[Senate Hearing 117-418]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-418
STATE DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION:
STRENGTHENING U.S. DIPLOMACY
FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 3, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-969 PDF WASHINGTON : 2022
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey, Chairman
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut MITT ROMNEY, Utah
TIM KAINE, Virginia ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon TODD YOUNG, Indiana
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii TED CRUZ, Texas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
Damian Murphy, Staff Director
Christopher M. Socha, Republican Staff Director
John Dutton, Chief Clerk
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator From New Jersey.............. 1
Risch, Hon. James E., U.S. Senator From Idaho.................... 3
McKeon, Hon. Brian, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and
Resources, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC............ 5
Prepared Statement........................................... 7
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator Robert Menendez........................................ 31
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator James E. Risch......................................... 44
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator
Benjamin L. Cardin............................................. 52
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator Jeanne Shaheen......................................... 52
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator Todd Young............................................. 54
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator Brian Schatz........................................... 55
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions Submitted by
Senator Chris Van Hollen....................................... 57
(iii)
STATE DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION:
STRENGTHENING U.S. DIPLOMACY
FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert
Menendez presiding.
Present: Senators Menendez [presiding], Coons, Murphy,
Kaine, Schatz, Van Hollen, Risch, Portman, Young, and Cruz.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
The Chairman. The Foreign Relations Committee will come to
order.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining us today. Before we
get to the regular work of the committee, I want to take a
moment to recognize an important day in history. It is a day
that we are blessed to have Senator Risch in our lives. It is
his birthday.
[Singing.]
The Chairman. Happy birthday, Mr. Ranking Member.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored you
would take time to do this. When you get to this many, it is
kind of like every other day, but I am blessed.
My successor governor has the same birthday I do and he--
however, he is much older than I am. He was born in 1942, and
he says ``Happy Birthday, my friend. Eighty really doesn't feel
that bad.'' I said, ``I will keep that in mind when and if I
get there. Seriously, looking back, neither one of us can
complain about the hand we were dealt,'' and he says, ``God's
got a crush on both of us. We are blessed.'' I said, ``Amen,''
and that is exactly where I am. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Happy birthday. Many
more healthy and happy ones.
It is refreshing to have the Department's engagement on
partnership as we look forward towards putting together this
year's State Department authorization bill.
As you know, last December, Congress passed the first State
authorization bill in nearly two decades. It was not an easy
task, and I want to commend the ranking member and his staff
for partnering in that process.
It was a truly bipartisan accomplishment supported by
nearly every member on the committee and I look forward to
replicating that this year.
The American people and our nation's foreign policy benefit
when we can work together. As we have discussed before, when
Secretary Blinken, you, and other senior officials took your
positions last year, you inherited a damaged, neglected, and
underfunded department.
Morale was low. The expertise needed for successful
effective diplomacy was leaving. The pipeline of new Foreign
Service officers was languishing. Critical bureaus had been
gutted. Our ability to promote and protect our interests and
our values had been decimated.
As recent world events have reminded us, we need our
diplomats and development professionals on the ground to
advance our national interests, to counter Russia and China, to
support threatened democracies, and to strengthen alliances.
These are not abstract priorities. They matter. When we
have a strong presence in place, the United States and the
world is better for it.
So I very much appreciate the efforts now underway to
address years of underinvestment, restoring and rebuilding
critical bureaus, creating new offices like the Cyber Bureau.
I want to commend the incredible public servants at
bringing the Department up-to-date to face the challenges of
the 21st century, even during the trying times of the global
pandemic.
In particular, I want to applaud the Department's push to
modernize and increase diversity, something I have long
advocated for.
From the shores of Alaska and New Jersey to the ranches of
Idaho and the border towns of Detroit, we must draw on
America's extraordinary range of backgrounds and perspectives
to advance our nation's interests abroad.
Naming the first ever Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer
was a good start. All Americans should have the opportunity to
serve and represent our country on the global stage. A
disability should not be an obstacle in accessing or working at
our embassies.
Adding as many as 200 paid internships beginning this fall
semester is another positive step that will remove barriers for
students who might not be able to afford working in an unpaid
position.
I also support the Department's forward-looking equity
plans including the announcement of a special representative
focused on racial equity. I support consular affairs officers
offering passports with inclusive gender markers and I support
diplomats engaging with underrepresented communities worldwide.
It is also vital that the Department modernize its
recruitment process to attract a talented top-notch workforce.
It is heartening that after years in which applications were
declining, now, under your leadership, the Department is now on
pace for the largest annual hiring of Foreign Service officers
in a decade.
It is not enough to simply recruit an incredible workforce.
We must also retain it with professional training, expanded
incentives, and modernizing the promotion process.
Today, I hope to hear from you on what additional
authorities or resources you think the Department needs to
continue these rebuilding and modernization efforts. I cannot
promise we will deliver on all your asks. There may be some for
which we have different views.
I know that the ranking member and I and all members of
this committee are committed to working with you in a
constructive manner as we put together and pass into law this
year's State Department authorization bill.
Let me close by saying the Department of State has come a
long way from its humble beginnings when Thomas Jefferson had a
staff of six and only two diplomatic posts.
When the Department of State lives up to its aspirations
and the aspirations of the American people, it sets the
standard other U.S. Government agencies and departments must
strive to meet as well.
This is a time for action to make sure that the Department
of State is aiming for excellence. The Administration has been
in office for over a year now. The clock is ticking. We cannot
wait any longer.
Congress and this committee are standing by to work with
you as a constructive partner. We want to see results, the
American people want results, and I believe the future of the
United States foreign policy depends on it.
As Russia's unprovoked war rages in Ukraine and the
Administration is requesting billions of dollars more in
assistance, which I support, but I also look forward to hearing
some of the details about our plan, going forward, including
plans to reopen our diplomatic posts there.
With that, let me turn to our distinguished ranking member,
Senator Risch, for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Deputy
Secretary McKeon, for being here today.
Like the chairman, I am proud of this committee's work to
see the first successful reauthorization of the State
Department in nearly two decades passed last December after
years of work. I think everyone is to be congratulated who
worked on this and pushed it forward.
I think it would be unfair not to recognize, clearly, the
leadership of the chairman of this committee in making this
happen. So congratulations, especially to you, Mr. Chairman.
While the reauthorization was a success, the bill
demonstrated the enormous amount of work to be done at the
State Department in terms of management and operations. That is
probably one of the most significant accomplishments of the
bill is to underscore these matters.
The Department and this committee must examine the needs of
21st century diplomacy and move the State Department forward to
advance our national interest while being effective stewards of
taxpayer dollars.
Before I get into that, I want to note that it is
imperative for the State Department to reopen our embassy in
Kyiv to better support Ukraine and send a strong message that
the U.S. Government stands with the Ukrainian people.
I am equally concerned with the status of the U.S. Embassy
in Moscow. As the Russian Government squeezes out U.S.
diplomats, those who remain have gone above and beyond to keep
the embassy up and running. They need our help.
I look forward to hearing what you are doing to better
support U.S. personnel in Moscow, realizing that this is an
open setting and we cannot talk about all the details of that.
When it comes to 21st century diplomacy, we must start with
the basics--getting our diplomats outside of embassy walls and
meeting with local populations, just like diplomats used to do.
We need a State Department that is firing on all cylinders
in order to compete with Chinese, Russian, and Iranian
adversaries who do not have the restrictions our diplomats do.
To begin addressing this issue, I have a bill recently
passed out of committee that updates how State investigates
security incidents abroad in order to rebalance the State
Department's risk calculus. I would appreciate your thoughts on
that legislation.
I am also currently working on an update of security
requirements for our embassies that make it easier for our
diplomats to access local populations while also saving U.S.
taxpayers millions of dollars.
When we make it easier for our diplomats to get out and
about, we must make sure we are doing our best to protect them.
Anomalous health incidents, or Havana syndrome, as it is known,
still needs to be addressed and quickly.
Who is attacking our personnel? How do we keep them safe?
How is the Department ensuring those officers who have
sustained long-term injuries are provided for and how are we
harmonizing care and access to treatment with interagency
partners?
Other departments are taking this issue very seriously. I
would appreciate you addressing these questions. The State
Department needs to do this.
Also, U.S. diplomats in China are spending time in fever
prisons. The treatment of our personnel is deeply disturbing
and I want to know what State is doing about that.
While the State Department has generally focused outward on
foreign audiences, the Department also provides services
directly to the American public. At the top of this list is
passports.
The huge backlog that have accumulated because of COVID has
made getting a passport take longer than it has in decades.
This is an essential government service and one that needs to
function efficiently.
Without passports, U.S. citizens cannot travel the world to
promote American business. Without visa services foreigners
cannot come to America and spend money.
The Idaho economy and, indeed, the economy of all states
benefits enormously from tourism and foreign seasonal workers,
and we need passport and visa systems functioning in order to
continue benefiting. I hope you can provide us with an update
on the Department's efforts to achieve that.
The enacted State Department authorization requires that
starting in January most special envoys will have to come
before this committee. I look forward to this new process of
greater congressional scrutiny of senior officials who are
handling substantive and sensitive portfolios.
After 18 years without an authorizing bill, the Department
has a lot of catching up to do. Last year's bill was a good
start and I look forward to continuing our work to get the
Department into shape to address 21st century threats.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, the floor is yours. Your full statement will
be included in the record. We would ask you to try to summarize
it in 5 minutes or so so we can have a discussion with you.
Please go ahead.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BRIAN MCKEON, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
STATE FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. McKeon. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator
Risch, Senator Coons. Nice to see you all. Thanks for having me
here today.
Mr. Chairman, I think you have a future in singing. Your
voice is actually quite good.
I welcome the opportunity to be here to talk about the
issues that you have set forth, including engaging on State
Department authorization, and we very much appreciate the
committee's work on legislation in the last year.
Let me begin by expressing our appreciation for your
continued support for equipping us to lead globally on behalf
of the American people.
We are especially grateful for the supplemental resources
and flexible authorities you have provided in response to
Moscow's brutal war against Ukraine and for the supplemental
funds for Afghanistan last year.
This partnership between the Administration and Congress
has been essential to a strong united American leadership.
When I came before this committee last October, it was the
day the Secretary announced his vision for modernizing American
diplomacy, an agenda that will shape the Department to meet the
challenges of the 21st century by delivering an even stronger,
more effective, more diverse, and more agile institution to
lead America's engagement in the world.
While the modernization agenda includes a range of cross-
cutting actions aimed at ensuring the Department can
effectively execute American foreign policy for the next
generation, the Secretary has identified three key priority
initiatives.
First, we will build the Department's capacity and
expertise to address 21st century missions. We want to ensure
that the Department is organized, resourced, and equipped with
the skills and abilities to effectively develop and execute
foreign policy in areas of China, climate, health security,
cyberspace, and emerging technologies, multilateral diplomacy
and economic tradecraft.
Launching the new Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy
last month was an important step in advancing this goal. We are
also in the final stages of reviewing how we are organized for
global health security in consultation with this committee and
other stakeholders.
Our modernization approach includes using new tools such as
AI and integrating data analytics to inform policy decisions.
Data scientists want to come work at the State Department,
believe it or not. We just had a job announcement for 50
positions and we closed it after a few days because we got 400
applications.
Second, we are working to modernize training and
professional development. We look to embrace a culture of
learning where employees are offered and expected to engage in
a wide range of opportunities to acquire new skills, expand
their experiences, and grow throughout their careers.
This entails expanding courses in emerging fields such as
cyber, tech, STEM, health, climate expertise, and increasing
accessibility, incentives, and accountability for employees to
train and develop.
With your help, we will expand our Foreign Service training
and development float and establish a civil service equivalent.
This was an objective first set out by Secretary Powell two
decades ago and we are making every effort to try to realize it
with your help.
The third initiative is to institutionalize a hybrid
workforce. We will ensure that the Department's workforce
transitions to a mission-first hybrid work environment that is
resilient, agile, secure, and inclusive.
As I noted, the launch of the Cyberspace Bureau is one
example how we are establishing new capabilities to address
emerging challenges. There are many others.
Thanks to your support, as the chairman mentioned, we will
expand our paid internships starting with a group of 200 this
fall and plan to make all internships paid in 2023. About 1,200
people will be paid when interning with us. This should be a
game changer to diversify our recruitment pool.
We have updated the performance management process used for
both the Foreign and Civil Service which includes manager
accountability and integration of DEIA principles. We have
established an employee retention unit to develop the first
Department-wide retention strategy to understand why people are
leaving but also to understand why people are staying.
We established a 500-person volunteer recruiter corps with
representation from all of our Departments' affinity groups. We
have offered Foreign Service specialists oral assessments
virtually.
We also conducted a review of the Foreign Service exam and,
as you may have seen, we recently announced it will expand the
focus on a candidate's education and experience and will end
the practice whereby the written exam is the sole gateway to
the rest of the process.
With regard to assignment restrictions, we have lifted now
nearly 70 percent of those and we will soon finalize the
revised appeals process for officers who have restrictions
sustained against them.
Many of these achievements were only possible with your
support and the support of the Appropriations Committee. So we
thank Senator Coons, who chairs the subcommittee.
We will continue to rely on your advice and partnership to
make further progress and this includes ensuring that we have
the resources and authorities to take care of our people and
fulfill our mission.
Lastly, I want to thank the committee for their work on
confirming our nominees. I know we have a lot of them. We have
moved about a hundred through the process in the last year,
many by bipartisan votes, but we still have a number of
nominees pending and it is critical to have our team on the
field, particularly as we respond to Russia's invasion of
Ukraine.
So we appreciate, Mr. Chairman, your prompt action to
schedule a hearing for Ambassador Brink, which I understand is
next week.
We ask for your continued support for the many nominations
that we have pending and I suspect we will be sending you more
over the coming weeks.
So with that, I will stop and look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McKeon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mr. Brian P. McKeon
Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, members of the Committee--
thank you for having me here today.
I welcome this opportunity to continue our discussion from last
fall, and to build on Secretary Blinken's testimony from last week.
I would like to express the Department's appreciation for your
continued support and for helping to equip us to lead globally on
behalf of the American people. We are especially grateful for the
supplemental resources and flexible authorities you have provided in
response to Moscow's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine, as well
as for the supplemental funds for Afghanistan last year. This
partnership between the Administration and Congress has been essential
to a strong, united American leadership.
When I testified before this committee last October, it was the day
that the Secretary announced his vision for Modernizing American
Diplomacy--an agenda that will shape the Department to be ready to meet
the challenges of the 21st Century by delivering an institution that is
even stronger, more effective, more diverse and more agile to lead
America's engagement in the world.
In a world defined by new threats, new competitors, and
extraordinary opportunities to advance the needs and aspirations of the
American people, the renewal of American diplomacy is vital and urgent.
The modernization agenda will strengthen the Department for the
challenges of this century, and is designed to align our work, our
resources, and our expertise with the issues that most directly and
consequentially affect Americans' lives, livelihoods and security.
While the modernization agenda includes a range of cross-cutting
actions aimed at ensuring the Department can effectively execute U.S.
foreign policy over the next generation, the Secretary has identified
three priority initiatives:
First, we want to build the Department's capacity and expertise to
address 21st century missions. We want to ensure the Department is
organized, resourced, and its workforce is equipped with the skills and
abilities to develop and execute U.S. foreign policy in the areas of
China, climate, health, cyberspace and emerging technologies,
multilateral diplomacy, and economic tradecraft.
The launch last month of the new Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital
Policy is an important step in advancing this goal. We are currently in
the final stages of a review on how we are organized for global health
security, and are consulting with this committee and other stakeholders
in Congress.
This reorientation to address these 21st century challenges
includes using new tools, such as Artificial Intelligence, and better
integrating data analytics to inform our policy decisions. We have an
eager community of data professionals ready to join us. Last month, we
advertised 50 new positions for data scientists, and closed the
announcement after a few days, when we received 400 applications.
Second, we are working to modernize training and professional
development. We will revitalize the Department's approach to training
and professional development to embrace a culture of learning where
employees are offered, and expected to engage in, a wide range of
opportunities to acquire new skills, expand their experiences, and grow
personally and professionally throughout their careers.
This entails expanding content offerings in emerging fields such as
cyber/tech, STEM, health, and climate expertise; and facilitating
increased accessibility, incentives, and accountability for employees
to train and develop.
And with your help, we will expand our foreign service training and
development float--and establish a civil service equivalent--to provide
the capacity for our workforce to take the time necessary to learn and
grow. This was an objective first set out by Secretary Powell two
decades ago; we are making every effort to realize it. We appreciate
congressional support for our FY22 staffing request, which enables us
to allocate an increase of 80 positions for professional development
and training this year. Our FY 2023 budget request seeks to expand on
that by adding 250 positions for this purpose.
The third initiative is to institutionalize a hybrid workforce. We
will ensure the Department of State workforce transitions to a mission-
first hybrid work environment that is resilient, agile, secure, and
inclusive. Enabled by modern technology, workplace functionality, and
updated workforce policies, Department employees will be equipped to
meet mission needs in the 21st century.
Underpinning these initiatives are foundational actions we will
undertake as part of the modernization agenda to build and retain a
diverse, dynamic, and entrepreneurial workforce; leverage new tools and
technologies to work more effectively and solve policy challenges;
shift our culture to lead, and become risk aware, not risk averse; and
foster initiative and innovation.
As I noted, the launch of the Cyberspace and Digital Policy Bureau
is one example of how we have started making progress on new
capabilities to address the challenges over the next several decades.
There are many other examples:
We established new Foreign Service climate diplomacy
positions in all geographic regions and key overseas posts.
We have developed a first of its kind ``Demographic
Baseline'' report and dashboard with detailed views of who we
are as an organization. We can now analyze the gender, race,
ethnicity, and disability status of our direct hire cohort--
approximately 24,500 employees--broken down by bureau, rank,
and employment type. We are making this dashboard available to
State's entire workforce.
We have updated the performance management process for both
foreign service and civil service, which include manager
accountability and integration of DEIA principles.
We are moving toward realizing the goal of paid internships
for all our interns. Thanks to the support of Congress, we will
start with a group of 200 interns this fall, and we plan to
expand the program to all State Department internships in
2023--that is, about 1200 people will get paid when interning
with us. This is a gamechanger for so many young Americans of
diverse backgrounds hoping to start a career in foreign
affairs.
We have established an employee Retention Unit, which will
review data and talk with the workforce to understand why
people stay and why they leave. This team will develop the
first Department-wide retention strategy.
We established a 500-person Volunteer Recruiter Corps with
representation from all our State Department affinity groups.
For the first time, we offered Foreign Service specialist
oral assessments virtually and requested FY22 funds to provide
a needs-based stipend for some in-person oral assessments. We
are also revising the Foreign Service exam process so that we
undertake a holistic review that expands the focus on a
candidate's education and experience, and ending the practice
whereby the written exam is the sole gateway to the rest of the
process.
We have lifted over 70 percent of the assignment
restrictions and will soon finalize a revised appeals process
for officers who still have such a restriction.
Many of these achievements were made possible only with your
support, and we will continue to rely on your advice and partnership to
make further progress on this agenda. That includes ensuring we have
the resources and authorities to take care of our people and carry out
our mission domestically and abroad.
The Department hopes to return to a regular process of
authorizations for the Department of State and we are currently
developing legislative proposals for consideration by the Congress.
Once finalized, we look forward to working with you to ensure the
Department has the authorities it needs to improve our operational
effectiveness and strengthen efforts to build capacity and foster
greater ties with our partners and allies.
Finally, I want to thank the Committee for its work to confirm
State Department nominees. Over the course of last year, you moved
nearly 100 nominees through the process, most of them by bipartisan
voice vote. It is critical to have our team on the field, particularly
as we respond to Russia's aggression in Ukraine. Unfortunately, we are
still not operating at full strength, and I want to ask for your
support in confirming the many nominees who are currently pending
consideration in the Committee.
Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We are fully
engaged in trying to pursue hearings and markups for all of the
nominees.
We will start a round of questions. Let me start off with
Secretary Blinken has noted that the State Department is
returning diplomats to Ukraine and beginning the process of
resuming operations at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, and we all
looking forward to the nominees' hearing.
How does the State Department intend to weigh the
imperatives of establishing a physical diplomatic presence in
Kyiv and mitigating risks to the safety and security of U.S.
personnel assigned there?
