continued Oversight................ 56
Controlling COVID-19 and Strengthening Global Health Leadership.. 46
Investing in our People and Building a Stronger Culture.......... 50
Leveraging Local Strengths for Sustainable Development........... 54
Managing Aid in Emerging and Protracted Crises................... 53
Responding to Humanitarian Crises in Places Like Ethiopia and
Afghanistan.................................................... 49
Restoring U.S. Climate Leadership................................ 48
Strengthening Core Management Functions.......................... 56
Supporting Community-Led Development............................. 50
[all]