[Senate Hearing 117-948]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]






                                 ______


                                                        S. Hrg. 117-948
 
     STRATEGIC COMPETITION AND SECURITY COOPERATION IN THE WESTERN 
                               HEMISPHERE

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

                                HEARING

                               before the

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                   EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 23, 2022

                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
         
         
         
    GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT

     
         


                 Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
                 
                 
                                _______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 59-652                WASHINGTON : 2025   
                 
                 
                 
                 


                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

 JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman          JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire               ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New Yor              kDEB FISCHER, Nebraska
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut             TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii                     MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
TIM KAINE, Virginia                         JONI ERNST, Iowa
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine                   THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts             DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan                    KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia              RICK SCOTT, Florida
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                         MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois                   JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
MARK KELLY, Arizona                         TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
                                     
                                     
 
                                     
                   Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
                    John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director
             


           Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities

   MARK KELLY, Arizona, Chairman         JONI ERNST, Iowa
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire            DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York          KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TIM KAINE, Virginia                      RICK SCOTT, Florida
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts          MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan                 TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
                                     
                                     
                                     
                                    
                                     

                                  (ii)


                         C O N T E N T S



                             march 23, 2022

                                                                   Page

Strategic Competition and Security Cooperation in the Western         1
  Hemisphere.

                           Member Statements

Statement of Senator Mark Kelly..................................     1

Statement of Senator Joni Ernst..................................     2

                           Witness Statements

Dalton, The Honorable Melissa, Assistant Secretary of Defense for     3
  Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs.

Questions for the Record.........................................    26

                                 (iii)


     STRATEGIC COMPETITION AND SECURITY COOPERATION IN THE WESTERN 
                               HEMISPHERE

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 2022

                      United States Senate,        
                   Subcommittee on Emerging
                          Threats and Capabilities,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in 
room SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Mark Kelly 
(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
    Subcommittee Members present: Kelly, Gillibrand, Kaine, 
Peters, Ernst, Fischer, Scott, and Tuberville.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARK KELLY

    Senator Kelly. The Emerging Threats Subcommittee meets this 
afternoon to receive testimony from the Department of Defense 
on strategic competition and security cooperation in the 
Western Hemisphere.
    I would like to welcome our witnesses today, the Honorable
Melissa Dalton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland 
Defense and Hemispheric Affairs; Mr. James Saenz, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics; Brigadier 
General Frank Bradfield, Deputy Director for Political-Military 
Affairs for the Western Hemisphere, J5 Joint Staff. I want to 
take this opportunity to thank all of you for being here today.
    The Western Hemisphere is seeing a growing set of 
challenges creating instability, undermining democratic 
institutions, increasing corruption, and threatening 
longstanding U.S. security relations in the region. Department 
of Defense (DOD) operations in the region have traditionally 
focused on counternarcotics and countering transnational 
criminal organizations, all while the resources for these 
missions have decreased.
    At the same time, the opioid crisis continues unabated, 
with opioid and synthetic drug trafficking returning to pre-
pandemic levels. We are seeing this in Arizona, where fentanyl 
seizures at or near the border continue to rise, putting a 
greater strain on local law enforcement, that is also 
stretched, at the same time, by the migrant crisis.
    The Western Hemisphere is also increasingly the focus of 
strategic competition as near-peer rivals China, and also 
increasingly Russia, seek to expand their influence. China is 
using its investments throughout the region to create political 
influence it can leverage to weaken democracies. China is also 
exploiting the region's resources, including through Chinese 
blue water fishing fleets, engaged in illegal, unreported, and 
unregulated fishing. Russia is using military assistance and 
air and sea access agreements with Venezuela, Nicaragua, and 
Cuba to create instability and challenge democratic governance 
in the region.
    A key tool in this strategic competition is U.S. security 
cooperation with foreign military and security forces in the 
Western Hemisphere. During today's testimony, I hope you will 
address how the Department is using its security cooperation 
authorities, including its section 333 capacity-building 
authority and bilateral and multilateral training and exercises 
to strengthen our longstanding security ties to countries in 
the region, and also what more can be done to counter the 
growing malign influence of Russia and China in the region.
    Lastly, I would be interested in how DOD is engaging with 
foreign ministries of defense to build longer-term capacity 
within those institutions in order to promote the rule of law, 
human rights, and respect for civilian control of the military.
    I will now turn it over to Senator Ernst for any opening 
comments she may have.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JONI ERNST