Mr. McKeon. Mr. Chairman, as you know, our diplomats
assigned at Embassy Kyiv have been working out of Poland for
the last couple of months. We have started day trips back into
western Poland into Lviv--Kristina Kvien, the charge
d'affaires, was there yesterday for several hours--and we are
planning to try to get back into Kyiv in the near future. Our
security professionals will have to go in and do an assessment
of our facilities and make a judgment about how we can mitigate
risk.
Obviously, the Russians can--even though they are not on
the ground threatening Kyiv they can still range the whole
country with missiles and aircraft as we saw last week. We will
have to take that into account, but the Secretary is determined
to get us back into Kyiv in the near future, and I understand
Undersecretary Bass is coming up to do a closed briefing for
Senator Cardin's subcommittee this afternoon.
The Chairman. Let me turn to the question of diversity. I
have long championed since my days in the House a diverse
workforce at the Department, which is why I commended last
year's appointment of the Department's first Chief Diversity
and Inclusion Officer, Ambassador Abercrombie-Winstanley.
I understand that the Department's diversity and inclusion
strategic plan as required by Executive Order 14035 was
completed in March. It still hasn't been released.
Given that the plan is critical for executing the Chief
Diversity Officer's work, including communicating new policies
and procedures to State's global workforce, when will the plan
be released and what steps are being taken to ensure that
everyone in the Department will be held accountable for the
goals of the plan?
Mr. McKeon. Mr. Chairman, we released internally a
preliminary draft of the plan back in the fall and invited
comments from across the workforce, and around that same time
the OMB or OPM--I forget which agency--issued executive branch
wide guidance on what they wanted to see in these plans.
So we had to take a look at that and update the draft plan
to conform with that and all the agency plans are sitting over
at the White House being reviewed. So we are waiting on their
action to release it.
The Chairman. So do we have any projected timeframe?
Mr. McKeon. I do not know the latest. I will check on it
when I get back to the Department.
The Chairman. I appreciate knowing that.
Mr. McKeon. I can get back to you.
[Editor's note.--The requested information referred to above
follows:]
We are pleased to announce that the Department's Diversity, Equity,
Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Strategic Plan will be released to
the public before the end of September and will be posted on our
website at state.gov/deia-strategy.
To ensure accountable implementation of the Plan, the Secretary's
Office of Diversity and Inclusion (S/ODI) is chairing an Implementation
Team comprised of the Department bureaus and offices that have a role
in implementing the goals and objectives laid out in the Plan. This
Implementation Team, which held its inaugural meeting in June, will
meet quarterly to ensure goals are being met.
We consider the Plan a living document, as it will be adjusted to
reflect new evidence, knowledge, and best practices to enhance DEIA
across the Agency.
The Chairman. Within this context, how are individuals
within the Department, particularly those in leadership
positions, going to be held accountable for the goals, which it
is great. Starts off with the top.
I tell this to the Business Roundtable and same for the
government--when leadership at the top makes it a priority and
people understand it is, then it--ultimately, the diversity
officer is a great action forward, but then there has to be
accountability, right, because otherwise it makes no
consequence. People have to know that this is part of their
evaluation, for example.
So any sense about that that you can share with us?
Mr. McKeon. I would say a couple of things. The Secretary
has made it clear this is everyone's job. It is not merely the
job of the senior leadership.
When I meet with ambassadors who have been confirmed and
are about to go out to post, which I try to meet with all of
them, I tick through a list of issues that are a priority for
the Secretary that they need to pay attention to, and this is
one of them.
As I mentioned, we have updated our promotion rules or
standards. So in the Foreign Service it is called the promotion
precepts, and we have issued updated precepts, which includes a
specific precept on what they have done on DEIA.
We have a Department-wide DEIA Council, which the Secretary
attends those meetings when we are--when he is in town and when
we have these meetings we usually have a couple of bureaus
present on best practices that they have been undertaking to
advance these objectives.
So it is--this is a mission for everyone in the Department
and we have got to make sure that everyone understands that.
What we have heard anecdotally is that the workforce
understands this is a priority from senior leadership. They are
not always hearing it further down. So we have some work to do
to make sure that middle managers understand this is part of
their job description.
The Chairman. I will look forward to that happening.
Finally, on April 26 of his year, the State Department
announced it would cease using the written Foreign Service
Officer test as a pass/fail gateway test and instead consider
each candidate's performance on the test among several factors
in the application process. This is one of those things that I
have always said has been an impediment to people. It is very
subjective that you cannot orally communicate.
What impact is this expected to have on tracking the
broader American population to work with the Department and
what has been the response to this news?
Mr. McKeon. As you said, Mr. Chairman, we will continue to
have the written test, but it will not be the gateway to the
rest of the process. Someone will take the test and then they
submit--they also submit a personal narrative statement, and
then we have what we call a qualification evaluations panel
that will look at the officer--the aspiring officer in toto,
looking at all of their background and qualifications and what
they--what their skill sets may be and then they would go on to
the oral test if they made it that far through this process.
We think, and some of the data show, that this may increase
the diversity of our entry classes. Some people do not take
tests well. Some people have the resources to take courses to
help them pass the written test.
We want to make sure that we are not screening out
qualified officers by just the written test. For my part, I
failed the Foreign Service exam in the 1980s. I came out okay.
So not everybody can pass the test.
The Chairman. All right. That is an interesting tidbit
that----
Senator Risch. Make a note of that.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. --you can become the--one of the chief
secretaries of the Department in that way.
All right. Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I missed it if you did--did you give us any timetable for
when you might be looking at trying to get back into Kyiv or,
particularly, starting the process?
Mr. McKeon. We are starting the process to look at it now,
Senator. The Secretary would like us to get in there this
month.
Senator Risch. That is a good goal, at least.
I spoke briefly about the issue in Beijing with our people
there and being in what they call the fever prisons there. What
can you tell us about that?
Mr. McKeon. Mr. Chairman, I am pretty sure we have not
allowed any officers to go into the so-called fever hospitals.
When officers come in from outside the United States they have
to quarantine and there are quarantine hotels, I believe, but
let me double check that fact.
We have objected to the possibility that people who are
already stationed in China, if they test positive, going into a
fever hospital.
There was a threat at one point a few months ago where an
officer might be separated from their child because the child
tested positive. So we have made that clear to the Government
of the People's Republic that that is not acceptable to us.
We are now on ordered departure status in Shanghai because
of the lockdown. A number of officers were having challenges
with that. So we have skinnied down substantially because of
that and it is something Ambassador Burns is watching very
closely.
I know Under Secretary Bass just talked to him about it
last night because you can see the reports of Beijing where
they are imposing more testing requirements right now.
Senator Risch. I have been informed that there have been
U.S. personnel that had been forced in the fever hospitals. You
might want to check on that, and if that is the case probably
ought to be revisited what is happening. So that is the
information I have. If yours----
Mr. McKeon. That was not my information, Senator, but I
will double check----
Senator Risch. I hope you will check on that for me. I
would appreciate that.
One of the issues that has been reoccurring with me for
some time is getting--I understand there is a level of risk
always in everything that is done. Obviously, you want to
reduce the risk as much as possible, but reducing it has really
impeded our people from getting out more than what, I think,
that they should and I have been complaining about this for
some time.
Is there any thought at all about revisiting the policies
in that regard?
Mr. McKeon. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for your work on
the accountability review forward process. It is definitely
something we are working on and Under Secretary Bass, before he
was confirmed, entered a temporary assignment where he looked
at this very issue with a retired diplomatic security officer.
I would say a couple things about it. One, we have, in
statute, some security standards that were put in place--I
confess, I worked on them in the late nineties after the East
Africa bombing--that imposed pretty rigid standards for our
facilities in terms of what we need from--setback from the
street and the size of the walls around the complex, et cetera.
We think we can relook at some of that because of the
advancements in technology where it can--maybe do not need as
much setback.
We have tried to encourage people and we have put out risk
principles that had been looked at last fall and we--in the
fall of 2020 by the last team and we revalidated them, and I
sent out a workforce message calling everyone's attention to
it.
What we are trying to do is make people risk aware and not
risk averse because this is a risky business that we are in.
That is not to say people should be gambling with people's
lives, but they should take smart risks. That is a cultural
change that we are going to have to keep working on, but we are
with you. We completely agree with what you said previously.
Senator Risch. Thanks. I appreciate that. Just to be clear,
I am not complaining at all about the review of the thickness
of the wall setbacks and that sort of thing. I think that is a
job for somebody who has clear expertise in that area.
What I am talking about more is the restrictions on
movement of personnel, and I can tell you that out there
amongst the community the belief is that we are under the most
restrictive regulations and constraints that there are for
diplomats in various countries, and I know there is a lot of
people that feel they could do better if they could have less
restriction in that regard.
Obviously, risk adversity is something that we are all
concerned with. On the other hand, there is also a job that has
got to be done. So I appreciate your thoughts in that----
Mr. McKeon. Yes, I completely agree, Senator Risch.
Obviously, the Accountability Review Board process was one of
the things hanging over people's heads as they calculate risk,
and other investigations that have occurred in the past tend to
make people a little more risk averse. So I appreciate your
encouraging us in this respect.
Senator Risch. Thank you. Thank you for your service.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Happy birthday to
Ranking Member Risch, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, for once
again gracing us with your musical talents. You, literally,
have the nicest voice in the entire Senate, and that you used
it today to celebrate the ranking member was one of those rare
moments of----
The Chairman. Senator Coons, I like to eat so I am not
giving up my day job.
[Laughter.]
Senator Coons. It bears repeating that your strong
bipartisan work to achieve the first time in, I think, two
decades reauthorization of the State Department is well worth
celebrating and I want you to hear my appreciation for how hard
you and your staff have worked.
I hope to contribute to it in a few small ways that I would
like to review, if I could, with you, briefly, Mr. Deputy
Secretary.
First, I introduced a bill with Senator Graham back in
December called the Democracy in the 21st Century Act. It
recognizes that in the digital age we may need to modernize
some of the tools that we fund for defending democracy.
It would establish funds with flexible terms and resources
for confronting emerging challenges to democracy through the
State Department, USAID, and the National Endowment for
Democracy with a particular focus on election integrity,
emerging technologies, and combating kleptocracy.
Do you think it would be helpful for this committee to take
up and pass that legislation in advance of the President's
Summit for Democracy at the end of this year?
Mr. McKeon. Without having read it, Senator Coons, I
hesitate to give you a full-throated endorsement, but we
welcome the conversation and we, certainly, welcome flexible
funds.
It has been 40 years since the National Endowment for
Democracy and Institutes were established. They have done a lot
of good, but it is certainly worth the conversation to see what
other tools we could use.
Senator Coons. This is a piece of legislation I reviewed
with both Secretary Albright, a blessed memory, and Senator
Sullivan, who has had a leadership role in the IRI. I hope you
will consider it and give us some prompt feedback. I think it
is well worth taking up and passing.
In 1948, Congress passed the Smith-Mundt Act and it is my
understanding that this outdated Cold War era law, along with
some of its subsequent amendments, has, at times, had a
chilling effect on the extent to which our career diplomats
feel comfortable or feel empowered to share domestically
information about the importance of foreign policy.
Foreign policy certainly impacts the American people from
public health in a global pandemic to trade issues to national
security issues.
Is State exploring any efforts to help ensure that our
diplomats are fully engaging with both foreign and domestic
audiences and do you think making some modernization revisions
to this Cold War era statute that restrains some domestic
public diplomacy efforts is worth undertaking?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, the complexity of this--of the Smith-
Mundt reforms became enhanced when USAID was merged into the
State Department in the late 1990s. We have the Under Secretary
of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, and the Public Affairs
Bureau certainly has a mandate to talk to the American people
and explain what we are doing.
We have always been guided by the Smith-Mundt restriction
in not using public diplomacy program dollars, which are aimed
at influencing foreign audiences, to communicate with American
people.
In the age of the internet, it is more challenging,
obviously, than it was when Smith-Mundt was written or even in
the late 1990s when the internet was not so common.
So we, certainly, encourage engagement with domestic
audiences, not just by the public affairs professionals, but by
senior leaders, but I am happy to take a look at what you are
proposing.
Senator Coons. I am, frankly, just trying to clear out what
I think is some outdated underbrush, that at least from
encounters with mid-level Foreign Service officers they have
understood to restrain them.
As the chairman mentioned, diversity is a critical and
important goal. I have had some folks recently connecting with
our HBCU about internship opportunities now that there are paid
internship opportunities at the State Department, and I just--I
think we can and should do more to actively encourage effective
outreach domestically.
Last, if I could, I worked hard to try and remove the
barrier to our rejoining UNESCO to get a UNESCO waiver in the
SFOPS bill this past year. My view is that we are ceding
leadership at the United Nations through a number of different
bodies to China.
The Israeli Government supports our returning to UNESCO
under certain conditions. Is this something that you think
would be an important part of our reengaging effectively with
the U.N. community?
Mr. McKeon. We do, Senator, and we support rejoining UNESCO
for the reasons you have stated. UNESCO is doing some work on
standard setting not just in education, but on things like AI,
and if we are not there the Chinese are going to be filling the
vacuum. So that is why we support rejoining.
If I could, on the diversity issue and recruiting, as you
may know, we have what we call diplomats in residence--
regionally focused recruiters around the country--and I believe
seven of them are either at HBCUs or Hispanic-serving
institutions.
I was just down at Florida International in late March,
which is the largest Hispanic-serving institution in the
country, to do an event and the Secretary recently did an event
at Howard University.
So we want to do more of these, but we are, certainly,
trying to get out there.
Mr. Chairman, if I could clean up my answer to Senator
Risch on the fever hospital. I had a misunderstanding.
The Chairman. Sure.
Mr. McKeon. As I said, nobody who is currently stationed in
China has gone into a fever hospital if they have tested
positive, but they have gone into them if they tested positive
when they had come from overseas. So my mistake, Senator.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. I
look forward to working with you on this bill.
The Chairman. Thank you, and let me thank Senator Coons,
who, as the chair of the Foreign Ops Subcommittee on
Appropriations, has worked with us on issues to maximize the
Department's--to the Department's benefit.
I also appreciate that things that are within the
authorization element we have worked together to try to
preserve the authorization versus the appropriating part. So I
just want to recognize that and I appreciate it.
I understand Senator Portman is with us virtually.
Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
having this hearing.
I understand, Mr. Deputy Secretary, that the State
Department is returning diplomats to Ukraine. Can you tell us
when that is going to happen and, specifically, when are they
going back to the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv?
As you know, 17 other countries have already announced
returns and most have personnel in place already, including the
EU, including France, and I wonder what our timing is.
Mr. McKeon. Yes, Senator. We have already returned to
western Ukraine with our diplomats assigned to Embassy Kyiv,
have gone into Lviv a couple of times on day trips, including
most recently yesterday.
We are doing the security assessment about returning to
Kyiv and we are hoping to get back there in the very near
future.
Senator Portman. Are you concerned that we are moving too
slow and losing a leadership position amongst other countries?
Again, 17 countries have already announced returns. Many are
already in Kyiv.
I know it is a dangerous environment, but what is your view
on our relatively slow return to Kyiv and the impact it is
having on the impression of the United States' leadership?
Mr. McKeon. I do not think it is having a negative effect
on our engagement with the government in Kyiv. Even when the
war started and for the last 2 months, our diplomats based in
Poland were in regular communications with Ukrainian Government
officials and, as you know, of course, the two--the Secretary
of State and Defense were there last weekend and the Speaker
was just there.
So I think the Ukrainian Government well understands our
commitment to their cause and we are committed to getting back
into Kyiv as soon as we can.
Senator Portman. Okay. I appreciate that. Having been in
Poland and met with Embassy Kyiv and also, of course, met with
them in Kyiv several times, I know they are eager to get back,
to say the least.
On this issue of the Global Engagement Center, as you know,
in last year's testimony, Secretary Blinken, with regard to the
budget, gave his commitment that he would follow through on
President Zelensky's request to set up a center for combating
disinformation in Ukraine in partnership with GEC.
He also stated that the appointment of a special
coordinator, which is the leader of the Global Engagement
Center, would happen quickly and was being reviewed.
I am concerned about two things. One is the fact that we
still do not have a leader of the Global Engagement Center at a
time when there is more disinformation than ever, particularly
related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and second, that
the funding request this year only asked for a $5 million
increase. Given the disinformation climate that we face today,
that seems to me to be inadequate.
Can you give us an update, first, on the efforts of the
Global Engagement Center in Ukraine? Are we coordinating with
them as they had requested, and then second, why have we still
not appointed a special coordinator for the Global Engagement
Center 2 years into the Administration?
Mr. McKeon. It hasn't been quite 2 years, but it feels like
it some days. I believe we have somebody identified and is in
vetting at the minute. The Acting Coordinator, Leah Bray, is
very capable, a retired military officer who I worked with in
my last government job at the Department of Defense.
We are engaged across the board in exposing disinformation
by the Kremlin and coordinating with not just Ukraine, but
other partner governments in the region.
Senator Portman. So you are not going to answer my question
as to why we do not have a lead for the office yet and what the
timing is on getting someone?
This is not a position that has to go through our
confirmation process. This is a matter of you all identifying
somebody and putting someone in place as the leader. I like
Leah Bray also, but she is not the lead. She is in an acting
role. So what is your answer to that?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, the personnel process even for those
that do not go through the Senate takes a long time sometimes.
I am not trying to dodge the question. I believe we have
someone identified for the position and that person is in
vetting. I do not know the timing, but I will check on it when
I get back and let your office know.
Senator Portman. Great. I would love to get a commitment
from you today that you will move on that. Again, it seems to
me that is the least we should be doing in terms of pushing
back on this disinformation that is, as you indicate, an
increasing problem.
How about the budget? Do you believe that the $5 million
dollar increase is adequate, given the disinformation
environment we face today?
Mr. McKeon. I do. The GEC is undertaking one aspect of
their work, which they are trying to normalize their workforce,
they have a lot of contractors and we are trying to convert a
number of them to full time equivalents and that the resources
they have now, I think, meet the moment, but we will take
another look at it as we begin the work on the 2024 budget,
which we have already started conversations on.
Senator Portman. Yes. I would just say the obvious, Mr.
Deputy Secretary, which is that the other countries are
spending billions. We are spending tens of millions, and it
seems to me this ought to be a huge priority.
I noticed that the Department of Homeland Security is now
setting up their own disinformation board of sorts. I think a
lot of what they are talking about doing the GEC should be
doing at the Global Engagement Center, and if the State
Department is not doing it, apparently, other agencies are
willing to step up and be more engaged.
I think it is in everybody's interest, including the State
Department, to really focus on this effort because it is the--
unfortunately, it is the 21st century way that Russia and other
countries, including China, Iran, North Korea, are partly
waging their conflicts.
With regard to Uniting for Ukraine, last week you announced
a new program that I am happy to see us move forward on. The
notion is to streamline this process for Ukrainian citizens who
have been displaced.
I have heard personally from so many Ohioans who told me,
hey, I am willing to help--I want to open my home. More than
500 people have called or emailed our office, by the way. A
number of businesses have expressed interest in offering jobs.
So there is a big demand out there. I think Ohio alone could
take a substantial number of these humanitarian parolees.
How long do you envision this application process taking?
Is this a matter of weeks or a matter of months? Could you tell
us a little more about how this is going to work?
The Chairman. So this will be the final question for
Senator Portman. It is a minute 40 over so----
Senator Portman. I am sorry. I apologize. I do not have a
clock in front of me.
The Chairman. It is quite all right. You can answer the
question, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. McKeon. Senator, I think it will be weeks. The
Department of Homeland Security is in the lead on this, though
the State Department is helping to facilitate. I was on an
interagency call this morning where the Deputy Secretary of
Homeland Security said we have had about 10,000 people apply
already. A lot of this--the application process--can be done
electronically. So I do think it will be a matter of weeks.
Senator Portman. Great. Thank you. Thank you for your
indulgence, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Deputy Secretary, for
your service.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Deputy Secretary, good to see you again. I mentioned this
at Secretary Blinken's hearing last week. This is really for my
colleagues. If you haven't had a chance to see this Foreign
Affairs Security Training Center facility at Fort Pickett in
Virginia, I would really encourage you to go.
I took a visit during the recess. State Department
colleagues were with me. This came through this committee back
in 2014-15 and it is truly impressive. I took some staff there
on a Friday. Forty-one weeks a year, they run week-long
programs for FSOs and their family members to get security
training, and Friday is the day of the exercise where they have
to put all the security training to good purpose.
It is in a mockup of a town square with an embassy compound
that involves an attack on an embassy that is frightening. Even
though I was told what was going to happen and knew what was
going to happen, it was very, very intense.