    Senator Ernst. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank 
you all very much for appearing in front of the subcommittee 
today.
    Despite the war raging in Ukraine, this hearing is always 
timely because it concerns the security of our own 
neighborhood, right here in the Western Hemisphere. The 
security of this region is not guaranteed. China clearly views 
the Western Hemisphere as critical to fulfilling its global 
ambitions and displacing the United States as the global 
leader. China's successful inclusion of 21 Latin American 
states in the Belt and Road Initiative, its efforts to bribe 
and bully countries into lopsided deals that give the Chinese 
preferential access agreements, and its significant investments 
in dual-use infrastructure like ports, as well as military 
capabilities like space tracking sites really should concern 
us.
    It is clear China's efforts are not purely economic. They 
are following their tried-and-true playbook that uses strong-
armed economic and diplomatic efforts to set conditions for an 
eventual military buildup. The China Communist Party's 
autocratic, oppressive model is not in the long-term interest 
of our hemisphere.
    Make no mistake. China is on the offense in the Western 
Hemisphere, and I am worried our posture and policies are 
reactive at best, inert at worst.
    During today's hearing I look forward to discussing how DOD 
can be more innovative and effective in competing with and 
countering our adversaries in the region and strengthening 
partnerships with key allies like Colombia.
    With that, Mr. Chair, I will turn it back to you.
    Senator Kelly. General Bradfield, Ms. Dalton, Mr. Saenz, I 
understand that all of you do not have a prepared statement, 
but if you have a joint statement I think one of you are 
prepared to deliver that.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MELISSA DALTON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY 
    OF DEFENSE FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE AND HEMISPHERIC AFFAIRS

    Ms. Dalton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Kelly, 
Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished members of the 
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before 
you today on how the Department approaches strategic 
competition and security cooperation in the Western Hemisphere. 
I am delighted to be joined by Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense James Saenz and Brigadier General Bradfield to provide 
our joint testimony today, and we would like to make two main 
points.
    First, the Department is committed to maintaining strong 
defense relationships with our key partners in the Western 
Hemisphere, including Canada, Mexico, and the majority of the 
countries from the Caribbean and Central and South America. 
Security cooperation is a vital tool to maintain these 
relationships, as Russia and China continue expanding their 
influence and actively seek to compete with us in this 
hemisphere across multiple sectors.
    Second, even as we engage in this competition, we must also 
support responses to threats posed by state or non-state 
actors, including drug trafficking, trafficking in persons and 
weapons, illicit financial flows, humanitarian disasters with 
natural and manmade causes, and malicious cyber activity. Our 
security cooperation partnerships serve as a critical way to 
counter transnational threats as part of a whole-of-government 
approach.
    As DOD addresses multiple threats to international peace 
and stability, we are mindful that a relatively safe and secure 
Western Hemisphere helps give us the bandwidth to tackle 
challenges elsewhere in the globe. However, we cannot take 
security in this hemisphere for granted, especially as our 
strategic competitors seek to shift the balance in their favor.
    The People's Republic of China (PRC) is the pacing 
challenge for the Department, including in the Western 
Hemisphere. The PRC continues to expand its diplomatic, 
technological, informational, military, and economic 
enticements to our partners in the region. We are concerned 
that PRC offers of military cooperation, scientific exchanges, 
and information technology assistance have nefarious 
objectives. We are also concerned that the PRC's economic 
investments are predatory in nature and may mask military 
purposes.
    Russia continues to promote instability in the hemisphere 
with disinformation and by providing diplomatic, intelligence, 
financial, and military support to authoritarian regimes, and 
its activities could enter a new phase if Russia seeks to 
amplify these activities in reaction to the United States 
response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
    Meanwhile, Iran's cooperation with the Venezuelan regime of 
Nicolas Maduro, among other countries, remains of great concern 
to us.
    Responding to these threats requires attention, commitment, 
and investments. As the forthcoming National Defense Strategy 
will outline, DOD will need to maintain strong bilateral and 
multilateral defense partnerships in the hemisphere, enabled by 
engagements in presence, intelligence, and information 
exchanges, education programs and exercises, and other tools of 
security cooperation.
    In addition to state competitors, drug trafficking and 
other transnational criminal organizations continue to accrue 
billions of dollars in illicit profit at the expense of 
American lives and regional security. They engage in illicit 
activities such as trafficking in humans and weapons and 
illegal mining. These organizations undermine stability by 
enabling corruption, eroding democratic institutions, and 
hindering governments from exercising effective sovereignty 
within their countries.
    Western Hemisphere nations, particularly in Central America 
and the Caribbean, face the threat of extreme natural 
disasters, in many cases exacerbated by climate change. These 
disasters often lead to a variety of destabilizing effects that 
compound economic hardship and insecurity and can help drive 
migration.
    We have also seen the devastating effects of the COVID-19 
pandemic in the hemisphere. The pandemic's effects on political 
and economic stability and on public health will resonate 
across the region for decades to come.
    Finally, there is concern across the hemisphere about the 
increasing threat of a range of malicious cyber activities, 
including unauthorized intrusions.
    Addressing these strategic and transnational threats 
requires DOD to closely cooperate with other U.S. Executive 
branch partners and with our international partners. Building 
and strengthening these partnerships are key to maintaining the 
Western Hemisphere's security and stability. Our partnerships 
with other hemispheric nations are based on the essential 
principles of support for democratic institutions, civilian 
control of the military, and respect for human rights and 
dignity.
    Dedicated training on human rights is a core component of 
our security cooperation activities with partners. Senior DOD 
officials have led multiple bilateral working groups and other 
senior leader engagements with our partners across the 
Americas, including several with Caribbean partners as part of 
our greater emphasis on cooperation with that vital region. We 
continue institutional capacity-building and professional 
military education programs with partners nations' defense and 
security ministries and militaries, including in Central 
America. Our defense and security cooperation with Colombia 
remains strong, and is a key component of the United States-
Colombia Bicentennial Partnership that Presidents Biden and 
Duque announced on March 10th.
    At the same time, we are expanding into new areas of 
cooperation to include cyber, climate resilience, and space. We 
also cooperate in multilateral settings to include the Inter-
American Defense Board and the Conference of Defense Ministers 
of the Americas, which Brazil will host this July. In addition, 
to help our U.S. law enforcement and international partners 
disrupt drug trafficking and other transnational criminal 
organizations, DOD continues to provide detection and 
monitoring, intelligence analysis, and other forms of support, 
using the counterdrug authorities and appropriations provided 
by Congress for more than 30 years.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished 
members of the subcommittee, these are just some of the ways in 
which DOD employs security cooperation to address strategic 
competition and transnational threats. Thank you, and we look 
forward to your questions.
    [The joint prepared statement of The Honorable Melissa 
Dalton, Mr. James Saenz and Brigadier General Frank Bradfield 
III follows:]