Looking at the care that has been devoted to developing
this security program, in addition to the fact that--that is
the 1-week-long program for all FSOs. There is also, if you
want to be in the security side of State, you do 11 weeks there
in your first year, 17 weeks there in your second year, and
another 11 weeks in your third year before you do an overseas
deployment.
I just want to applaud the State Department for this really
comprehensive security training. Sadly, we need it in ways we
didn't in the past.
Mr. McKeon. Yes.
Senator Kaine. What I saw firsthand would be hard to
describe. I just hope some of my colleagues might have a chance
to see it.
Mr. McKeon. Yes. Thank you for going, Senator. I was there
on a Friday as well last fall and it is quite realistic--the
training. Just to amplify that point, I have heard two
anecdotes in the last few months of officers who have been in a
circumstance overseas where they said my training at FASTC made
a difference.
One was in Oman where a contractor assigned to the embassy
was stabbed in the lungs and the officer jumped in--he was a
neighbor--and did whatever medical procedure--emergency medical
procedure that he learned at FASTC and he said it came back
from that training and probably--and the medical units said it
probably saved that person's life.
So it is--we appreciate the support that you have, but also
the Congress for this facility. It is really state of the art,
and I understand we took you out on the fast driving track and
glad you survived.
Senator Kaine. Yes. I had a very calm driver, and as long
as he wasn't sweating I wasn't sweating.
Let me ask you this. In the security space, update us on
the Administration's effort to determine the cause of Havana
syndrome.
Mr. McKeon. This is a continuing effort on the part of the
intelligence community and across the interagency. Earlier, or
last fall and earlier this year, we had two panels, one that
the Director of National Intelligence commissioned and one that
our Diplomatic Security Bureau commissioned of the JASON, which
is academic experts.
Some of the JASON report is unclassified so that is out
there for you to read, but there is a classified portion and
the DNI issued an unclassified summary, and what both of them
found, roughly, is a number of these cases can be explained by
environmental and health factors.
There is still a percentage of them for which we do not
have an explanation and we are still--we have not identified or
attributed this to a particular actor. It is still a
frustrating head scratcher that we haven't been able to figure
that out.
Senator Kaine. Then frustrating is a good word because a
number of State Department personnel have expressed frustration
about what they maintain are actions by the Department
leadership to either deny them or family members affected by
this access to proper medical care.
Talk a little bit about what you are trying to do within
State to make sure that our State Department members and their
families get access to medical care for this condition.
Mr. McKeon. At post, if somebody reports an incident they
are supposed to both report it to the Diplomatic Security
Bureau official at post and to the medical unit, and in both
cases they go through a questionnaire to try to get a common
set of data.
If their symptoms are sufficient that warrant medevac back
to Washington, that will be authorized, and then people who
need care quickly at a higher level, we have set up a contract
with Johns Hopkins University Hospital in Baltimore to get
holistic care, if you will, for officers and we are also
getting some officers into the program at Walter Reed if that
is warranted.
Senator Kaine. One last quick question. In February 21, the
Department rolled out a new payroll system. There were a number
of glitches with that that has delayed people getting paid.
I understand Secretary Blinken has indicated that in
instances where pay was long delayed, the State Department will
commit to paying interest on those. Just give us an update on
how--is the system now fixed and are you taking steps to remedy
situations that were caused by people not getting paid on time?
Mr. McKeon. Unfortunately, the system is not fixed yet. The
software was implemented. Its implementation was planned by the
last team, but it was put in place in March of last year and,
in shorthand, I think we were a little too ambitious with this
software, doing everything at once, and it is had a lot of
errors.
The Secretary just sent out a workforce message apologizing
to the workforce and committing to where we owe people to pay
interest, and we have engaged some professionals, including a
former CIO of the Department, to help us figure this out--it is
at our center down in Charleston--and try to work through the
glitches.
We have also set up an online-based portal for people to
report their challenges because we had a not very efficient
system for that to try to improve the response time to help
people get the compensation they are owed.
Senator Kaine. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
being here, Secretary.
Freedom House says that global internet freedom has
declined for the 11th consecutive year. I was pleased to see
the State Department announce its Declaration for the Future of
the Internet this past week.
U.S. Government efforts on internet access and protecting
journalists and civil society from undemocratic restrictions
exist in several places with overlapping functions and
resources.
Russia's war in Ukraine puts further pressure on our
resources. The Chairman has introduced the INFO Act, which
would authorize funding for State, AID, and the U.S. Agency for
Global Media to further advance the important work that we are
already doing.
Beyond funding, are there organizational or operational
changes that you are planning across the Department to kind of
consolidate all of these efforts and make sure that one part of
the Department, one part of the government, knows what the
other side is doing?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, within the Department we recently
established the new Bureau on Cyberspace and Digital Policy. So
part of their mandate is focused on digital freedom. The
Democracy and Human Rights Bureau also works on this issue and
we have given them some additional resources to work in this
space.
Senator Schatz. So what I worry about is scale. I have been
in this space for a couple of years now and lots of very
important individual efforts are ongoing, but this problem is
global, and so I want you to pay particular attention to when
we find a model that works when we are working with a country
and reversing this trend that it is sort of--not in the literal
sense, but it is sort of hand-to-hand combat, right. It is our
country working with our counterparts and trying to increase
global internet freedom with that country.
My question is scale. Is there someone in charge of
figuring out what works and scaling it across the planet, which
is sort of, in my view, the State Department's job?
Mr. McKeon. In the bureau I mentioned and also the USAGM
and some of its grantees they have a fund. I forget what the
name of it is, but open technology that helps with people
overcoming restrictions on the internet in a particular
country. I mean, this is part and parcel of the broader
democratic recession, if you will, where autocrats are using
the internet for not good outcomes.
So it is not a standalone policy. It is a part of our
broader work on democracy and human rights.
Senator Schatz. So today is Global World Press Freedom Day.
What do you think about adding press freedom training to
Foreign Service Officers?
Mr. McKeon. I will have to take that back and think about
it, to be honest. I do not know if it is part of our training
for human rights officers. It probably is. I confess I do not
know for certain about that.
The Secretary is marking this day today by going to the
Foreign Press Center, which has not had an in-person briefing
for 2 years. So we are, certainly, as a department giving lift
to the brave work of journalists around the world.
Senator Schatz. Yes. I just want it to be part of the
curriculum. I want it to be part of where the rubber hits the
road, which is, as you know, in the Foreign Service.
Finally, in response to my questioning last week, Secretary
Blinken said that additional resources may be needed for
negotiations for the Compact of Free Association. How are you
ensuring that the Department is organized to prioritize and
successfully conclude the negotiations, given that Ambassador
Yun will need resources and political will not just throughout
your Department, but through Interior and Defense?
Mr. McKeon. Broadly, we are focused on this issue, not just
what Ambassador Yun is doing on the compacts, but on the
challenge in the Pacific Islands because the Chinese are,
obviously, making a big play there.
When Secretary Kerry and Assistant Secretary Medina were
out in Palau recently for the Our Oceans Conference they heard
this in stereo sound that we needed to up our game on
resources.
So we are taking a hard look at both how we can adequately
fund the compacts, but also the Tuna Treaty that we have with
several countries in the South Pacific and, more broadly, our
resources for diplomacy in the region. We are going to be
planning to open a new post in the Solomon Islands.
Senator Schatz. So two questions that I hope will be a
quick yes. First, I assume you will get back to this committee
on resources required. That is number one.
Mr. McKeon. Yes.
Senator Schatz. Secondly, one of the things that I have
heard is that although the Department of Defense looms large
and in a positive way as it relates to the Compact of Free
Association, they are, understandably, not the tip of the spear
as it relates to the sort of negotiations themselves.
I would like to see a DoD representative in all the
meetings. It doesn't necessarily have to be at the secretary
level, but someone to convey that this is a whole-of-government
effort with State, Interior, and Defense, and I am wondering if
you can talk to your counterparts to make sure we have DoD in
the room.
I have heard a little bit of chatter that they are not
quite in the room, that they are waiting to see how this
resolves and support it at the end. I think we need them to
convey that the entire U.S. Government is behind the
renegotiation.
Mr. McKeon. I will check on that. I was not aware they were
not in the room, and we will get back to you.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Cruz.
Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McKeon, welcome.
Mr. McKeon. Good morning.
Senator Cruz. I want to ask you about the State
Department's ongoing efforts to finalize a nuclear deal with
Iran.
Last week in this committee I discussed the IRGC terrorism
sanctions with Secretary Blinken and he said that dismantling
some sanctions would be worth it because the deal has benefits
that will meaningfully roll back Iran's nuclear program.
I want to ask you about those benefits because I do not
think that is true and I do not think you do either. Since
President Biden was elected, Iran has made enormous
unprecedented progress on its nuclear program, including
enriching uranium to 60 percent, deploying advanced
centrifuges, and acquiring significant knowledge.
The Biden administration has a secret assessment that says
there is a point after which the nuclear progress would make
the deal meaningless. Secretary Blinken has referenced that
point in public numerous times since last year, but you have
never revealed to this committee what that point is publicly.
Administration officials have told this committee in classified
briefings what your assessment is but, again, it has been kept
from the public.
This weekend, Chairman Menendez said, ``We are told by the
Administration that if the negotiations didn't conclude by the
end of February that, in fact, the time that would be lost and
what we would gain would be of very little importance or value
to us.''
Now it is the end of April. So if the end of February
wasn't going to buy us what we need, certainly, the end of
April is not there. That is entirely consistent with everything
I have heard and seen.
So my question is does the State Department intend to make
your internal assessment public?
Mr. McKeon. Senator Cruz, I think that is probably an
assessment of the Intelligence Committee that is classified. So
my answer to you right now without knowing more would be not in
the near term, but this is not a topic I work on so I will have
to take that question back.
Senator Cruz. So if the State Department has an assessment
that says the deal's benefits became meaningless months ago,
why is the State Department still negotiating?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, as I said, I do not work on this issue
literally. I am not in any briefings. I am not up to speed on
what is happening. I do not have a different answer than the
Secretary would have given you last week.
Senator Cruz. I think the State Department needs to come
clean with the American people about an assessment that impacts
the safety and security of every American and the safety and
security of our allies.
Let us turn to a different topic. I want to ask you about
the new so-called Disinformation Governance Board that the
Biden administration recently announced. The board is an
interagency team assembled under the Department of Homeland
Security allegedly to combat disinformation, and it shows every
sign of potentially becoming an Orwellian tool to target
Americans whom Democrats consider to be their political
opponents.
In defense of the board, Biden administrations have rushed
out to say no, no, no. You do not understand. The board is not
going to target Americans. It is about targeting foreign
disinformation.
I got to say, I was surprised to hear that and I expect
many members of this committee were equally surprised and that
is because the U.S. Government already has an interagency
organization built to counter foreign disinformation. It is the
Global Engagement Center at the Department of State.
Its mission is, ``To direct, lead, synchronize, integrate,
and coordinate efforts of the Federal Government to recognize,
understand, expose, and counter foreign state and nonstate
propaganda and disinformation.''
The GEC was created and has been consistently supported by
bipartisan legislation that has come out of this committee.
Last year, Senators Portman and Murphy filed a new
authorization for $150 million for the GEC, again, to ``counter
foreign state and nonstate sponsored propaganda and
disinformation.''
It would seem that either the Biden administration has
created a completely redundant organization to target foreign
disinformation, duplicating and undermining this committee's
work over years, or they are not being honest about what the
new board is designed to do and that it is actually designed to
target Americans.
So I want to ask you, how do you understand the GEC's
mission to differ from the new disinformation board and what
activities currently being conducted by the GEC would State
contemplate ceding to this newly created board?
Mr. McKeon. The GEC, Senator, is outward facing, engaged in
exposing to foreign publics the disinformation that we see our
adversaries putting out there, whether it is the Russian or
Chinese or some other entity.
I am not familiar with this new DHS entity. I just saw the
headline in the paper this morning. I had not heard of it so I
do not know how it would differ.
Senator Cruz. So State was not consulted even though,
ostensibly, what this new agency does is something already
assigned to State and there is already an effort stood up to do
this?
Mr. McKeon. I do not know if the folks at the GEC or in our
public diplomacy--public affairs office were consulted. I will
have to find out and get back to you.
Senator Cruz. You were not consulted?
Mr. McKeon. I was not. No.
Senator Cruz. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Deputy Secretary, great to see you, and I want to
associate myself with the comments the chairman made in his
opening remarks about your efforts to make sure that the State
Department reflects the great diversity of talent in the
country, and appreciate the efforts you are making in that
regard and associate myself with the remarks of the ranking
member and the comment that you made distinguishing risk
awareness, which we want to be very focused on, but contrasting
that with risk adversity because I do think it is important
that our State Department officers get out and about to the
extent that they can do so without putting themselves at great
risk.
The issues we cover in this hearing are not the ones that
make headlines, but they are fundamental to the success and
implementation of our foreign policy, and I want to start by
asking you about implementation of the Foreign Service Families
Act.
I asked Secretary Blinken about this when he was here and,
again, I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for
working with Senator Sullivan and I to pass this, which we
think is essential to continuing to attract and retain top-
notch talent.
Passing the bill was just the beginning. There are lots of
pieces to implementation. I just want your commitment to work
with us to try to expedite a lot of the details we need to put
in place to make it real.
Mr. McKeon. You have that commitment, Senator. Thank you
for your work on it. I remember we discussed it in my
confirmation hearing back in March of last year.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. If there is somebody in
addition to yourself--and I appreciate your being available on
your team--who we should be in contact with who would that be?
Mr. McKeon. I think most of the provisions, if I remember
from reading it, fall on the workforce so it would be the
Director General of the Foreign Service, Ambassador Perez.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you.
So I have a couple questions regarding the Priority 2
system that we established for Afghan refugees back in August
2021. There seems to be an awful lot of confusion about the
current status of this program, and we are contacted daily by
NGOs who have staff members who they believe and we believe,
looking at the facts, would be eligible for the P-2
applications.
Can you give me a sense of how many P-2 applicants have
arrived in the United States?
Mr. McKeon. I do not know that number, but it is not a
large number because in order to be processed as refugees they
have to get out of Afghanistan in the first instance.
Senator Van Hollen. I understand that and we have been
working hard to communicate that fact, but there are also a
number of people who have gotten out of Afghanistan and did so
with the expectation that they would then qualify, and so they
are sitting now in third countries.
Let me just read to you a reply that we received from the
Department of State's Afghanistan Task Force when we inquired
about some of these P-2 applicants. ``We are unable to provide
status updates for individuals referred to for P-1 or P-2
access to the United States Refugee Admission Program at this
time. Eligible referrals will be processed and individuals who
have been referred will receive notification by email once
updated information or instructions are available,'' and it has
been radio silence.
Mr. McKeon. How recently was that response?
Senator Van Hollen. This was sent some--I will get you the
exact date, but I would just ask, again, for your----
Mr. McKeon. I think we can do better than that.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes. I appreciate----
Mr. McKeon. We can follow up with your staff on the cases.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. I appreciate that. At the
very least what I want to do is let these individuals know
whether they have a chance, right? Because right now you have
got a lot of expectations and where people are just not getting
information. So I appreciate that. We will follow up with you.
[Editor's note.--The requested information follows:]
Since July 2021, the State Department's Bureau of Population,
Refugees, and Migration (PRM) has received a total of 45,028 P1 and P2
referrals to the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for
Afghan applicants. As of August 10, 2022, nearly 24,000 of those
referrals have been deemed complete and accepted into our program.
Because of the heavy volume received, acceptance and processing
timelines were initially delayed. As of August 10, 2022, over 13,000
additional applications have been flagged for further information or
additional follow-up from the sponsoring individual or organization.
Another approximately 7,500 applications have been closed or found
ineligible for acceptance into the USRAP.
A small number of applications are presently pending review, as a
result of resubmission by sponsors providing additional information or
other circumstances. We recognize and regret previous delays in
processing, but are pleased to report that at this time we are not
currently running a backlog. The Department of State provides
applicants with information on the status of their application and
instructions on next steps once their referral has been accepted. That
communication informs them that as soon as they are outside of
Afghanistan their cases will begin to undergo processing.
Senator Van Hollen. Finally, security clearances. This is
driving me crazy. I just had an example of somebody who had
been on my staff who was accepted for a position dealing with
arms control at the State Department.
The security clearance process took 10 months at a time
when the people who wanted him really needed his expertise and
talents, given everything that is going on in the world right
now.
This is a longer conversation, but I would--this is a
broken area. It is one of the areas that doesn't get a lot of
attention. Can you speak to how long it takes, on average, for
somebody at the State Department to get a security clearance?
Mr. McKeon. I do not know the average number. I know the
pain point you described of taking too long in the case of
officers. We sometimes lose aspirants for the Foreign Service
because it takes too long.
We have had a working group underway for a couple of years
trying to speed up the process and there is a broader
governmental effort for the last several years to try to speed
up the process.
I can report some good news. We have started to use some
automation tools--bots--to speed up some parts of the process.
For example, it used to be the case if you were transferring
from one civil service position to another for reasons nobody
can explain it would take 6 weeks to transfer the clearance.
We can now do that in one day because of this automation.
So we are working to fix it. I hear--I do town halls virtually
with posts around the world. The number-one question all the
time is eligible family employment, which is part of your bill,
and related to that is clearance for eligible family members
seeking employment.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. I do look forward and we
will be following up with you and your team on this.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good to see you. Thank you for being here today. First, let
me just associate myself with some of the remarks I heard from
the ranking member.
I want to thank Senator Risch and Senator Menendez for
working with this committee to reform the Accountability Review
Board process and I just look forward to continuing to work
with you to make sure that the Department can shift its
approach to risk to make sure that we can get our diplomatic
staff out into high-threat environments to expand our
footprint. Absolutely essential.
I know it is integral to our conversation about reopening
in Kyiv, but it is also really important when it comes to a lot
of other dangerous places where State Department personnel need
to be out on the frontlines.
Second, I do think Senator Cruz fundamentally
misunderstands what the Global Engagement Center is and how the
mission of it is fundamentally different than the mission of
the Department of Homeland Security.
The mission of the Department of Homeland Security is to
protect the homeland, to protect the United States from
misinformation and propaganda attacks from foreign actors. The
mission of the Global Engagement Center is to work with partner
countries around the world to protect them and their citizens
from those misinformation attacks.
In fact, the Global Engagement Center makes no grants to
U.S. nonprofits or institutions. The Global Engagement Center,
which Senator Portman and I have championed, makes grants to
foreign media sources, fact checkers, watchdogs, to try to
combat Russian and Chinese misinformation outside of the United
States.
They are fundamentally different missions. I am not sure
that there is any contention that one would steal from the
other.
Two questions for you, Mr. McKeon, if I can. One is just a
follow-up on a question I asked you, perhaps at your
confirmation hearing on the issue of subnational diplomacy and
I just want to keep on hammering this home.
Here is an example of how other countries approach
empowering city and state local actors to engage in diplomacy.
The city of Shanghai has 100 staff dedicated to building
diplomatic relationships around the world simply for the city
of Shanghai.
The United States has no office at a federal level, at the
State Department level, dedicated to the same mission. In
China, there is a hundred-person office in one city dedicated
to this.
So I know that you said earlier that this was something of
great interest to the Secretary. I would look forward to any
update you have on efforts to establish--reestablish a office
of subnational city and state diplomacy at the Department of
State. We have got legislation that would do that pending
before this committee.
Any updates on efforts to raise the profile of our local
and State actors in diplomatic efforts around the world?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, it is still our intention to set up an
office within the Department to deal with this issue and I
believe we have identified the person to lead it. I do not know
the timing. It has been hanging for a little bit, but I know we
have positions identified and where it would be lodged. So I
will come back to you in a couple of weeks to give you an
update.
Senator Murphy. Yes. I just think we are leaving a lot of
talent on the playing field when we do not sort of purposely
organize our local elected officials, Republicans and
Democrats, to represent the United States around the world.
Then, lastly, to back up a little bit from Senator Van
Hollen's question, this year's budget requests includes a 50
percent increase for the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. You
set this very ambitious target for admissions from Ukraine.
We haven't seen that flow really start and my understanding
is because there is a lot of work to do to rebuild USRAP from a
lot of the damage that was done by the last Administration.
Can you just, in a minute, talk about why this budget
request is so essential to be able to build back up the
capacity so that we can specifically target that hundred
thousand number for Ukrainian admissions?