  Joint Prepared Statement by The Honorable Melissa Dalton, Mr. James 
            Saenz and Brigadier General Frank Bradfield III
                              introduction
    Chairman Kelly, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished Members of 
the Subcommittee: thank you for the opportunity to testify before you 
today on how the Department of Defense (DOD) approaches strategic 
competition and security cooperation in the Western Hemisphere. We 
would like to make two main points:
    First, the Department is committed to maintaining strong defense 
relationships with our key partners in the Western Hemisphere, 
including Canada, Mexico, and the majority of the countries from the 
Caribbean and Central and South America. Security cooperation is a 
vital tool to maintain these relationships, as Russia and China 
continue expanding their influence and actively seek to compete with us 
in this hemisphere across multiple sectors.
    Second, even as we engage in this competition, we also must support 
responses to threats posed by state or non-state actors, including drug 
trafficking, trafficking in persons and weapons, illicit financial 
flows, humanitarian disasters with natural and man-made causes, and 
malicious cyber activity. Our security cooperation partnerships serve 
as a critical way to counter transnational threats, as part of a whole-
of-government approach.
                         strategic competition
    As DOD addresses multiple threats to international peace and 
stability, we are mindful that a relatively safe and secure Western 
Hemisphere helps give us the bandwidth to tackle challenges elsewhere 
in the globe. However, we cannot take security in this hemisphere for 
granted, especially as our strategic competitors seek to shift the 
balance in their favor.
    The People's Republic of China (PRC) is the pacing challenge for 
the Department in the Western Hemisphere. The PRC continues to expand 
its diplomatic, technological, informational, military, and economic 
enticements to our partners in the region. We are concerned that PRC 
offers of military cooperation, scientific exchanges, and information 
technology assistance have nefarious objectives. We are also concerned 
that the PRC's economic investments are predatory in nature and may 
mask military purposes. Russia continues to promote instability in the 
hemisphere with disinformation and by providing diplomatic, 
intelligence, financial, and military support to authoritarian regimes, 
and its activities could enter a new phase if Russia seeks to amplify 
these activities in reaction to the United States response to Russia's 
invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile, Iran's cooperation with the Venezuelan 
regime of Nicolas Maduro among other countries remains of great concern 
to us.
    Responding to these threats requires attention, commitment, and 
investments. As the forthcoming National Defense Strategy will outline, 
DOD will need to maintain strong bilateral and multilateral defense 
partnerships in the hemisphere, enabled by engagements and presence, 
intelligence and information exchanges, education programs and 
exercises, and other tools of security cooperation.
                     enduring and emerging threats
    In addition to state competitors, drug trafficking and other 
transnational criminal organizations continue to accrue billions of 
dollars in illicit profit at the expense of American lives and regional 
security. They engage in illicit activities such as trafficking in 
humans and weapons, and illegal mining. These organizations undermine 
stability by enabling corruption, eroding democratic institutions, and 
hindering governments from exercising effective sovereignty within 
their countries.
    Western Hemisphere nations, particularly in Central America and the 
Caribbean, face the threat of extreme natural disasters, in many cases 
exacerbated by climate change. These disasters often lead to a variety 
of destabilizing effects that compound economic hardship and 
insecurity, and can help drive migration.
    We have also seen the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic 
in the hemisphere. The pandemic's effects on political and economic 
stability, and on public health, will resonate across the region for 
decades to come.
    Finally, there is concern across the hemisphere about the 
increasing threat of a range of malicious cyber activities, including 
unauthorized intrusions.
        strong relationships and effective security cooperation
    Addressing these strategic and transnational threats requires DOD 
to closely cooperate with other U.S. Executive Branch partners and with 
international partners. Building and strengthening these partnerships 
are key to maintaining the Western Hemisphere's security and stability. 
Our partnerships with other hemispheric nations are based on the 
essential principles of support for democratic institutions, civilian 
control of the military, and respect for human rights and dignity. 
Dedicated training on human rights is a core component of our security 
cooperation activities with partners.
    Senior DOD officials have led multiple bilateral working groups and 
other senior-level engagments with our partners across the Americas, 
including several with Caribbean partners as part of our greater 
emphasis on cooperation with that vital region. We continue 
institutional capacity-building and professional education programs 
with partner nations' defense and security ministries and militaries, 
including in Central America. Our defense and security cooperation with 
Colombia remains strong, and is a key component of the United States-
Colombia Bicentennial Partnership that Presidents Biden and Duque 
announced on March 10.
    At the same time, we are expanding into new areas of cooperation, 
to include cyber, climate resilience, and space. We also cooperate in 
multilateral settings, to include the Inter-American Defense Board and 
the Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas, which Brazil will 
host this July. In addition, to help our United States law enforcement 
and international partners disrupt drug trafficking and other 
transnational criminal organizations, DOD continues to provide 
detection and monitoring, intelligence analysis, and other forms of 
support, using the counterdrug authorities and appropriations provided 
by Congress for more than 30 years.
                               conclusion
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished Members of 
the Committee, these are just some of the ways in which DOD employs 
security cooperation to address strategic competition and transnational 
threats. Thank you, and we look forward to your questions.