Mr. McKeon. So just on the Ukrainian target of a hundred
thousand that the President has set, I think a lot of those
will end up being people coming through the United for Ukraine
program that DHS has announced. They will come in on temporary
parole authority.
There are some refugees through the Lautenberg program that
we are trying to accelerate and some people will just come
through normal visas--family reunification immigrant visas.
On the broader Refugee Admissions Program, we have a lot of
rebuilding to do because the program was decimated by the
previous Administration. The backbone, the local resettlement
agencies, a lot of them went out of business, and we have been
hampered in the last year-plus with COVID.
There is still a restriction overseas in processing
refugees, and our partner, USCIS, also needs to rebuild its
workforce. They do the interviews overseas for people coming
through the refugee program.
The President has given us a very ambitious target. We are
not going to hit it this year, but we have got to make progress
so that we can hit it in the next couple of years.
Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Deputy Secretary, just a couple of follow-ups. The
Department's request for implementing diversity, equity,
inclusion, and accessibility, as required by several Executive
orders, is $65.6 million. Can you give us an insight as to what
specifically that funding will be used for?
Mr. McKeon. I think the number that I am tracking is
actually a little bigger than that, Senator, with $73 million
in the Fiscal Year 2023 budget. It would be a range of things,
the Office of Ambassador Abercrombie-Winstanley, for one,
getting resources to do some data analysis and surveys, some
additional money for the Foreign Service Institute for
training, additional resources for our Human Resources Bureau,
and in the strategic plan that we discussed earlier there are a
lot of specific projects and targets that the plan sets out and
we will need some funding to implement those programs.
The Chairman. Then given that racial equity became a
priority of the Department as a result of the Executive order,
this past year, following global racial justice efforts, we
will be receiving a budget--will we be receiving a budget
request for dedicated funding to address global racial equity?
The 2023 budget request provides $2.6 billion to advance
gender equity and equality. How at all will the racial and
gender equity goals be coordinated?
Mr. McKeon. So the Executive order you speak of the
President issued on his first day in office and then all
departments were asked to put together plans to implement it,
which we just released ours, and an officer on my team led a
cross-department effort to develop this plan, and it is really
designed to embed in our programs in both public diplomacy,
foreign assistance, our overall diplomatic engagement, more
outreach to underserved and marginalized communities overseas.
There is money integrated in the foreign assistance budget,
about $40 million, to advance these principles. The gender
equity piece that you reference, some of that is not new money,
but it is attribution exercises, looking at existing programs
and shifting some of the focus to make sure that it has a
gender equity component, and I think over time we will be doing
more of that on the racial equity side.
The Chairman. I appreciate that. As I have said, this is of
great importance to us and you know we believe in leading by
example. I want you to know that as the Department hired a
Chief Diversity Officer, as the chairman and I have hired a
Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, the first time
that committee has ever had one, Mischa Thompson, who is here
with us today.
So I look forward with her working with the Department, at
the end of the day, to achieve some mutual goals that we can
make real groundbreaking breakthroughs on some things that have
been lasting for so long.
As part of your March 3 confirmation process, you responded
to questions that the Bureau of African Affairs is chronically
understaffed both in terms of positions and vacancies, and you
committed to me to work with the Bureau of African Affairs to
ensure it has the resources, including personnel, necessary to
meet the Bureau's objectives.
It has been 14 months since that hearing. Can you give me a
sense, have you undertaken a review of the Africa Bureau's
resources, including personnel? What did your review reveal and
what actions are we taking?
Mr. McKeon. As part of both the 2022 and the 2023 budgets
and, as you know, we have talked about this, we have asked for
hundreds of additional positions, both in the Foreign and Civil
Service, and I want to say the Africa Bureau is second in line
for--behind the East Asia Bureau in getting new positions. Let
me confirm that for you. Off the top of my head, that is my
recollection.
The challenge we have a lot of times in Africa posts, and I
have heard this from both the current assistant secretary and
the previous acting assistant secretary, is getting people to
bid.
Even though the positions may be there at a post--a
hardship post--it is finding people to bid and to do a tour
like that. The school may not be particularly good if they have
kids in--school-aged children.
So the Bureau of Global Talent Management is working with
the Africa Bureau to look at additional incentives to try to
encourage people to serve at Africa posts, and we can get you
an update on that work.
The Chairman. Yes. If you would do that I would appreciate
it.
Lastly, there was some discussion here on refugees. The
Migration and Refugee Assistance Account funds assistance
programs to protect vulnerable people around the world
including refugees, conflict victims, internally-displaced
people, stateless persons, vulnerable migrants.
The Fiscal Year 2022 requests included $550 million for
refugee admissions and resettlement efforts that would be used
to rebuild the refugee resettlement infrastructure within the
U.S. and admit up to 125,000 refugees in Fiscal Year 2022.
I think you just said we are not on track to meet that
goal, as I understand it. Where are we at in this regard? Do we
have allocations on the number of refugees we plan to admit
from different geographic areas? Where is the rebuilding
process now?
Mr. McKeon. On that geographic allocation, that would have
been done last September before the start of the fiscal year,
announced by the President or the Secretary. So we can get you
those numbers. I do not have them at hand.
As I was saying previously to Senator Murphy, the
rebuilding has to happen in a few places, one internally in the
Population and Refugees Migration Bureau. They have staffed up
the admissions office but I think we are probably going to be
looking for more officers to--or more positions to assign to
them.
Second, the local network of resettlement agencies around
the country, a lot of them went out of business because of lack
of funding in the last Administration. So we have got to
rebuild that infrastructure.
We have done some of that through the Afghan evacuees that
we processed and resettled last year, but we have also
undertaken to forward fund some money to the resettlement
agencies to help them rebuild.
Then overseas, we do the work, but also USCIS goes out and
does so-called circuit rides to interview refugee applicants,
and USCIS has a number of personnel shortfalls that they are
trying to fill so that we can rebuild.
The Chairman. Senator Young.
Senator Young. Mr. Deputy Secretary, welcome to the
committee. We have seen dramatic disruptions in consular
services over the past several years.
First, COVID upended the entire model of fee-based funding
as global travel dramatically declined. Second, tens of
thousands of Afghan translators and allies were left stranded
after the Administration's bungled withdrawal from Afghanistan,
and now there are new pressures from the massive crisis in
Ukraine.
How does the Department plan to make consular services more
resilient to global disruptions?
Mr. McKeon. Senator, you are right that the fee-funded
foundation that we have for our programs undermined our
consular services during the pandemic, but--and Congress has
helped us in the last couple of years with direct
appropriations to fill some of the gaps.
I think we are in a better place financially now because
travel is picking up so the passport and visa fees--the income
is coming in and Congress also in the 2022 appropriations bill
allowed us to keep some more of the fees that were previously
remitted to the Treasury.
So I think in terms of our financial base, we are in a good
position. We still need to rebuild at post and we have a new
Assistant Secretary, Rena Bitter, who is focused intensely on
this.
I know we have had a conversation, I believe, with your
office about visas for nurses. So she has gone around to some
of our biggest visa-issuing posts to make sure they are well
postured to deal with what you have described.
Senator Young. Very good. I hope you will keep this
committee and my own office updated if the projections are off.
Incidentally, what are the contingency plans if the fees do not
increase as much as the Department is projecting?
Mr. McKeon. Right now, we have a good base and we see that
travel is picking up around the world. The demand for passports
is up as we head into summer travel season and, certainly, we
have got a lot of visa applications that are backlogged.
At the moment, I do not think we have a concern that the
revenues are going to fall significantly again. We may have to
come back to Congress to help for--ask for a little more help,
but I do not anticipate that we will.
Senator Young. As you and I have discussed previously, I
remain gravely concerned by the delays we have seen in issuing
visas for the nurses, which you were kind enough to mention,
and other travelers providing lifesaving services here in the
U.S.
As embassies reopen following the pandemic, how is the
Department prioritizing among the many competing demands for
consular services?
Mr. McKeon. One of the biggest--the posts that issue the
most visas for nurses which, off the top my head, are Manila,
Kingston, Jamaica, and I forget the third one--I think it is in
Nigeria or Kenya--we have prioritized these visas for nurses
coming to the United States, obviously, filling a critical gap,
particularly in rural hospitals.
We have given posts flexibility to make decisions about how
to prioritize certain issues. During the pandemic, the priority
was, really, just American citizen services and immigrant
visas.
We recognize, depending on the post, there are other
priorities that we need to fill, whether it is student visas,
visas for shipping crews. There is a range of priorities that
we are hearing from industry about that we are trying to be
very responsive to.
Senator Young. Is there a list of prioritized categories?
Mr. McKeon. Each post would have their own prioritization.
I mean, we have given guidance from Washington, but we also
want to allow them the flexibility to manage their workload.
As I said, in a post, for example, that has a high demand
for nurses visas those are one of the top priorities.
Senator Young. The National Visa Center has almost a half
million cases that are documentarily complete, yet only 32,000
were scheduled for interviews this month. What resources does
the Department need to reduce this massive backlog?
Mr. McKeon. Are those immigrant visas, Senator, that you
are referring to? I am not sure I am tracking this particular--
with respect to this.
Senator Young. Yes. Yes, they are.
Mr. McKeon. I will have to get back to you with a more
thorough response. My instinct--the answer to that question is
simply bandwidth within a visa post that are still--where COVID
is still a challenge.
There would be constraints in the waiting room how many
people can be there under local conditions at any one time, and
we have fewer consular positions because of the funding
challenges we had in the last couple of years.
We are trying to rebuild the workforce and get more
positions assigned out, but let me get Consular Affairs to come
back with a more thorough answer.
Senator Young. Sure, but in light of the critical visa
categories that we need to run through here and the ongoing
pandemic, I think a number of us would be ready to offer some
surge capacity if presented plans.
Mr. McKeon. Some of the things--one of the things we have
done, Senator, with some nonimmigrant visas is to get authority
working with DHS to waive the interview requirement for certain
categories of applicants. So that eases the burden on some
posts.
Senator Young. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Deputy Secretary, I have been around here long enough
to know that gratitude and thank yous are few and far between.
So let me just say I want to thank you and Assistant Secretary
Bitter, in particular, for the hard work that you have helped
in my office--I know others as well--in terms of some
challenging Consular Affairs cases.
I know you understand how important that work is and I
appreciate the notable change in the Department's attitude and
engagement in this regard. So thank you for that. Thank you for
the----
Mr. McKeon. Thank you for saying that, Senator. Assistant
Secretary Bitter is one of our best. I make it a point when I
travel domestically to go to our passport offices and I went to
the National Visa Center national passport center, which is in
New Hampshire, a couple of months ago and customer service is
their mantra. This is what they do and they are very committed
to it.
The Chairman. Yes. Whenever I travel abroad, I always ask
to see the chief consular officer because they do incredibly
important work.
So with the appreciation of the committee for your
appearance and thoughtful answers and for the work we are doing
together on State Department reauthorization, this record will
remain open to the close of business tomorrow.
With the thanks of the committee, this hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Robert Menendez
Question. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: I have long championed
a diverse workforce at the Department and equity in the implementation
of U.S. foreign policy, which is why I commended last year's
appointment of the Department's first Chief Diversity and Inclusion
Officer--Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley. Given longstanding
racism around the globe affecting numerous communities and our American
troops, diplomats, students, and business professionals living and
working overseas, I also welcomed the Department's announcement of a
Special Envoy for Racial Equity and Equity Action Plan last week. Both
efforts demonstrate our commitment to democratic values and are
critical to the long-term success of our foreign policy interests
overseas, which is why I would like to work closely with you to ensure
their success. Given the Department cited equity as a ``strategic
National Security imperative'' and included equity in the Joint
Strategic Plan with USAID, will the Special Envoy on Racial Equity sit
in the Secretary's front office and hold the status of Ambassador
similar to others appointed to lead critical efforts of the Department?
Answer. The Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice
(SRREJ), a Senior Executive Service-level position, will be located in
the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor's (DRL) front office,
given DRL's responsibility for a range of equity, social justice, and
human rights issues. The SRREJ will work with the Secretary, Under
Secretaries, U. S. Ambassadors, multilateral institutions, civil
society, and host governments worldwide to combat systemic racism and
advance the human rights of members of marginalized racial and ethnic
communities. The SRREJ is responsible for successfully integrating
Executive Order 13985 into all aspects of the Department's foreign
affairs mission.
Question. While the work of the Chief Diversity and Inclusion
Officer was included in this year's budget request, I did not see a
funding request for the Department's large-scale equity efforts, from
increasing procurement opportunities for minority-owned businesses to
establishing a new Special Envoy on Racial Equity's office and work.
Will you be submitting a budget request for this important equity work
to this Committee?
Answer. The Department's FY 2023 Congressional Budget Justification
Appendix 1 includes a table (page 10) outlining diversity, equity,
inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) priorities. The Department also
created a Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice based in
the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor to advance racial
equity in State's policies and programs and support Executive Order
13985. Similar equity-based efforts include initiatives in the
Secretary's Office of Global Women's Issues, Special Envoy to Monitor
and Combat Anti-Semitism, Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTQI+
Persons, Special Advisor for Disability Rights, the Chief Diversity and
Inclusion Officer, and the Office of Civil Rights. Work on procurement
opportunities is the responsibility of two existing offices: the Office
of the Procurement Executive and the Office of Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization. The director of the latter office reports
directly to me.
Question. With an eye towards identifying opportunities for us to
work together to achieve equity and workforce diversity goals in
foreign affairs, can we schedule regular meetings on these efforts and
consultations on significant developments and decisions between our
staffs?
Answer. Yes, we welcome the opportunity for regular meetings to
discuss the Department's progress on equity in foreign affairs and
workforce diversity.
Question. Cyber Bureau: I was glad to see the official launch of
the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy a few weeks ago--and to see
that building capacity in cyberspace and emerging technologies is a
priority for this year's budget . . . these steps will be essential in
addressing some of the most critical challenges in the coming decades.
What will be the key priorities for this new bureau in the next year?
Answer. I see building an integrated team while also advancing our
diplomatic objectives as crucial to our success over the next year.
That means hiring the right leadership and staff throughout the bureau,
as well as coordinating and advancing the security, economic, and
values-based elements of cyberspace policy and diplomacy. Through our
diplomacy, we will ensure the United States remains the world's
innovative leader and standard setter, keeping universal rights and
democratic values at the center of innovation while working to ensure
digital technologies deliver real benefits to people's lives. We will
also support and work with partners and allies to develop and deploy
digital technologies to tackle the most urgent challenges we face.
Question. The next 5 years?
Answer. Within the next 5 years, the Cyberspace and Digital Policy
(CDP) bureau will be leading and coordinating, at State and throughout
the interagency, work with foreign and domestic counterparts to shape
an open digital future by preventing cyber attacks that target our
businesses, working to ensure that digital technologies help advance
human rights, and promoting a digital economy based on our democratic
values. Our task will also be to put forth and carry out a compelling
international vision for how to develop, deploy, and use digital
technologies in a way that serves our people, protects our interests,
and upholds our democratic values.
Question. Will you commit to keeping this Committee appraised of
the new bureau's work and to consult with this Committee on significant
developments and decisions? Will you commit to the same with respect to
the planned Special Envoy for Critical and Emerging Technologies?
Answer. Yes, we are committed to maintaining open and regular
communications with Congress and this Committee on issues related to
the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy's mission, objectives, and
progress. We are committed to doing the same with regards to the Office
of the Special Envoy for Critical and Emerging Technology. We are
grateful for the bipartisan support as the Department reorganized to
elevate and institutionalize these critical foreign policy issues.
Question. Bureau of African Affairs: The Committee has received
nominations for career foreign service officers to serve in key posts
in Africa--Sudan, South Sudan, and Mali. All candidates seem to be
imminently qualified to become Ambassadors, and I will move their
nominations as quickly as possible. I would note that none of them has
served as Ambassador before and none of them has served in Africa over
the course of their careers. What message does it send to Foreign
Service officers and civil servants who have spent considerable time
working in Washington or at posts in Africa about prospects for career
advancement?
Answer. The Bureau of African Affairs (AF), alongside the other
regional bureaus, seeks to fill Chief of Mission (COM) positions with
individuals who have substantial senior leadership experience from
varying backgrounds and who have substantial experience working in
hardship conditions. AF firmly believes in ensuring embassies mirror
the America they represent and recommends qualified COM candidates with
proven track records. By including qualified candidates regardless of
prior regional experience, AF can draw from a more substantial pool of
diverse applicants. This message of inclusion is highly valued by our
employees, who know they too may be considered as candidates for
leadership assignments throughout the Department of State, regardless
of prior regional experience.
Question. Do you think it has had an impact on morale?
Answer. Opening leadership opportunities to qualified staff,
regardless of their previous regional expertise, is an important factor
in maintaining morale among the senior ranks of the service, as it
makes opportunities more inclusive. For officers with extensive
experience in one bureau to be competitive for positions in others,
bureaus must be open to fair competition from officers throughout the
Department who have relevant skills.
Question. What accounts for the fact that we are sending first time
Ambassadors with no Africa experience to some of the most challenging
posts on the continent?
Answer. Successful Chief of Mission candidates have strong, broad
leadership, management, and foreign policy experience, independent of
regional expertise. The Bureau of African Affairs makes every effort to
recruit candidates who have applicable regional and functional
experience based on post specific qualifications. This includes a
proven track record of leading a large, diverse workforce and working
with interagency counterparts, particularly in hardship conditions.
Those nominated for senior leadership positions quickly become
knowledgeable of their future areas of responsibility through
substantial consultations with experts of various fields and bring a
comparative perspective and valued diversity of experience to the
region.
Question. Is this a legacy of the loss of senior staff during the
last Administration?
Answer. With robust interest from qualified candidates, the Bureau
of African Affairs has found qualified candidates from various
backgrounds, while not excluding applicants with experience on the
African continent. With 46 Chiefs of Mission (COM) in Sub-Saharan
Africa, there is frequent turnover. This is sometimes due to
retirement, but other times due to regular transfers and onward
assignments, either as COM elsewhere or to a leadership position back
in Washington. The President has nominated superbly qualified
candidates to fill these vacancies.
Question. Embassy Baghdad Staffing: The Administration's move to
end combat operations and transition the U.S.-Iraq relationship to a
strategic one centered on bilateral diplomacy are positive steps, which
I fully support. However, I remain concerned that the drawdowns of the
previous Administration left Embassy Baghdad understaffed, relative to
the size and scope of its mission. While the safety and security of
U.S. personnel is always paramount, I believe that a robust diplomatic
presence, including in southern Iraq, will be key to this new phase of
the U.S.-Iraq relationship that is centered on bilateral diplomacy.
What is your assessment of current staffing levels at Embassy Baghdad
and what do you need to see on the ground before considering an
increase to those levels?
Answer. I and the team at Embassy Baghdad are committed to ensuring
the embassy is not only secure, but also appropriately staffed to meet
Department goals. While current in-country staffing levels in Iraq are
temporary and reversible, they are consistent with the existing Ordered
Departure status. As with all our posts, we continue to assess both the
security and health environment in Iraq and hope to revert to higher
in-country staffing levels as soon as circumstances permit.
Question. Similarly, what would you need to see on the ground
before reopening the U.S. consulate in Basrah?
Answer. The Department suspended operations at U.S. Consulate
General Basrah in 2018 as a result of heightened security threats. We
continue to evaluate the security situation in Basrah and will, of
course, continue to keep Congress apprised of any decisions.
Question. What is the status of physical security repairs and
facilities upgrades at Embassy Baghdad?
Answer. The December 2019 attacks left the Baghdad embassy compound
with significant damage, destroying three of the five Compound Access
Control (CAC) facilities. The Department is currently executing an
expedited design-build repair project to return the main CAC to its
original, pre-attack condition and functionality, scheduled for
completion in September. In addition, the Department has allocated
funding for design of the remaining CAC replacements and wall
enhancements. Once the design is complete, the Department intends to
review available prior year funds to award a construction contract for
the work, currently planned in FY 2023.
Question. Yemen: As we currently do not have an embassy presence in
Yemen, all U.S. diplomatic operations take place out of the Riyadh-
based Yemen Affairs Unit. Given the recent on the ground developments
surrounding the UN-brokered truce between the Houthis and the Saudi-led
coalition, do you imagine any changes to the current U.S. footprint and
embassy operations?
Answer. No. At this time, I do not foresee any changes to our
current U.S. footprint and embassy operations in Yemen. We continue to
monitor the situation in Sana'a and work with our allies and
stakeholders to develop a long-term solution regarding our presence in
Yemen. However, it is important to note the Houthis are still detaining
a dozen of our current and former local staff and remain in breach of
the U.S. embassy compound in Sana'a; we continue to press for the
unconditional release of our staff. The Department also intends to
comply with all applicable Congressional consultation and notification
requirements should we decide to increase our footprint in Yemen. Our
ultimate objective is to ensure our presence in Yemen furthers U.S.
national security interests and enables our government to carry out the
full range of diplomatic activities while maintaining the safety of
diplomatic personnel.
Question. The U.S. has hundreds of locally employed staff in Yemen,
many of which have recently become targets. Over 30 Yemeni U.S.
Government employees have been forcibly detained by the Houthis. How
does the Department plan on ensuring the safety of the locally employed
staff and what efforts are being taken to protect the U.S. compound in
Sana'a?
Answer. Ensuring the safety of our local staff in Sana'a remains a
top priority and is extremely challenging for a variety of reasons,
including the lack of host nation government presence in the city. The
Yemen Affairs Unit in Riyadh and multiple other offices of the
Department continue to collaborate in pursuit of options for our local
staff that include potential immigration to the United States and
employment at other posts, on both temporary and permanent bases.
The Houthis remain in control of the U.S. compound in Sana'a. The
Department is engaged in several diplomatic efforts to recover control
of the compound which, if successful, will lead to a reassessment of
its security infrastructure.
Question. Libya: I understand that the Department is exploring the
resumption of a diplomatic mission in Libya. In March, Ambassador John
Bass visited Libya to further assess the prospects of resuming the U.S.
embassy's operations in Tripoli. Where do these discussions stand and
have the recent political developments in Libya impacted U.S.
consultations?
Answer. Following his trip, Ambassador Bass authorized the Bureau
of Diplomatic Security and Overseas Building Operations to survey
potential interim mission sites with the intention, security conditions
permitting, of establishing a semi-permanent presence staffed by
rotating officers. Our efforts to restore a full diplomatic mission
continue, and we will brief Congress on the next steps. We, of course,
monitor the political and security environment in Libya closely and
will continue to do so.
Question. Last I heard, the Tunis-based embassy staff is able to go
in and out of Libya at least 1 day per month. Is there more flexibility
in how often staff is able to travel in and out of Libya for diplomatic
engagements?
Answer. Because of the ongoing suspension of U.S. embassy
operations in Libya, the Under Secretary for Management must approve
all travel for personnel under Chief of Mission security responsibility
into Libya. Consideration of whether to approve travel into Libya takes
into account an assessment of threats, security resources, and the
necessity for travel, and each trip requires significant logistical and
security support. The frequency of our diplomatic engagement has
steadily increased over the last few years, but increased engagement
will depend on the availability of facilities and resources to ensure
the security of our personnel.
Question. What are the current security needs for ensuring the
safety of these individuals?
Answer. As in all locations, our security requirements are a
mixture of fixed/static security, movement security, physical security,
crisis response/quick reaction forces, and other considerations. We
would be happy to detail our requirements in a classified setting.
Question. Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI): Since 2002,
the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) has worked to address
gaps in educational and economic opportunity and participatory
governance across the Middle East, especially for young people, women
and religious and ethnic minorities. However, funding has decreased
over the years, as has the scope of MEPI's work, which now focuses on
scholarships. What steps can MEPI take to expand its scope to include
more of the types of programs that were envisioned at its outset, in
addition to scholarships?
Answer. Since 2020, more than 75 percent of funding for MEPI has
supported the Tomorrow's Leaders (TL) scholarship program, consistent
with Congressional directives. The FY 2023 budget request for MEPI
seeks funding to continue support for TL. It will also maintain, at a
reduced scope, leadership and alumni programs and continued work with
governments and citizens on locally identified and led reforms to
enhance government responsiveness, democratic decision-making,
inclusive economic growth, and greater opportunities for youth, women,
and marginalized communities. The Department will continue to leverage
MEPI and explore opportunities to expand initiatives of impact to
advance U.S. interests when possible.
Question. Priority GAO Recommendations: For several years, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) has sent the Secretary of State
(along with other Department heads) a letter identifying the most
important outstanding recommendations for your agency to address. In
its 2021 letter, GAO highlighted issues including embassy construction
planning, cyber diplomacy, and security assistance vetting. Will you
commit that senior leadership will review the list of recommendations
GAO highlights as the most important and taking steps to ensure they
are addressed?
Answer. Yes, I am fully committed to closing GAO recommendations,
including the priority ones, in a timely manner. We value these
recommendations to improve our programs and operations. In the recently
released (May 2022) Priority Open Recommendations letter, GAO noted the
Department's implementation rate was 94 percent. We will continue to
work with GAO to assure that recommendations are closed as quickly as
possible.
Question. Embassy Construction: In 2018, GAO reported that State's
Overseas Buildings Operations Bureau had built 77 embassies under its
Capital Security Construction Program since 1999, at a total cost of
about $24 billion. However, GAO found that the pace of the embassy
construction program had slowed. Furthermore, State had not provided
Congress with information on the potential effects of construction
inflation on Program capacity or timeframes for building the nearly 50
embassies identified for replacement beyond 2022. Have you assessed the
effects of worldwide construction inflation on the Program? If so, how
is it going to impact the pace of new embassy construction?
Answer. The Department has assessed the effects of the worldwide
construction inflation on the new embassy construction program and
estimated the effects of lost purchasing power on the program's
capacity. The average inflation rate of 3.55 percent between FY 2014
and FY 2023 on a new embassy construction program that ranged between
$2.2 and $2.6 billion dollars resulted in a $75 million loss in
purchasing power in FY 2015 and will reach a cumulative total loss of
$704 million in purchasing power in FY 2023. Without continued
increases in funding to offset the impact of lost purchasing power due
to worldwide construction inflation, as well as current price inflation
surges, the pace of our construction program will slow proportionally.
Question. Does your budget request take into account the effects of
construction inflation?
Answer. The FY 2023 budget request maintains funding for the
construction of new, secure facilities at levels consistent with the
recommendations of the Accountability Review Board. In accordance with
a 2018 recommendation from the Government Accountability Office, the
Department estimated the effects of cost inflation on planned embassy
construction capacity using construction industry indices. The average
inflation rate of 3.55 percent between FY 2014 and FY 2023 on a new
construction program that ranged between $2.2 billion and $2.6 billion
resulted in a $75 million loss in purchasing power in FY 2015 and
reached a cumulative total of $704 million lost in purchasing power for
FY 2023.
Question. Leahy Vetting: In 2016, GAO recommended that State
develop time frames to establish policies and procedures to implement a
vetting process that would enable the U.S. Government to provide a more
reasonable level of assurance that equipment is not transferred to
foreign security forces where there is credible evidence of human
rights violations. In July 2021, State issued new guidance to address
this recommendation. What steps has State taken to ensure that overseas
posts are implementing this new guidance?
Answer. In 2022, the Department of State undertook a global survey
regarding implementation of the Leahy law. The survey showed that most
countries are expected to receive assistance for which vetting of
recipient units can be done in advance. For the other countries, the
U.S. Government is seeking to enter into agreements with recipient
governments in which the governments agree not to provide covered
assistance to units we identify to the governments as credibly
implicated in a gross violation of human rights. We have completed 15
agreements with such governments thus far.
Question. What challenges have posts faced in implementing the
guidance?
Answer. Some U.S. embassies face challenges in implementing the
2021 guidance in cases where the assistance is not easily tracked to a
specific recipient unit. In those cases, the Department of State is
seeking to enter into agreements with recipient governments in which
the governments agree not to provide covered assistance to units that
we identify as credibly implicated in a gross violation of human
rights. To date, we have completed 15 agreements. The Department has
also developed and is implementing a process to identify such
ineligible units in connection with the agreements.
Question. Democracy Assistance: In 2018, GAO reported that of 10
State bureaus providing democracy assistance, 3 were unable to provide
reliable data on democracy activities they funded. In particular, GAO
found that the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs (INL) did not correctly code its data to identify democracy
assistance provided to countries such as Colombia, Egypt and Kenya.
While State has made improvements to data tracked in its financial
systems, INL has not yet demonstrated how it addressed GAO's
recommendation to improve the reliability of its democracy assistance
data. What actions has INL taken to improve the completeness and
accuracy of its funding data for democracy assistance, such as
correctly identifying beneficiary countries?
Answer. On May 18, INL met with GAO to discuss the status and
criteria needed to close out the recommendation. INL provided GAO
documentation containing the updated INL Bilateral Desk Guide and
Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR) guidance used when entering an
obligation into the financial system. Combining the FADR guidance and
the desk guide establishes a process that will ensure project codes are
a requirement in the Department's financial system and therefore must
be inputted to create an obligation. INL is also producing an updated
report with FY 2021 democracy assistance data to prove to GAO that the
process changes reflect more reliable data.
Question. Anomalous Health Incidents: The Department is requesting
new funding for the Bureaus of Medical Services and Diplomatic Security
to research Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI). While these incidents
have also been referred to as Havana Syndrome and were previously
unseen, U.S. Government personnel have reported potential incidents
around the world. What steps is the Department taking now to ensure it
is prepared to respond to future emerging health-related incidents?
Answer. There is nothing more important than protecting the health,
safety, and security of our people. First and foremost, while
communicating with our entire workforce and investigating incident
reports, we are focused on delivering the best possible care and
treatment for our affected colleagues and their families. Our provision
of medical care at posts is supplemented, when needed, by care here in
the United States at centers of excellence, including Johns Hopkins and
Walter Reed.
We are applying what we have learned from our experience with AHIs,
as well as our response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to prepare for future
health events we can predict and those we cannot. Our commitment to
global health security is not only diplomatic, but applies to our
workforce, too.
Question. Suspension and Reprogramming of Assistance to Central
America: According to a recent GAO report, the 2019 suspension and
reprogramming of assistance to the Northern Triangle adversely affected
implementation of many State projects. Specifically, 65 of State's 168
projects were adversely affected. State reported that commonly
experienced adverse effects on project implementation were delays from
planned timeframes and decreased frequency, quality, or types of
services provided to beneficiaries. What is State doing to overcome the
effects of the suspension and reprogramming of assistance on the
implementation of projects?
Answer. The Department used existing prior year funding and FY 2019
and FY 2020 funds to continue implementing programs consistent with
U.S. Government priorities in Central America and to expand programs
delayed and reduced due to the reprogramming.
Question. Will you provide an update on the level of assistance
State is currently providing compared to prior to the suspension?
Answer. The Department and USAID allocated nearly $804 million in
FY 2021 bilateral, regional, and humanitarian assistance for Central
America, and the President's FY 2022 request included nearly $861
million to support the U.S. Strategy for Addressing the Root Causes of
Migration in Central America. Prior to the reprogramming of assistance,
the Department and USAID allocated approximately $807.5 million in FY
2016 and $769.3 million in FY 2017 bilateral, regional, and
humanitarian assistance to Central America.
Question. Economic and Commercial Diplomacy Training: A December
2021 GAO report recommended that State's training related to economic
and commercial diplomacy would benefit from periodic, comprehensive
assessments to identify whether its training is covering needed topics.
GAO also recommended that State should consult with stakeholders
outside of State regarding whether its economic and commercial
diplomacy training is adequately equipping personnel to perform their
jobs. State concurred with both of these recommendations and stated
that it would establish a Trade and Expansion Advisory Committee as set
forth in the Championing American Business through Diplomacy Act to
obtain some of this external feedback. Has State conducted a
comprehensive assessment of its training needs to support its economic
and commercial diplomacy efforts? If so, what has State found through
this assessment?
Answer. On January 11, the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) re-
established its annual, comprehensive assessment across the economic
and commercial diplomacy issue areas. The review included discussion
and analysis of current policy priorities, FSI's Economic and
Commercial Training Division's current training and course offerings,
course attendance records, and course evaluation results for FY 2021.
This assessment resulted in recommendations including elimination or
reduction of less relevant training, continued and ongoing needs
assessments, increasing resources to meet needs, and reinitiating
annual meetings with all economic and commercial diplomacy subject
matter expert course coordinators.
Question. Is State's training providing its people with the tools
they need to support U.S. businesses abroad?
Answer. The Department of State offers a range of economic and
commercial diplomacy courses and activities that equip foreign affairs
professionals with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to advance U.S.
economic and commercial objectives. The Department appreciates the
recognition that it has taken important steps in its planning, design,
implementation, and evaluation of its economic and commercial diplomacy
training. The Department will continue to strengthen its training
efforts, including through continued assessments of training needs,
additional career guidance for State personnel, and further
consultations with external stakeholders.
Question. What is the status of the Trade and Expansion Advisory
Committee?
Answer. The Trade and Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC), as
established by the Championing American Business through Diplomacy Act
(CABDA), will provide comments and advice on priorities for trade
expansion initiatives to U.S. Government agencies and policymakers. We
are working with our interagency partners, in particular the
Department's Economic Diplomacy Action Group (EDAG) co-vice-chairs--the
Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative--to formally
establish the EDAG, which is a prerequisite to standing up the TEAC.
Question. Who is included in this advisory committee and what are
their roles?
Answer. The Department is working with our interagency partners to
establish the Economic Diplomacy Action Group (EDAG), which is a
prerequisite to the establishment of the Trade and Expansion Advisory
Committee (TEAC). We envision the TEAC providing comments and advice to
agencies and policymakers on potential priorities for initiatives to
expand trade. The Championing American Business through Diplomacy Act
includes a diverse TEAC membership comprising representatives of the
U.S. private sector and other organizations, including labor, who have
direct and operational experience in importing and exporting,
particularly to and from developing countries. The TEAC will advise the
EDAG on ways agencies and posts can better support U.S. companies
abroad. It also is expected to assist the EDAG in soliciting private
sector advice for strategic planning purposes and in advancing the
overall mission and goals of U.S. national security.
Question. What feedback has State received from external parties
related to its economic and commercial diplomacy training?
Answer. The Department of State meets with the Department of
Commerce to discuss training initiatives and collaborative efforts for
outreach to private sector and industry groups on a quarterly basis.
The Trade and Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC), set forth in the
Championing American Business through Diplomacy Act, will be utilized
as a vehicle to facilitate direct engagement with private sector and
industry groups on training. We are working with our interagency
partners to establish the Economic Diplomacy Action Group (EDAG),
including laying the groundwork for the requisite Presidential Action,
prior to the EDAG establishing the TEAC.
Question. State Department Staffing: A March 2019 GAO report found
that, according to staff at overseas posts, State's Consular Fellows
Program was helpful in hiring applicants from outside the Foreign
Service to perform duties and to fulfill responsibilities similar to
those of entry-level career Foreign Service consular officers. GAO's
review found that consular fellows filled over 200 Foreign Service
consular positions that otherwise would be vacant. Do you consider the
program to be a success? If so, would it be possible to create a
similar program to help reduce the high vacancy rates for other
positions at overseas posts, such as information management?
Answer. The State Department continues to utilize the Consular
Fellows program to meet the needs of the service. As needed, the
Department uses limited noncareer appointment Consular Fellows (CFPs)
to fill entry-level consular positions, where they are primarily
responsible for adjudicating visas. The Department considers this
program very successful because it allows staffing to expand and
contract based on visa demand. For example, during the past year and a
half during the pandemic, the Department did not hire any Consular
Fellows. The Department regularly reviews current and future staffing
demands and necessary resources to ensure the optimal intake and
staffing for all skill codes.
Question. Employing Eligible Family Members: A March 2019 GAO
report found that, according to staff at overseas posts, posts have
widely employed eligible family members (EFMs) to supplement Foreign
Service employees and, in certain cases, to take on the duties of
Foreign Service positions that are vacant. However, staff at overseas
posts noted the challenges of relying too heavily on EFMs to help
address Foreign Service vacancies. In particular, staff noted that some
EFMs may lack the skills, qualifications, training, or interest needed
to fill vacant staffing needs at post. Has the number of EFM positions
at overseas posts increased, decreased, or stayed the same over time?
Answer. Eligible Family Member (EFM) positions at post may
supplement overseas staffing needs. For more specialized EFM positions,
such as Expanded Professional Associates Program (EPAP) positions, EFMs
often provide substantial support to their sections, but do not replace
the need for trained Foreign Service Officers, who are ultimately
responsible for direction and management of a section. The number of
centrally funded EPAP positions has remained at 400 worldwide since
2018, while the number of other EFM positions has either remained
static or decreased over time.
Question. Has State assessed the extent to which the EFM program is
addressing the needs of overseas posts?
Answer. All of our Eligible Family Member (EFM) programs fill
staffing needs overseas, but the Expanded Professional Associates
Program remains one of the most popular EFM programs. Each year, posts
request more positions than are available through the State
Department's central funding. Other administrative positions may be
filled by EFMs at post as needed.
Question. What steps has State taken to ensure that EFMs are
qualified for their assigned positions?
Answer. When Eligible Family Members (EFMs) are accompanying their
employee spouses on an overseas assignment, they may apply to available
positions. EFMs must meet the qualifications required for the position,
regardless of the nature of the position. However, many jobs available
to EFMs inside an embassy or consulate are administrative in nature and
do not require specialized training or skills to qualify. The State
Department offers functional training to EFMs on a space-available
basis as funding permits.
Question. State also hires eligible family members to certain
specialized positions, such as facility managers, through its Expanded
Professional Associates Program. Has State assessed the extent to which
this Program has addressed specialized position vacancies at overseas
posts?
Answer. The Expanded Professional Associates Program (EPAP) helps
address the staffing needs of overseas posts, including the need for
specialized positions. Each year, posts request more positions than are
available through the State Department's central funding. These
positions are professional level full-time positions in Economics,
Management, Political, Public Diplomacy, Financial Management, General
Services, Human Resources, Office Management and Medical (Registered
Nurse) areas.
Question. Democracy Assistance. Multiple State bureaus are involved
in providing democracy assistance around the world. In 2020, GAO
reported that State officials in its case study countries said they
generally lacked information about the Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights and Labor's (DRL) democracy assistance projects, including
project descriptions and funding amounts. State's existing information-
sharing mechanisms, including data systems and strategies, do not
consistently address these gaps. What actions has State taken to
improve information sharing on democracy assistance projects between
the HQ-based DRL bureau and embassies abroad?
Answer. DRL coordinates closely at all stages of the procurement
cycle with relevant stakeholders, including regional offices,
embassies, and USAID. As part of the Office of Foreign Assistance-led
planning process, all Department offices and bureaus, including
regional offices and embassies, are able to review and request changes
to DRL's intended programming. Per DRL policy, all program
solicitations require regional office and embassy clearance and, in
consultation with the relevant embassy, regional desks serve as voting
members on all application review panels. DRL strives to improve
information flows with embassies by sharing information biannually
regarding ongoing programming to address knowledge gaps due to turnover
at posts.
Question. Funding for Consular Services: Recent changes in the fee
structure for Consular Affairs should generate additional revenue to
fund the Bureau's operation. Specifically, the Passport Security
Surcharge was increased by $20 per passport. In addition, the FY 2022
Consolidated Appropriations Act allows State to retain the passport
application fee, which State historically transferred to the General
Fund. Nevertheless, State has requested additional, expanded fee
setting and expenditure authority for several consular fees. Please
explain why these recent changes are insufficient to address the
imbalance that State has identified in the structure of Consular
Affairs fees.
Answer. Recent Congressional action has had a significant, positive
impact on the longstanding structural imbalance of the Consular and
Border Security Programs (CBSP) account. Continuation of the
expenditure authorities in section 7052 for the Passport Security
Surcharge and other fees, as well as renewing the expenditure authority
for the Passport Application and Execution Fees, however, remains
critical to ensure the CBSP account is able to manage future
fluctuations in demand for consular services. The FY 2023 Congressional
budget request seeks to ensure the Department has the flexibility to
address remaining structural gaps as a result of non-retained and no-
fee services.
Question. Why does State need additional flexibilities? Please
describe why each of the requested changes, or which subset of the
changes, would be sufficient to ensure that Consular Affairs collects
sufficient revenue to ensure full cost recovery and the targeted
threshold for carry over balances.
Answer. The State Department requires the requested additional
flexibilities to continue addressing the long-standing structural
imbalance of the Consular and Border Security Programs account and
maintain resilience against unforeseen fluctuations in demand.
Enactment of these requests, and the continuation of the new Passport
Application and Execution Fee expenditure authority, would support the
Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) in fulfilling its mission of providing
critical support to U.S. citizens overseas and upholding national
security. CA looks forward to briefing committee staff on the rationale
behind each section.
1. Extending broader expenditure authorities (sec. 7052)
2. The CBSP visa services cost recovery proposal (sec. 7062)
3. Modification of PSS and IVSS authority (sec. 7063(b))
4. Extension of the WHTI authority (sec. 7025(i)(1))
5. Border Crossing Card for Minors (sec. 7063)
6. Transfer Authority (sec. 7025(i)(9)
Question. Embassy Maintenance: State's Bureau of Overseas Buildings
Operations operates and maintains over 8,500 owned and leased real
property assets, including both buildings and structures. State has an
estimated $3 billion maintenance backlog. However, we reported in
September 2021 that State did not have a plan to address this backlog
and has not specifically requested funding to address the backlog in
its congressional budget requests. State officials estimated it could
take 30 to 40 years to eliminate the backlog with current funding
levels. Is State developing a plan with specific information on the
funding and timeframes needed to reduce its deferred maintenance
backlog?
Answer. The Department's real property portfolio includes more than
25,000 leased and government-owned assets. The Bureau of Overseas
Buildings Operations (OBO) is addressing the overseas deferred
maintenance backlog by implementing a Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization (SRM) framework that will better project operational and
maintenance costs for the life cycle of facilities in our overseas
portfolio. The SRM framework will include site surveys and data
collection for Facility Performance Evaluations. The Department
continues to prioritize funds for programs that address deferred
maintenance and repair.
Question. Does State plan to specifically request funding to
address the deferred maintenance backlog in its Congressional budget
requests?
Answer. The FY 2023 request includes more than $365 million to fund
programs intended to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog for
overseas facilities. We are currently collecting data that will inform
future budget requests, as well as the internal allocation of
resources.
Question. U.S. Assistance to the Saudi-led Coalition in Yemen:
Since 2015, the United States has provided intelligence, military
advice, and logistical support to the Saudi Arabia-led Coalition in
Yemen. In February 2021, the President announced an end to all American
support for offensive operations in the war in Yemen, including
relevant arms sales. How, if at all, has State sought to determine
whether requested equipment is offensive or defensive in nature?
Answer. The Department adheres to the President's February 2021
guidance that suspended arms sales relevant to offensive operations in
Yemen and maintained support for Saudi Arabia's capabilities to defend
its territory, where more than 70,000 U.S. citizens reside. Pursuant to
this direction, the Department suspended air-to-ground munitions sales.
The Administration continues to evaluate proposed arms transfers on a
case-by-case basis, informed by previous use. The Department has
briefed Members and staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
regarding issues related to this distinction and provided classified
details of the current policy that puts into effect President Biden's
guidance to cease support for offensive operations in Yemen. We will
continue to consult with Congress to ensure that sales and support to
Saudi Arabia are considered with this question in mind.
Question. We understand that the Administration plans to release a
new version of the Conventional Arms Transfer Policy in the near
future. How, if at all, does State plan to use this policy to guide its
Foreign Military Sales (FMS) transfer decisions in a way that aligns
with the Administration's policy not to support offensive operations in
the war in Yemen?
Answer. The Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) Policy provides a
global framework under which U.S. Government agencies review and
evaluate proposed transfers of military articles, defense services, and
certain commercial items, to foreign countries or organizations. Under
the CAT Policy, proposed arms transfer decisions continue to be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure transfers align with U.S.
foreign policy and national security interests. The Administration will
continue the policy of denying arms transfers where we believe there is
significant risk of diversion, civilian harm, or misuse, including
human rights abuses. While the CAT Policy does not specifically address
the conflict in Yemen, we apply the same standards to those partners
who are operating in Yemen.
In reviewing and updating the CAT Policy, the Biden-Harris
administration is working to emphasize our foreign policy priorities,
including leading with diplomacy, elevating human rights, and renewing
and revitalizing America's alliances.
Question. Countering China's Economic Espionage and Technology
Transfer Efforts: The Government of the People's Republic of China has
publicly stated its intent to acquire foreign technology as a key
element of its strategy for international competitiveness. State's visa
adjudication process is integral to identifying which prospective
foreign visitors, from China and elsewhere, may pose specific types of
threats, such as a risk to sensitive technology transfer. In January
2021, the White House's Proclamation on Ending Discriminatory Bans on
Entry to the United States directed State to, among other things,
provide a report within 120 days on various visa processing topics,
including recommendations to improve screening and vetting activities
to further integrate relevant government data into the vetting system.
According to State officials, this report was transmitted to the White
House in the fall of 2021. What, if any, recommendations has State
identified to improve the screening and vetting process, particularly
to address technology transfer threats presented by the PRC and other
countries of concern?
Answer. As required by Presidential Proclamation 10141, section 3,
the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security
submitted a report underscoring a multifaceted approach that
continually and deliberately strengthens multilayered screening and
vetting procedures for visa applicants. The proposed approach includes
11 recommendations that leverage existing processes and programs, such
as international data sharing and domestic coordination, to improve our
ability to detect and counter security threats, including that of
technology transfer. The Department's recommendations in the report are
classified. We request that you contact the National Security Council
for additional information.
Question. What, if any, challenges may exist that would impede the
implementation of these recommendations?
Answer. The Department's report to the President is classified, and
we request that you contact the National Security Council for
additional information. The report identified several challenges, as
well as possible remedies to address them. The Department of State is
committed to strengthening national security and will continue to work
to identify and address these issues. We will continue to collaborate
with the National Security Council, the Department of Homeland
Security, and other interagency partners on these efforts.
Question. Promoting Equity Abroad: Protests around the world
against racism and injustice have highlighted opportunities for U.S.
leaders to advance racial and ethnic equity and to support historically
marginalized groups around the world. To this end, in 2021, the
President issued several executive directives that outlined policy
commitments for his Administration. These include advancing racial
equity and support for underserved communities, preventing and
combating discrimination based on gender identity and sexual
orientation, and promoting and protecting the human rights of lesbian,
gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons. The
2023 Budget request provides $2.6 billion to advance gender equity and
equality and to support underserved communities across a broad range of
sectors. This includes $200 million for the Gender Equity and Equality
Action Fund to advance the economic security of women and girls. How
does State plan to spend the remaining $2.4 billion?
Answer. The FY 2023 President's budget request includes an historic
request of $2.6 billion for gender equity and equality across the
Department of State and U.S. Agency for International Development, more
than doubling such funding over the FY 2022 request. In addition to the
Gender Equity and Equality Action Fund (GEEA), the request includes
funding with a primary purpose of advancing gender equality and women's
empowerment, preventing and responding to gender-based violence, and
promoting women, peace, and security. The request also includes funding
for other assistance programming across development sectors and
security assistance that will integrate gender equality and women's
empowerment.
Question. Given the Administration's focus on racial equity and
equity for all, how does State plan to promote equity amongst other
underserved populations?
Answer. The Department of State employs a range of diplomatic and
programmatic tools to address the intersectional barriers that limit
members of all marginalized communities from fully participating in
civic and economic life, including by integrating racial equity and
support for underserved communities into the Department's strategic
plans at the mission, bureau, and agency levels. For example, the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor champions the access,
inclusion, and equality of all people by leading and supporting
Department efforts to identify and address barriers for marginalized
and underserved groups within society, including those experiencing
discrimination, violence, or other forms of injustice, through both
diplomacy and programming.
Question. Definitions for marginalized groups are somewhat
expansive due to the need to include all those who may experience
marginalization. Do you anticipate any challenges with directing
sufficient resources to any particular group due to the number of
populations covered by expansive definitions?
Answer. As the lead for democracy and human rights in the
Department, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL)
supports programs that contribute to the promotion, protection, and
advancement of nondiscriminatory practices and laws around the globe
through strategic resource allocation to ensure we are meeting the
needs of all marginalized populations. DRL prioritizes inclusive and
integrated programming to address the barriers to access for
individuals and groups based on their unique needs, including
communities that experience intersectional discrimination. Our
resources are targeted based on connections between discrimination and
the weakening of democratic institutions, and where specific types of
marginalization are a global issue.
Question. Your budget request expands programs to foster diversity
and inclusion. In support of the President's DEIA-related Executive
Orders, the Department's request is $65.6 million, which includes
funding for 30 new positions for DEIA efforts. What efforts and how
many positions, if any, will be directed to promoting DEIA in State's
foreign assistance provided abroad?
Answer. As outlined in the Department's recently released Equity
Action Plan, the United States is addressing systemic racism and
strengthening democracy and human dignity worldwide as a core tenet of
President Biden's foreign assistance. In addition to orienting our
external work around the values of diversity, equity, inclusion, and
access, we are placing just as much emphasis on bolstering Department
leadership to amplify and accelerate assistance that is comprehensive
in its approach to advancing equity for all. Accordingly, we expect to
see new and enhanced leadership across sectors and regions, the details
of which will correspond to Department personnel announcements and
staffing timelines.
Question. State has taken numerous actions in response to E.O.
13985, such as creating the Agency Equity Team and increasing the focus
on equity in new strategy documents. How does State plan to
institutionalize these changes, such as through multiyear funding or
permanent dedicated staffing?
Answer. The Department created an Equity Action Plan outlining
actions, commitments, and accountability mechanisms to integrate equity
across our foreign affairs work. We will institutionalize this plan by
prioritizing engagements with diplomatic partners from underrepresented
and underserved communities, establishing reporting requirements and
equity analysis tools for international aid, embedding the executive
order's principles into public diplomacy programming and communications
strategies, updating the interpretation and application of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, and requiring reviews under current
federal contracting processes to provide more equitable access to
underserved and small business partners.
Question. Child Trafficking Programs: In 2013, Congress authorized
Child Protection Compacts (CPCs), multi-year bilateral agreements
between the U.S. Government and selected partner countries that are
managed by the Department of State's Office to Monitor and Combat
Trafficking in Persons (J/TIP). These compacts focus on bilateral
efforts to prevent child trafficking, protect victims, and prosecute
cases of child trafficking. Since 2015, J/TIP has selected five CPC
partner countries to work collaboratively with the government through a
joint commitment (with a sixth CPC to be negotiated soon). How, if at
all, are these bilateral government partnerships more effective than
individual State awards/projects in combatting trafficking?
Answer. Child Protection Compact (CPC) Partnerships are negotiated
with the partner government and are multidisciplinary in nature,
engaging a wide variety of governmental institutions and systems across
the three ``Ps'' of prevention, protection, and prosecution to reduce
child trafficking and protect victims. Unlike our typical foreign
assistance, foreign governments make formal commitments to address
child trafficking and often their own investments to advance the goals
of the partnership. This level of coordination with the CPC partner
government is deeper than typical bilateral programs, which tend to
focus on one or two issues or institutions within a country and are not
intended to take the multidisciplinary approach that the CPC program
does.
Question. Does State believe it would be useful to adopt this type
of compact partnership model for delivering foreign assistance in other
areas?
Answer. The Department is constantly examining new and innovative
ways to be more effective with our foreign assistance funding. We
examine each proposal on a case-by-case basis to determine what is most
appropriate for a given program and account. However, per our response
to Senator Menendez's previous question about Child Protection Compact
Partnerships, J/TIP has found that programs can have particularly
strong and sustainable impacts when there is a multidisciplinary
approach that includes increased engagement with government
stakeholders at all levels.
Question. Global Health Programs Funds: The Global Health Programs
(GHP) account funds health-related foreign assistance to control the
HIV/AIDS epidemic, prevent child and maternal deaths, and combat
infectious disease threats. Between fiscal years 2018 through 2020,
State typically carried over an average of about $9 billion in
unobligated balances. In fiscal year 2021, Congress appropriated $4
billion in emergency funds to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Please
provide an update on State's GHP obligations and describe how, if at
all, the global pandemic is affecting your ability to obligate and
distribute funding before available GHP funds expire.
Answer. Please see the chart below for an update on unobligated GHP
balances.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Thus far, the pandemic has not significantly impacted PEPFAR's
ability to obligate funds before they expire. While some costs
decreased (e.g., travel, certain program interventions like voluntary
male medical circumcisions), others increased (e.g., virtual platforms,
internet bandwidth, need for personal protective equipment, and supply
chain costs). One significant program disruption has been to our Peace
Corps programming as volunteers departed most programs during the
pandemic. However, this has not yet specifically resulted in the
expiration of funding.
USAID fully obligated the $4 billion in FY 2021 COVID-19 emergency
funds during FY 2021. While there continue to be challenges in the
programming, obligation, and implementation of GHP funds as a result of
the pandemic, USAID remains committed to the timely obligation of GHP
funds to achieve our three strategic global health goals. USAID does
not foresee any insurmountable challenges to fully obligating FY 2021
funds this fiscal year.
Question. Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance Funds:
State's Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) account
provides funding to maintain safe, secure, and functional facilities
for U.S. diplomatic and consular missions abroad. Between fiscal years
2018 and 2021, State has typically carried over an average of about $7
billion in unobligated balances. In fiscal year 2022, State noted that
it planned to use part of the ESCM funding for Embassy and Consulate
construction and renovations worldwide. Specifically, about $2.1
billion in unobligated funds were to be used for several major
construction contracts. Given the current global pandemic and supply
chain shortages, please provide an update on State's planned
construction and renovation contracts. Is State planning to move
forward with all of its planned efforts?
Answer. The Department is planning to award an estimated $3.1
billion worth of construction and renovation contracts in FY 2022. We
continue to work with our partners in the construction industry to
overcome challenges created by the global pandemic and supply chain
shortages. We will manage the impact of changes using existing
contingency funds when possible. When that is not possible, we will
reprogram funding when needed in consultation with Congress following
the regular notification process.
Question. Climate Preparedness: Congress has supported measures
that improve the climate resilience and adaptability of the Department
of Defense's assets and installations located overseas. It stands to
reason the State Department should take similar measures to secure our
non-defense facilities and assets abroad. Is the State department aware
of the provisions pertaining to the climate preparedness of the Defense
Department included in the FY 2019 and FY 2020 National Defense
Authorization Act?
Answer. The Department of State is aware of the Department of
Defense's efforts to adapt their operations and infrastructure to the
effects of climate change and has initiated collaboration with them on
best practices for data sources, risk analysis and adaptation planning.
The Department also agrees that our overseas diplomatic platforms are
critical infrastructure and takes seriously the responsibility to adapt
our facilities and operations to be resilient to the unavoidable
effects of climate change and other natural hazards. Although not
inclusive of all the provisions of the National Defense Authorization
Act, the Department is addressing the resilience of its overseas assets
and installations, as outlined in its 2021 Climate Adaptation and
Resilience Plan.
Question. If these provisions were appropriately modified to apply
to State Department facilities and resources, and other non-defense
assets and facilities that operate under chief of mission authorities
in foreign countries, would the State Department be able to
meaningfully execute such laws?
Answer. Modifications to the existing National Defense
Authorization Act provisions and appropriate resources would enable the
Department to meaningfully execute those provisions as it implements
the priority adaptation actions. Specifically, the Department's 2021
Climate Adaptation and Resilience Plan includes a priority adaptation
action for ``Program Building in Support of Climate-Ready Sites and
Facilities,'' taking measures to secure our non-defense facilities and
assets abroad.
Question. How important is it to the security of Americans serving
abroad under chief of mission authority, and for the safety and
security of U.S. Government civilian assets abroad, for the State
Department to take protective and preventive measures against the
effects of climate change?
Answer. The Department's Climate Adaptation and Resilience Plan
calls on diplomatic missions to include climate hazards in emergency
management activities. The Department has assessed overseas facilities
for several climate hazards and has reviewed emergency plans to
identify gaps. From an emergency planning perspective, natural disaster
and weather-related events are assessed at the post level. Post's
hazard-specific response plans are documented in the custom content
section in its Emergency Action Plan that lays out protective and
preventive measures for the safety and security of U.S. Government
civilian personnel, facilities, and residences. Climate hazards are now
being incorporated into site selection, new construction, and
renovations.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator James E. Risch
Question. U.S. Diplomats in China: How many U.S. personnel under
chief of mission in China have been forced by the Chinese Government
into ``fever hospitals''?
Answer. Prior to the arrival of Ambassador Nick Burns to Beijing in
late March 2022, Mission China had a total of 30 personnel (employees
or family members) test positive for COVID-19 upon arrival in China and
submit to hospitalization until cleared by People's Republic of China
(PRC) health authorities. On his first day, the Ambassador committed to
the Embassy community and subsequently communicated to the PRC that he
would not permit any American Mission personnel to be forced into a
fever clinic or COVID hospital. No American personnel of the Mission
have been admitted to PRC facilities since that time. Ambassador Burns
has reaffirmed this new U.S. position to senior PRC officials since
then.
Question. What is the longest stay in a fever hospital experienced
by U.S. personnel?
Answer. The longest stay in a fever hospital experienced by U.S.
personnel occurred between July and October 2021, during which time a
family stayed in a COVID-19 hospital for 56 days. Throughout this stay,
Mission China and EAP exerted constant advocacy and pressure on PRC
authorities for better treatment and release of the family. The
employee chose to remain in China and proceed with his assignment after
release.
Question. What is the second longest stay in a fever hospital
experienced by U.S. personnel?
Answer. The second longest stay in a fever hospital experienced by
U.S. personnel is 39 days. Throughout this stay, Mission China and EAP
exerted constant advocacy and pressure on PRC authorities for better
treatment and release of this employee.
Question. What MOU or other agreement governs the compliance of
U.S. personnel with the PRC COVID protocols?
Answer. There is no MOU or other agreement specifically governing
the compliance of U.S. personnel with the PRC COVID-19 protocols. The
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations and two applicable bilateral conventions between
China and the United States govern the PRC's obligations vis-a-vis the
treatment of U.S. diplomatic personnel and their families in the PRC.
None of these agreements establish detailed rules concerning the extent
to which diplomatic personnel must abide by host country health
regulations during a health emergency.
Question. Are there any current PRC requirements that exceed the
terms of the original agreement?
Answer. The Vienna Conventions require diplomatic personnel to
respect local law as long as local law does not prejudice the
privileges and immunities enjoyed by diplomatic personnel. Some PRC
COVID-19 protocols are inconsistent with the immunities enjoyed by U.S.
diplomatic personnel, notably requiring submission to long stays in
fever hospitals by those who test positive. To secure our privileges
and immunities in this context, on his first day, Ambassador Burns
committed to the Embassy community and subsequently communicated to the
PRC authorities that he would not permit any American personnel of the
U.S. Mission to be forced into a fever clinic or COVID hospital.
Question. Are Mission China and EAP satisfied with the current
arrangement with the PRC regarding COVID protocols for U.S. diplomats?
Answer. The United States expects all governments, including the
PRC, to adhere to their commitments under the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations. Senior Department officials have raised our
concerns in Washington and Beijing regarding the challenging
circumstances as the PRC responds to the COVID-19 pandemic. On his
first day, Ambassador Burns committed to the Embassy community and
subsequently told PRC authorities that he would not permit any American
personnel of the Mission to be forced into a fever clinic or COVID
hospital.
Question. Are Mission China and EAP taking any actions to improve
or modify COVID protocol arrangements?
Answer. On his first day on the job, Ambassador Nicholas Burns
committed to the Embassy community and subsequently communicated to the
PRC authorities that he would not permit any U.S. personnel of the
Mission to be forced into a fever clinic or COVID hospital. No U.S.
personnel of the Mission have been admitted to PRC facilities since
that time.
Question. Are the Bureaus of Medical Services, Diplomatic Security,
and Overseas Building Operations able to inspect the fever hospitals
for health, safety, and security? If so, how many such inspections have
been conducted, when did they occur, and what were the findings? If
not, why is the Department unable to inspect these facilities, and what
is the Department doing to change that?
Answer. Despite repeated requests by Mission China leadership and
engagement by the Secretary with his PRC counterpart over China's
``Zero COVID'' policy, PRC officials have refused requests by post
personnel on behalf of the Bureaus of Medical Services (MED),
Diplomatic Security, and Overseas Buildings Operations to access fever
hospitals to ensure these facilities are safe and secure. Ambassador
Burns told PRC authorities that he would not permit any U.S. Mission
personnel to be forced into a PRC facility. In addition, MED has made
evacuations available for personnel under Chief of Mission security
authority to enable them to avoid involuntary admission to fever
hospitals.
Question. Are the Bureaus of Medical Services, Diplomatic Security,
and Consular Affairs able to access U.S. personnel forced into fever
hospitals to check on their safety and security?
Answer. Because of PRC COVID-19 restrictions, these facilities are
inaccessible to diplomatic personnel or other visitors. Mission China's
personnel have been able to communicate with U.S. personnel in fever
hospitals and deliver food and other items to them via facility staff.
Once when the Embassy's medical staff was unable to get needed
medication to a patient in a fever hospital, the Department medically
evacuated the patient.
Question. How would you describe the conditions of a fever
hospital? Are they comparable to a U.S. hospital?
Answer. Fever clinics--the initial isolation facilities where
suspected patients remain for 1 to 3 days while being confirmed COVID-
19-positive--range in quality, though in general the Embassy views them
as unacceptable for U.S. standards. Several have moldy walls, no
running water, overcrowded conditions, and a general lack of
cleanliness. COVID-19 hospitals--where patients remain until they test
COVID-19-negative--are generally better and on par with those in the
United States. On his first day, Ambassador Burns committed to the
Embassy community and subsequently told PRC authorities that he would
not permit any U.S. Mission personnel to be forced into a PRC facility.
Question. Are U.S. personnel in a fever hospital provided with a
translator in order to fully understand their medical situation?
Answer. Translation has not been a problem for our personnel. These
facilities have staff who speak English, and Mission China's personnel
have also been able to communicate with U.S. personnel and with
facility staff. However, we see these facilities as unacceptable for
U.S. standards. On his first day, Ambassador Burns committed to the
Embassy community and subsequently communicated to the PRC authorities
that he would not permit any U.S. personnel of the Mission to be forced
into a fever clinic or COVID hospital. No U.S. personnel of the Mission
have been admitted to PRC facilities since that time. Ambassador Burns
has reaffirmed this new U.S. position to senior Chinese officials.
Question. Are U.S. personnel administered medical tests in a fever
hospital by Chinese doctors? If yes, are U.S. personnel able to decline
tests?
Answer. PRC doctors administer COVID-19 tests to U.S. personnel in
a fever clinic or COVID hospital. Personnel can decline tests, but for
a patient already tested to be COVID-19-positive, declining further
tests lengthens their hospital stay as they will not be permitted to
leave until testing negative. These are among the reasons we see COVID
hospitalization in China to be unacceptable for our Mission's U.S.
personnel. Upon arrival on March 28, Ambassador Burns committed to the
Embassy community and told PRC authorities that no U.S. personnel of
the Mission would be subject to a fever clinic or COVID hospital. He
has reiterated this in every official encounter with PRC authorities.
Question. Does the MED Unit at post have access to the test results
of any medical tests administered in a fever hospital?
Answer. MED units receive test results directly from the PRC
Ministry of Health. The PRC Ministry of Health has been, at times, less
than forthcoming with this information. This is among the reasons we
see COVID hospitalization in China to be unacceptable for our Mission's
U.S. personnel. On his first day, Ambassador Burns committed to the
Embassy community and subsequently told PRC authorities that he would
not permit any U.S. personnel of the Mission to be forced into a fever
clinic or COVID hospital. No U.S. Mission personnel have been admitted
to fever hospitals since that time. Ambassador Burns has reaffirmed
this new U.S. position to senior Chinese officials since then.
Question. Does the ``patient'' have access to the test results of
any medical tests administered in a fever hospital?
Answer. The patient in a fever clinic or COVID hospital being
tested has access to test results administered to them, though not
always as those test results are finalized; they often must wait until
discharge.
Question. What does the Department know about what happens to the
medical data collected from U.S. personnel while they detained in
``fever hospitals''?
Answer. PRC authorities are unable to provide assurances that
medical data, in the form of samples, will be destroyed after
processing in all cases.
Question. Are U.S. personnel in China allowed to medevac if they
receive a positive COVID result?
Answer. From his first day in Beijing, Ambassador Burns has
insisted no U.S. Mission personnel would be subject to a fever clinic
or COVID hospital. The PRC has agreed that arriving U.S. personnel who
test positive may remain in their quarantine hotel and be medically
evacuated within 72 hours rather than enter the PRC health care system.
Personnel already in China may be evacuated if they receive a positive
COVID-19 result, the Department confirms a need for medevac, and after
further negotiation with the MFA on a case-by-case basis.
Question. What is the process for U.S. personnel in China who
choose to medevac?
Answer. If U.S. personnel in China are medically evacuated, post
will coordinate their departure with local MFA officials, who will in
turn coordinate with local PRC Center for Disease Control officials.
They are transported to the nearest accepting location, which is
currently Guam, to board an aircraft contracted by the Bureau of
Medical Services. They are treated in Guam and once they are recovered
and can be released, they are transported to the United States. From
there, they decide whether to continue their tour of duty in China and
if so, they must meet the travel requirements to re-enter China.
Question. Are U.S. personnel who medevac allowed to return to
Mission China after they have recovered from COVID?
Answer. Yes, U.S. personnel who are medically evacuated are allowed
to return to Mission China after they have recovered from COVID-19.
They must meet the PRC's testing requirements for travel to China. For
a person with prior COVID-19-positive testing results, meeting these
requirements can take months and may involve additional diagnostics,
including chest x-rays.
Question. If the policy regarding U.S. personnel medevac has been
modified, when has it changed and why?
Answer. In April 2022, the Department of State developed a
mechanism by which personnel testing positive, but who are asymptomatic
could, nevertheless, depart China via appropriate means. The Department
created this option in recognition of the unacceptable hardship
presented by isolation in a PRC Government facility for diplomatic
personnel or their family members.
Question. Does the U.S. Government force Chinese diplomats in the
United States to submit COVID tests periodically to demonstrate that
they aren't spreading COVID while living in the United States?
Answer. No, the United States does not force any diplomats to
submit to COVID-19 testing. The United States strives to always respect
its diplomatic law obligations and does not suspend them as a
reciprocal matter.
Question. If Chinese diplomats in the United States receive a
positive COVID test result, are they forced to enter a U.S. hospital?
Answer. No, diplomats who test positive for Covid-19 are not
required to hospitalize.
Question. If Chinese diplomats in the United States receive a
positive COVID test result, are they forced by the U.S. Government to
quarantine?
Answer. Foreign diplomats, including those from the PRC, are
required to observe local COVID-19 mitigation measures. To the extent
those measures require a COVID-19 positive individual to remain in
quarantine for a certain period of time, the Department would expect
PRC diplomats to do so.
Question. Has the State Department discussed the lack of
reciprocity in how American and Chinese diplomats are treated vis-a-vis
COVID? If yes, what has been the Chinese Government's response?
Answer. We continue to assert to the PRC that many of its COVID-19
mitigation measures are inconsistent with the privileges and immunities
diplomats enjoy under applicable diplomatic law instruments. The
Department has also pointed out to the PRC the disparity in treatment
between U.S. diplomats and those of the PRC. The PRC has refused to
make significant exceptions to its ``Zero COVID'' policy with respect
to its obligations toward diplomatic personnel entering or residing in
the PRC. PRC authorities are adamant all residents, including diplomats
and their families, must comply with its public health measures.
Question. Mr. McKeon, you corrected your initial answer on
questions regarding U.S. personnel in China and COVID protocols with,
``Nobody who is currently stationed in China has gone into a fever
hospital if they tested positive, but they have gone into them if they
test positive when they come from abroad.'' Can the Department confirm
that not one person under chief of mission authority in China has been
forced into a fever hospital, except upon entry into China?
Answer. The Department confirms that not one person under Chief of
Mission authority in China has been forced into a fever hospital,
except upon entry into China.
Question. Lockdowns in China: Since the determination to go to
ordered departure in Shanghai, what kinds of routine and emergency
services is the consulate able to provide to U.S. citizens? Please be
specific.
Answer. Ambassador Burns ordered the creation of a 24-hour Task
Force of 80 officers to support U.S. citizens and provide reinforcement
to Consulate General (CG) Shanghai. From April 7 to May 27, CG Shanghai
and Embassy Beijing staffed this task force, providing extensive
assistance to U.S. citizens. Diminution in demand for the Task Force's
services led to its dissolution. Mission China continues to provide
emergency and routine services to U.S. citizens, including passport
renewals. Mission China is also urging PRC officials to open residences
of U.S. citizens that city officials have blocked, and to allow U.S.
citizens to quarantine at home.
Question. Does the Department of State currently have regular
access to detained Americans, especially those located in facilities in
areas that the Chinese Government has locked down? If not, what is the
Department doing--both at Mission China and from Washington--to ensure
regular consular access?
Answer. Since the start of the pandemic, all Mission China posts
have sent multiple diplomatic notes to PRC authorities requesting
regularized consular access and to address individual U.S. citizen
inmate concerns. Consulate General Shanghai requested welfare status
updates for every U.S. citizen inmate in its consular district, within
which all prisons and detention centers have been locked down with no
consular access in any form. Visits with detainees in Beijing's
consular district are being conducted by phone, where possible, due to
recent PRC restrictions. Mission China is discussing with other
likeminded missions how to collectively advocate for regular consular
access.
Question. The Office of Sanctions Coordination: The President's FY
2023 Budget Request includes a request for contractors in the Office of
Sanctions Coordination. When Congress created the Office of Sanctions
Coordination it included a 2-year direct hire authority. How many
personnel have been hired using that direct hire authority?
Answer. The Office of Sanctions Coordination (S/SC) has certain
direct hire authority as provided by Congress through the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021. S/SC is in the process of using this
authority to hire three members in addition to securing the services of
a contracted Office Management Specialist. The request for contractors
in the President's FY 2023 Budget Request is for the Office of
Sanctions Policy and Implementation in the Bureau of Economic and
Business Affairs Division of Threat Finance and Sanctions (EB/TFS/SPI).
The direct hire authority was not extended to EB/TFS/SPI, which reports
up through the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business
Affairs (EB). The direct hire authority provided was specific to the
Office of the Sanctions Coordinator (S/SC), which reports directly to
the Secretary of State.
Question. Why does the Department need contractors in the Office of
Sanctions Coordination if it has a direct hire authority?
Answer. The Office of Sanctions Policy and Implementation in the
Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs Division of Threat Finance and
Sanctions (EB/TFS/SPI) employs roughly 43 contractors in the
development and implementation of economic sanctions authorities
implemented by the Secretary of State. These contractors began
supporting sanctions work for EB/TFS/SPI in 2019 with a focus on Iran.
Since that time, their scope of work has expanded and they have
supported the implementation of sanctions against more than 300
Russian, PRC, Iranian, Burmese, and Nord Stream 2-related actors. The
Office of Sanctions Coordination (S/SC) has certain direct hire
authority as provided in the Congress through the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021. S/SC is in the process of using this
authority to hire three direct hire members in addition to securing the
services of a contracted Office Management Specialist.
Question. Consular Affairs: According to the State Department's
website, the wait time for obtaining an interview for a visitor visa to
the U.S. can easily take longer than 200 days and in some instances
more than 2 years. While the State Department has, like the rest of the
world, been challenged responding to COVID-19, it seems as though
certain consulate's visa processing wait times are getting longer. What
is the ideal time for the State Department to process the average visa?
Answer. The Department of State is committed to reducing wait times
in all visa classes, and to meeting visa demand safely and efficiently
at our posts around the world. Consular sections assess local
conditions, staffing capacity, and seasonal priorities to allocate the
maximum number of interviews for applicants. They also maintain
expedited appointment programs to facilitate travel for people with
emergent or urgent needs. Given the wide range of conditions at each
embassy and consulate, nonimmigrant visa wait times fluctuate depending
on visa class, as well as local conditions and resources at each post.
Question. What steps is the State Department taking to speed up the
visa approval process?
Answer. The Department is committed to reducing appointment wait
times for all visa classes, through policy innovations, including the
expansion of the interview waiver authorities, and staffing and
resource increases, such as additional hiring. Consular sections also
maintain expedited appointment programs to facilitate travel for people
with emergent or urgent needs and have done so throughout the pandemic.
For the majority of nonimmigrant visa cases, the key factor in
processing length is the wait for a visa appointment. Once an applicant
appears for their visa appointment, a consular officer makes a decision
about the applicant's visa eligibility. Issued visas are typically
provided to applicants within 5 working days of their interview.
Question. Are there viable alternatives to in-person interviews for
visas?
Answer. Under statutory authorities, the Department has waived the
in-person interview requirement for several categories of nonimmigrant
visa (NIV) applicants. Consular officers' ability to waive this
requirement will allow a larger number of some categories of NIV
applications to be issued without an in-person interview, reducing the
number of people present in waiting rooms and improving processing
efficiencies. The Department, in coordination with the Department of
Homeland Security, will continue to explore means for exercising the
statutory interview waiver authorities. Immigrant visa applications
require biometrics taken at an embassy or consulate, limiting
processing efficiencies of virtual or mail-in processes for those
applicants.
Question. Due to the wide variation in wait times for visa
appointments, is the State Department focusing on consulates with
longer than average wait times? If so, what is the Department doing to
support consulates with a longer than average wait time?
Answer. The Department is committed to reducing wait times in all
visa classes through policy initiatives, including the expansion of the
interview waiver (IW) authorities, and rebuilding staffing and
resources that were constrained during the pandemic. Consular sections
also maintain expedited appointment programs to facilitate travel for
people with emergent or urgent needs and have done so throughout the
pandemic. An increasing number of nonimmigrant visa (NIV) applicants
will benefit from IW. In addition, we are training and onboarding new
employees. Staffing resources are directed to posts with the most
urgent needs, such as those processing Afghan Special Immigrant Visas,
supporting Ukraine efforts, and high-volume immigrant visa posts.
Question. Do you have the funding and other resources necessary to
reduce wait times for appointments? If not, what do you need in order
to reduce the backlog?
Answer. Thank you for your support through COVID Supplementals and
Appropriations, as well as expanded expenditure authorities. The wait
time issue is not presently a question of funding. The Bureau of
Consular Affairs continues to work with the rest of the Department to
rebuild lost capacity and fill positions left vacant during the
pandemic. Despite the easing of the funding challenge, the processes
for hiring, security clearances, training, and deployment for an
overseas consular officer to arrive at an assignment take over a year.
Question. When will the State Department return to pre-pandemic
processing times?
Answer. The Department is working to reduce wait times in all visa
classes, and meet demand safely and efficiently, through policy
initiatives and staffing and resource increases. Wait times for
consular services vary from post to post; all consular sections
maintain expedited appointment programs to facilitate travel for people
with emergent or urgent needs and have done so throughout the pandemic.
Staffing resources are directed to posts with the most urgent needs,
such as those processing Afghan Special Immigrant Visas, supporting
Ukraine efforts, and high-volume immigrant visa posts.
Question. State Department Authorization: The Senate Foreign
Relations Committee has been working on a new State Department
authorization for months. Absent from our work have been State
Department requests for inclusion in a Department authorization. When
should the Senate Foreign Relations Committee expect to receive the
Department's requests?
Answer. Thank you for the committee's work on State Department
authorization. The Department is actively working on interagency
coordination and expects to be in touch shortly with you on our
legislative priorities. The Department looks forward to engaging with
the committee on this.
Question. In your remarks, you noted that diversity was now
included as a promotion precept. In practice, how will diversity as a
promotion precept be operationalized?
Answer. The Foreign Service issued new decision criteria for tenure
and promotion, identifying core skills and abilities that employees
must demonstrate to show potential to succeed at the next level.
Employee evaluations, which are reviewed for promotion consideration,
must document how the employee has met these criteria. The new criteria
elevate the critical importance of demonstrating through action and
achievements a commitment to fostering diversity, equity, inclusion,
and accessibility and ensuring this important work is woven into all
that we do as an institution. The new Foreign Service performance
objectives--or Core Precepts--went into effect in April 2022.
Question. How will the diversity precept be measured or evaluated
for promotion?
Answer. The diversity-specific precept describes the competencies
employees must demonstrate to meet the objectives of the precept and is
one of five areas of performance evaluated. Through evaluation of these
competencies, Selection Boards identify and rank-order employees who
demonstrate potential to succeed in positions of greater
responsibility. In the evaluation narratives, raters and reviewers must
appraise the employee's potential in these areas and cite specific
examples of institutional impact.
Question. What types of activities will reflect positively for
promotion in terms of diversity?
Answer. The new diversity precept was drafted in concert with the
Office of Diversity and Inclusion, the Bureau of Global Talent
Management, and the America Foreign Service Association. Each employee
must demonstrate their contributions to that precept. For example,
exhibiting cultural awareness, achieving goals through inclusive
teamwork, showing support for workplace flexibilities, organizing
programs and events to discuss actionable ways to advance diversity,
infusing diversity, equity, and inclusion in foreign policy work, and
working to ensure the workplace is accessible, are all ways in which
any employee at any level can demonstrate a commitment to the
principles of diversity and inclusion.
Question. Professional Development: A training float for the Civil
Service will inevitably look different than the Foreign Service because
the Civil Service does not require consistent changes in positions. How
will the Civil Service training float differ from its Foreign Service
counterpart?
Answer. The Department is developing pilots, prototypes, and
expanded concepts for implementing additional training and professional
development programs, particularly at the mid- and senior levels for
both Foreign Service (FS) and Civil Service (CS) employees. The current
FS training float covers primarily long-term language and new hire
intake positions, which will affect orientation, Consular training,
tradecraft, and language training for new FS professionals as well as
family member support. The FS training float also covers NDU and other
interagency rotational opportunities that FSOs can bid. Because FSOs
rotate and `bid' on these positions, they are reassigned when they
rotate. Generally, CSOs are not reassigned to `long term training'--
they are detailed and stay assigned to their position of record because
they need a specific job/position to return to as a result of the rank
in position system versus the FS rank in person system. With no formal
training float for the CS, the Bureau of Global Talent Management has
been working to develop and pilot a professional development mobility
program. This will provide backfill capability to eliminate the
challenges associated with supervisors not approving developmental and
rotational opportunities due to staffing gaps when CSOs are detailed
from their positions.
Question. A transparent promotion process has the potential to
improve the quality of the workforce while also increasing diversity.
What is the Department doing to increase transparency in the promotion
process?
Answer. In 2020, the Director General announced the launch of a
new, long-term Foreign Service Performance Management Reform
initiative. The Bureau of Global Talent Management is conducting a
comprehensive review of the Foreign Service performance management
system to ensure the Department develops, evaluates, and promotes
employees in a fair, inclusive, and effective manner. These initiatives
will support wider Department efforts to promote diversity and
inclusion, support employee training and development at every stage of
their careers and improve retention of top talent. The initiative draws
on best practices from other organizations, Department and federal
government data, and employee and union input. All changes are
communicated to the workforce via Department-wide notices and cables,
as well as performance management related webinars and presentations.
Question. Is the Department considering changes to the promotion
process? If yes, at what levels?
Answer. The Department's Bureau of Global Talent Management has a
team looking at our performance management and promotion processes and
deploying new initiatives to enhance our ability to develop and advance
outstanding members of our workforce. For example, we have updated the
precepts against which performance is assessed at all levels to ensure
we have the modern skills needed to meet current and future foreign
policy goals. In addition, we are using technology and best practices
learned through experience over the past 2 years to enhance
transparency and efficiency in our processes.
Question. State Department Congressional Briefings: When Secretary
Blinken testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on
April 26, 2022, he noted that it was the 100th time he has briefed
Congress. That is a large number given that Sec. Blinken was sworn-in
on January 26, 2021. How is the number of Congressional briefings
calculated?
Answer. The Secretary is committed to maintaining a forward-leaning
posture with Congress--with members who are both on and off the
Department's authorizing and appropriating committees. The Bureau of
Legislative Affairs (H) facilitates official Department engagements and
communications with Capitol Hill. H calculated the number of
congressional briefings, which can be virtual, telephonic, or in
person. We do not include unofficial communications or engagements that
are strictly social in nature.
Question. Does a short phone conversation count as a briefing?
Answer. We do not consider the length of time of a conversation to
be an appropriate determinant of whether something is a briefing.
Ultimately, if a phone call is set up either at the Department or
Congress' request and has the purpose of relaying information related
to a foreign policy or Departmental matter, we would consider that the
Member of Congress with whom this engagement is taking place is being
briefed on a matter. If the purpose of a call is social or personal in
nature, then it would not be considered a briefing.
Yes, a phone conversation can count as a briefing if it fits the
criteria outlined above. Virtual meetings can also be briefings.
Question. Does a passing discussion at a diplomatic event?
Answer. No, a passing discussion at a diplomatic event is not
considered a briefing. We do not keep track of such engagements for the
Secretary or any other Department official or principal.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin
Question. Changes in recruitment of Foreign Service Officers and
the Foreign Service Officer Test (FSOT): I understand that the State
Department will no longer use the Foreign Service Officer Test as a
pass/fail gateway test, but will evaluate the education, experience,
and personal narratives submitted by candidates alongside the FSOT
score. The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) has already
expressed its concerns about this new policy, calling for fuller
transparency regarding hiring decisions made through this new system.
Why was this change made, and how will the State Department ensure that
transparent hiring decisions are made in a timely manner under this new
system?
Answer. Standardized written tests can only assess a portion of the
skills and qualifications required to succeed in the Foreign Service.
This change allows us to consider a candidate's previous experiences--
what they did and how they did it--in addition to their education,
skills and abilities. We expect that, after this change, candidates
moving to the next stage of the assessment process will be those more
likely to pass, making the process more efficient. I am committed to a
fair and transparent hiring process. While changes to the Foreign
Service assessment are an exercise of management's right to select
employees and are not subject to bargaining, the Department briefed the
American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) and welcomes continued
constructive dialogue with AFSA leadership.
Question. Funding for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Access
programs: the Biden administration is seeking $65.6 million in FY23 to
implement diversity, equity, inclusion, and access (DEIA) programs,
which includes funding for 30 new positions for DEIA efforts. How will
this request advance the goals of the State Department's forthcoming
Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan?
Answer. The Department's FY 2023 CBJ Appendix 1 outlines $78.6
million in diversity, equity, inclusion, and access (DEIA) priorities
to include the Paid Internship Program and the Accessible Housing
Program. Additional staffing is key to ensuring we can implement our
DEIA program, including: hiring personnel to run an anti-bullying
program to report and mitigate toxic management practices that do not
have an EEO basis and improve harassment report response time; hiring
more data scientists and analysts to identify barriers to equal
opportunity and analyze best practices to better ensure equity in
career outcomes; and commensurately increasing personnel dedicated to
improving and sustaining increased career advancement efforts.
Question. When does the State Department intend to release this
plan?
Answer. Pursuant to the executive order, the Department submitted
its 5-year diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility strategic
plan. We look forward to sharing the plan once it is released by the
White House.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
Question. Deputy Secretary McKeon, I want to thank you for your
leadership in ensuring that our world-class U.S. diplomats receive the
support they need in all circumstances, including for those afflicted
by directed energy attacks. My colleagues and I are focused on ensuring
that these diplomats work for an institution that has their full
support, especially when attacked in the line of service. I appreciate
your leadership in ensuring that after years of doubt, they have access
to the services that they need. My legislation with Senator Collins,
the HAVANA Act, provides compensation of those who have been affected.
When will State release its interim rule as required by the HAVANA Act,
and can you preview for us what that rule will say?
Answer. We appreciate your leadership on supporting the U.S.
Government response to Anomalous Health Incidents.
Taking into consideration Congressional and Administration intent,
interagency views, and input from affected colleagues and family
members as well as medical and security professionals, the Department
developed its draft rule for implementing the HAVANA Act. The draft
rule is currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). We look forward to OMB approval so that the draft rule can be
released for a 30-day period of public comment.
I believe our draft rule is faithful to the HAVANA Act and look
forward to the opportunity to discuss it with you in more detail. I
remain grateful for your continued support for the Department's efforts
on Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI).
Question. Are there any changes to the definition of a qualifying
brain injury?
Answer. The Department's draft Interim Final Rule includes a
definition of qualifying injury to the brain as mandated by the HAVANA
Act. That definition was developed in consultation with medical
professionals and the interagency. Once OMB approves the draft rule, it
will be available for a 30-day period of public comment.
Question. Can I receive your assurance that State is working with
all agencies to ensure equity in access to treatment for all victims of
these attacks?
Answer. Yes. The Department is actively working with the NSC, OMB,
and the interagency to ensure implementation of the HAVANA Act is
consistent and coordinated.
Question. In congressional testimony last week, Secretary Blinken
noted that the State Department was implementing a program focused on
improving retention of members of underrepresented groups who join the
State Department workforce. Could you please describe the different
components of this program?
Answer. It is imperative that the Department recruits, retains, and
supports a workforce that truly reflects the country it represents.
Under the Bureau of Global Talent Management (GTM), the newly
established Retention Unit is developing the Department's first
comprehensive retention strategy, a key component of the Secretary's
Modernization Agenda. The Retention Unit is collaborating with the
Office of Diversity and Inclusion, along with GTM's Innovation Unit and
Office of Talent Analytics, to collect and analyze both quantitative
and qualitative data to assess and better understand retention trends.
The Retention Strategy will outline concrete steps the Department can
take to strengthen retention across all employee groups.
Question. What data does the State Department have to underpin its
current understanding of factors that may cause members of
underrepresented groups to leave the State Department's workforce at
higher rates than their peers?
Answer. The Department's new Retention Unit, under the Bureau for
Global Talent Management (GTM), is collecting and analyzing data to
inform the Department's first Retention strategy. Key data initiatives
include the launch this month of the Department's first in-person exit
interviews, ongoing analysis of exit surveys that were revamped in
2019, and a Department-wide ``stay survey'' later this year. These
efforts will provide critical insights that will strengthen the
Department's understanding of the extent to which various retention
factors may affect underrepresented groups more significantly than the
broader workforce.
Question. As you may know, I have been working on the Special
Immigrant Visa program since its inception, originally with the late
Senator John McCain, who was a fierce ally of those who sacrificed in
support of their country, be they American or Afghan. As the program
was written in 2009--and as it stands today--Afghans are eligible for a
SIV if they were employed ``by or on behalf of the United States
Government.'' Successive administrations have chosen to interpret this
in a way that excludes Afghans who worked under U.S. Government grants
and cooperative agreements, despite nothing in the statute drawing such
a distinction. I appreciate that the Biden administration announced a
Priority 2 designation for refugee admissions intended to capture this
group, but the slow trickle of individuals approved under this program
does not make it a viable option for Afghans in immediate danger. Why
has this State Department chosen to arbitrarily exclude grants and
cooperative agreements from SIV eligibility and what would it take for
Congress to demonstrate to State its original intent in capturing these
individuals under the SIV program?
Answer. Since enactment of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of
2009, as amended (AAPA), the Department of State has consistently
interpreted and applied the AAPA to not include individuals working
pursuant to grants or cooperative agreements. This interpretation is
consistent with the SIV program in Iraq. I understand that Congress has
considered adding language to the AAPA to explicitly include Afghans
working pursuant to grants and cooperative agreements several times,
but ultimately did not do so.
Question. I understand you recently visited the National Visa
Center in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. We are very proud of the work of
the NVC and its dedicated staff. However, they face a staffing shortage
that is making it harder for them to do their jobs and slowing down the
adjudication of applications and the response time to applicants and
congressional offices. Can you share what you learned from your visit
to the NVC and what the State Department is doing to best support the
NVC workers and individuals whose visas are processed at the NVC?
Answer. The Department shares your positive view of the incredible
work by the dedicated staff at the National Visa Center (NVC), which is
a critical part of overseas visa operations. In particular, the influx
of inquiries and new SIV cases for Afghanistan created a tremendous
challenge for NVC's staff, and the Department is committed to finding
solutions and increasing productivity. The Department works closely
with NVC's contractor to enhance its recruiting efforts and allocate
staff from its other worksites to provide temporary support to NVC's
efforts.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Todd Young
Question. The National Visa Center has almost half a million cases
that are documentarily complete, yet only 32,000 were scheduled for
interviews in April. What resources does the Department need to reduce
this massive backlog?
Answer. The National Visa Center (NVC) schedules immigrant visa
interviews at immigrant visa processing posts based on the interview
capacity that posts provide to NVC. The Department is working to
quickly hire, train, and deploy consular officers to visa processing
posts with the goal of returning to pre-pandemic processing times.
Thanks to the U.S. Congress, in 2022, the Omnibus Bill temporarily gave
the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) the spending authorities it needed
to accomplish this goal. In the FY 2023 budget, CA requests the same
support from Congress as in FY 2022 to complete our recovery. With this
support, CA projects deploying more than 700 new consular officers
between FY 2022 and 2023, which will enable CA to reduce COVID-related
backlogs.
Question. The Committee asks of all Senate-confirmed nominees a
commitment to respond promptly to requests for information.
Unfortunately, there continue to be significant delays in responding to
questions for the record and other requests for information. What
accounts for the delays in the Department responding to the Committee's
questions in a timely fashion? How are you working to improve
communication with the legislative branch?
Answer. Partnering with Congress in the foreign policy making
process is a top priority for the Department and Secretary Blinken. The
Department seeks to provide information to Congress that accurately and
completely answers inquiries, which often takes time to draft and
subsequently clear with the many offices and bureaus that may have
equities. However, we also agree that such responses must be timely,
and there is room for improvement. Currently, the Department seeks to
turn around QFRs for nominations within 1 week or less, when possible.
It is important to note that the volume of written inquiries from
Congress has expanded dramatically: in 2021, the Department, through
the coordination of the Bureau of Legislative Affairs (H), answered a
record 5,010 QFRs. To date this year, 2,850 QFRs have been answered.
Secretary Blinken regularly emphasizes to the Department workforce and
senior officials that responsiveness to Congress at all levels must be
the way we do business. The Department will continue working to
implement this instruction and seek to improve the timeliness of our
written responses. We also continue to encourage congressional offices
to request briefings to receive timely information.
Question. An IG inspection report last year noted that the Bureau
of Legislative Affairs ``struggled to accomplish routine tasks'' and
that its organizational structure ``was not well-aligned with
operational needs.'' What is the Department doing to reform the Bureau
of Legislative Affairs in accordance with the OIG's recommendations?
Answer. The IG report referenced examined the H Bureau during the
period from August 31, 2020, to January 4, 2021. In May 2021, under new
leadership, the Bureau of Legislative Affairs (H) concurred with the 14
recommendations of the Department's Inspector General (OIG) 2020
inspection of the Bureau. This includes OIG's recommendation that the
Bureau of Global Talent Management (GTM) conduct an organizational
assessment of H with the goal of aligning H's structure with
operational needs. GTM's assessment is underway, and H has participated
in completion of survey and interviews conducted by GTM. H also
continues to take steps to implement and close all OIG recommendations,
including by recently hiring a career operations director to ensure
better alignment and continuity of operations.
Question. The Foreign Affairs Manual (1 FAM 312b) states that the
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Legislative
Affairs should be a Career Foreign Service Officer. Why has the
Administration chosen to encumber this position with political
appointees without experience in Department management processes?
Answer. The Department is committed to including career officers,
including Foreign Service and Civil Service officers, within the
leadership of the Bureau of Legislative Affairs (H). In June 2021, the
Senate confirmed Naz Durakoglu as Assistant Secretary of State for
Legislative Affairs. Since that time, Assistant Secretary Durakoglu
selected a career SES DAS to oversee the Regional, Global, and
Functional portion of the H bureau. There are also active recruitment
efforts under way in regard to the H PDAS position. Assistant Secretary
Durakoglu would be happy to brief on this matter.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. Visa Processing: International travel is increasing as
pandemic restrictions eased. Does the State Department have the funding
and resources necessary to process visas efficiently and reduce
backlogs to effectively manage consular affairs? If not, what
additional resources are necessary?
Answer. Yes, the Department has the resources necessary to process
visas efficiently and reduce backlogs. We are committed to reduce wait
times in all visa classes at our existing funding levels, and to meet
visa demand safely and efficiently at our posts around the world. We
appreciate the flexibility that Congress has provided by permitting us
additional authority to retain and use many of the fees we collect for
services.
Question. Remote Consular Services: The pandemic has forced many
consular services to take place remotely. As the world transitions out
of strict lockdowns, what lessons learned is State taking away from
remote programming?
Answer. The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly affected the operational
and resource capacity of the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA). CA
implemented new processes, including expanded interview waiver
authorities, and increased domestic remote processing of certain
interview-waiver eligible nonimmigrant visa cases; expansion of
programs to process overseas passport renewals in the United States,
video and telephonic provision of U.S. citizens services, and a robust
and flexible hybrid work structure to accomplish our mission. The
Department continues to examine lessons learned and the feasibility of
making some of these efforts permanent, to the extent allowable under
the law, policy, and available resources.
Question. Are there plans to maintain a remote option for certain
formerly in-person consular activities including some previously in-
person visa interviews?
Answer. To minimize applicants entering consular waiting rooms, the
Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) increased remote consular processing.
CA successfully conducted a remote interview pilot at select posts
overseas to register U.S. citizen births. Additionally, the Secretary
waived in-person interviews and fingerprint collection for several
categories of nonimmigrant visa (NIV) applicants. Use of these
interview waiver authorities could allow a greater number of NIV
applicants to be processed without appearing at a consular section. The
Department continues to explore the feasibility of making permanent and
expanding remote interview and work capabilities to the extent
allowable under the law, policy, and available resources.
Question. Employment Relocation Challenges: Military spouses face
challenges finding and retaining employment, and military spouses who
are Department of State or USAID employees face a unique set of hurdles
due to coordinating civilian and military relocations. What is the
State Department doing to avoid unnecessary family separation, prevent
income loss due to leave without pay, and improve retention of military
spouses who work for State or USAID?
Answer. The Department of State is sensitive to the issues
confronting all federal employees who are also military spouses,
including State and USAID employees. To support family unification, the
Domestic Employees Teleworking Overseas (DETO) program is a workplace
flexibility program that enables certain federal employees to continue
performing their domestic civil service jobs from an overseas location,
thus avoiding both family separation and income loss. We are aware of
the difficulty that some prospective DETOs face--specifically those
whose military spouses are assigned to a military base overseas--and we
are actively engaged with the Department of Defense on a solution to
facilitate approval of these types of DETO arrangements.
Question. Resources required for COFA Negotiations: What resources
is the State Department anticipating needing for negotiating certain
provisions of the Compacts of Free Association (COFA) with the Freely
Associated States (FAS)?
Answer. As the interagency determines the requirements to
successfully engage in negotiations related to the Compacts of Free
Association, I look forward to working with Congress on aligning
resources appropriately. I would defer to OMB for further information
on resources.
Question. How is the Department ensuring that any required
resources are prioritized commensurate with the level of strategic
importance of the FAS and the successful conclusion of negotiations?
Answer. The Indo-Pacific--inclusive of the FAS--has become an area
of increasing strategic importance and competition, underscoring the
importance of the Compacts of Free Association. The State Department
recognizes the vital nature of the Compacts of Free Association, which
is reflected in the priority we are giving to successfully complete
Compact negotiations.
Question. DoD Participation in COFA Negotiations: What is State
Department's position on the inclusion of dedicated Department of
Defense officials participating in COFA negotiations?
Answer. The State Department works closely with many interagency
partners, including the Department of Defense (DoD). We remain open to
increasing our already significant collaboration with the DoD and would
be pleased to further explore the possibility of including a dedicated
DoD official, as appropriate, in negotiations related to Compacts of
Free Association.
Question. How are you and other State Department leaders ensuring
that DoD is participating at the level that our FAS partners would want
to see, especially given the evolving strategic landscape in the Indo-
Pacific?
Answer. We closely coordinate with our colleagues at the Department
of Defense (DoD), and DoD representatives participate in negotiations
related to the Compacts of Free Association (COFA), and other
discussions with the Freely Associated States, as appropriate. DoD is
actively participating in COFA negotiations at each negotiating round
through in-person participation of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, UNINDOPACOM, Joint Region Marianas, and U.S. Army Space and
Missile Defense Command levels.
Question. COFA Positions Staffing: Is the State Department
adequately staffed for the COFA negotiations?
Answer. The Biden-Harris administration has prioritized Compact
negotiations with the Freely Associated States as a U.S. foreign policy
objective. Recognizing the urgency of completing these negotiations,
the Administration announced the appointment of Ambassador (retired)
Joseph Yun as the Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations
(SPECN) on March 22, 2022. Since the SPECN's appointment, the State
Department has added two staff to the Compact Team, with an additional
senior officer who was scheduled to begin in June.
Question. Given the increased importance of the Indo-Pacific, the
Pacific Islands, and the Freely Associated States, how is the State
Department planning for staffing and associated resources for the
period beyond the conclusion of negotiations?
Answer. The U.S. Government is continually assessing how to expand
our diplomatic, programmatic, and development efforts in the Pacific.
In the past 5 years, the Department of State has increased staffing in
the Pacific by approximately 10 personnel, and USAID has expanded its
presence as well. In February 2022, Secretary Blinken announced our
intent to open a U.S. Embassy in Solomon Islands. As the interagency
engages in negotiations related to the Compacts of Free Association and
the Economic Assistance Agreement associated with the South Pacific
Tuna Treaty, we look forward to working with Congress to align
resources appropriately to ensure the United States remains the
preferred partner in the Pacific.
Question. ECA Pacific Island Scholarship: How is the State
Department, including the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
(ECA), prioritizing scholarship and fellowship programs focused on the
Indo-Pacific?
Answer. Community engagement and strengthening people-to-people
ties, including through academic exchange, are important elements of
our Indo-Pacific Strategy. We are working with EAP and partners like
the East-West Center (EWC) and others to deepen our outreach to
students, scholars, and professionals in the region, including through
EWC's Pacific Islands Development Program and ECA's Young Pacific
Leaders Fellowships. We are also expanding ECA's educational exchanges
benefitting undergraduate and graduate participants in the Indo-Pacific
through Fulbright and Global UGRAD. More than 7,500 people from Pacific
Islands Forum member countries are alumni of U.S. Government funded
exchange programs, and we are working to expand that network.
Question. Is ECA planning on allocating additional resources in
FY22 to scholarship programs for Pacific Islands students to study in
the United States, given the importance of increasing U.S. influence in
the region?
Answer. In FY 2022, ECA is increasing funding for Fulbright awards
in the South Pacific by 25 percent, on top of an increase of 33 percent
in FY 2021, to facilitate engagement and exchange with more South
Pacific islanders and to allow more diversity of participating islands
in the region. ECA is also prioritizing English-language preparation,
with some participants benefitting from an added semester of long-term
English prior to commencing their studies. In addition, ECA added South
Pacific Island nations to the Global UGRAD exchange program for
semester undergraduate study in FY 2021. These efforts complement our
continued support for the U.S. South Pacific Scholarship Program, which
provides opportunities for undergraduate and graduate degree study.
______
Responses of Mr. Brian P. McKeon to Questions
Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question. Imprisonment of U.S. citizens in Ecuador: In 2017,
Maryland residents John Roja and Ronell Stephenson were arrested in
Ecuador on charges of possession of illegal drugs, weapons, and
homicide. Despite the gravity of these charges, it appears as if there
were multiple serious due process issues in the course of their
prosecution, including destruction of potentially exculpatory evidence
and a failure to provide a translator in court for the brothers. The
drugs and weapons charges were later dropped, but the murder charges
remained; the brothers were later convicted and sentenced to 34 years
in prison. The brothers strongly maintain their innocence and allege
that they have been framed for the murders. Ronell Stephenson was
subsequently diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer in 2021. He remains
hospitalized in a perilous environment, and John Roja Stephenson
remains in prison in what the brothers' lawyer says are dangerous
conditions. What are the State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Quito
doing to engage Ecuadorian authorities about the Stephenson brothers'
welfare?
Answer. The welfare and safety of U.S. citizens abroad is one of
our top priorities, and we follow up on all health issues raised by
U.S. citizen prisoners abroad to ensure they have access to appropriate
medical care. The U.S. Embassy in Quito and the Consulate General in
Guayaquil have provided consular services to Ronnell and John Roja
Stephenson throughout the pretrial investigation, trial, and
incarceration phases of their criminal proceedings. U.S. Embassy
officials raised Ronnell and John Roja's request for a domestic
transfer from a maximum-security prison to a minimum-security prison at
the highest levels of the Ecuadorian Government. John Roja was
transferred in January, and Ronnell's transfer request is pending
completion of his medical treatment. We regularly visit the Stephenson
brothers virtually to ensure their health and well-being.
Question. Have they raised with Ecuadorian authorities the alleged
serious due process issues in this case?
Answer. The U.S. mission in Ecuador has provided consular services
to Ronnell and John Roja Stephenson throughout the pretrial
investigation, trial, and post-trial incarceration phases of this
criminal matter. The embassy has engaged with the highest levels of the
Ecuadorian Government to ensure the brothers continue to receive fair
treatment during their incarceration and have been afforded full access
to, and impartial treatment by, the Ecuadorian criminal justice system.