    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Dalton, for your statement. I 
will begin our first round of 5 minutes for questions.
    Ms. Dalton, the Director of National Intelligence's (DNI's) 
latest annual Threat Assessment Report, issued in February of 
this year, highlighted the threat from illicit drugs, 
particularly synthetic drugs, has reached record levels, with 
more than 100,000 U.S. drug overdose deaths annually for the 
first time ever.
    In Arizona, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has said that 
they seized a record amount of fentanyl in 2021, with the 
primary source being the Sinaloa Cartel. This has taken the 
lives of many Arizonans and many Americans and has put a strain 
on local law enforcement.
    Secretary Dalton, do you agree that the threat from illicit 
drug trafficking is a national security threat and that the 
Department of Defense has an important role to play in 
assessing this threat?
    Ms. Dalton. Chairman, thank you very much for the question, 
and yes, I do agree that this is a national security threat 
that we must be committed to addressing. It is a tragedy, the 
alarming rate of hundreds of thousands of Americans that are 
being affected by the illicit drug trade in states across 
America. DOD is committed to the important role that we play in 
detection and monitoring, in intelligence cooperation in the 
broader region as well as through our security cooperation 
efforts, to try to address this phenomenon upstream, working 
closely with partners in the region and with our interagency 
partners, and then also in the Homeland, in support of 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice 
(DOJ), DEA, and other relevant civilian-led authorities. We are 
absolutely committed to this mission and it is a national 
security challenge.
    Senator Kelly. I imagine the Chinese and the Russians are 
looking at this as a big opportunity for them. Is it your 
assessment that our near-peer competitors like China and Russia 
are taking advantage of this instability created by this 
illicit drug trade and are using this to expand their influence 
in the Western Hemisphere?
    Ms. Dalton. Chairman, thank you for pointing out this 
important nexus. You know, as we look at the threats in the 
region and what our strategic competitors are doing and how 
they opportunistically may seek to ride upon other drivers of 
instability, I think this nexus is going to be increasingly 
important to watch, which is why we have dedicated elements 
within Southern Command, within the broader Department, to 
track the behavior of our strategic competitors and what the 
interrelationships might be with some of the transnational 
criminal organizations, and would be happy to follow up through 
classified channels to share more.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Mr. Saenz, the Department of 
Defense's budget for drug interdiction and counterdrug 
activities, as approved by the omnibus for fiscal year 2022, is 
over $800 million, and two-thirds of that is focused on the 
Western Hemisphere and the U.S. Homeland.
    Mr. Saenz, how effective would you say the Department's 
counterdrug activities have been in cutting off the flow of 
illicit drugs into our country?
    Mr. Saenz. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for that 
question and this opportunity to meet with all of you today. I 
think that the Department of Defense's activities, in 
conjunction with all of our partners, both interagency and 
international partners, work well together to help stem the 
flow of drugs into the United States, given our authorities and 
the funding provided by Congress.
    I think that the authorities that are provided by Congress 
are really what shape what we are able to do, and I would like 
to thank all the Members of Congress and Members of the Senate 
and Members of this Subcommittee for those authorities that 
help assist us in shaping how we provide our part of 
interagency, international effort to stem the flow of drugs.
    Senator Kelly. Can you give an assessment of its 
effectiveness? Is there any kind of metric that you use, any 
way to measure the effectiveness of the $800 million budget, 
where most of that goes in the Western Hemisphere and the U.S. 
Homeland?
    Mr. Saenz. Thank you for this opportunity to clarify. Our 
budget that we provide, that $800 million, is divided into 
several different areas. Part of that is for our own demand 
reduction activities within the Department of Defense. Some of 
that is for our primary mission, which is detection and 
monitoring, and part of that is for the support that we provide 
through intelligence and logistics support. Then a large 
portion of that is the support we provide through the National 
Guard in supporting local, state, and Federal law enforcement.
    Each one of those categories has different metrics in areas 
that we look at for how we providing that support in 
conjunction with our law enforcement partners. In those various 
areas we do have metrics that we look at to see how we are 
providing that support, and in general, those metrics show that 
the support that we are able to provide is effective and points 
out ways where we can become more effective and efficient with 
the funds that are provided.
    Senator Kelly. I would like to follow up. Maybe we can get 
some details on those metrics, and myself and my staff can take 
a look at it.
    I appreciate that. I will recognize Senator Ernst for 5 
minutes.
    Senator Ernst. Yes. Thanks again to our witnesses. General 
Bradfield, if I could start with you, sir. I am increasingly 
concerned about China's investments in our critical mineral 
markets in the Western Hemisphere. How could growing Chinese 
influence in South American mining become a security risk for 
us?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, 
Senator, for the question. The Joint Staff is gravely concerned 
about any seemingly economic deals with China in the hemisphere 
because of dual-use purposes. Some of these companies could 
easily be used for military application later. So any access 
that they gain through a business deal in the hemisphere may be 
militarized down the road.
    Senator Ernst. Mm-hmm. Yes. I do agree with that and I have 
grave concerns about it. Is there any coordination with our 
Department of State underway presently to counter the 
diplomatic pressure that China is putting on South American 
leaders regarding these critical mineral markets in South 
America, and particularly in Chile?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Ma'am, I would have to defer 
specifically to Department of State, but I can tell you that 
the Joint Staff works with the interagency to share information 
and concerns. As we detect and monitor and establish these 
well-founded relationships we have throughout the hemisphere 
with our partners and allies, to share that information with 
the appropriate entities. It is a whole-of-government approach, 
ma'am.
    Senator Ernst. Can you maybe explain the risks that are 
associated with that as well?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. To understand your 
question then, the risk for--I am sorry. Can you restate----
    Senator Ernst. Well, the pressure that China is putting on 
South American leaders to gain access to basically the mining 
infrastructure, are there risk then with allowing China to 
continue to put pressure on those leaders? Is it blocking any 
attempts that the United States might have to work with those 
South American leaders, those type of interactions? Are you 
able to observe any of that from the DOD perspective?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for 
clarifying the question. So yes, ma'am. They appear to have 
different tactics to gain access to, as you stated, minerals 
and business deals, but often what we are hearing from partners 
and allies and witnessing is that strings attached. So it may 
appear to be a business deal but then it turns into something 
about longer-term access, or, you know, there are 14 countries 
in the world that still recognize Taiwan. Eight of them are in 
the hemisphere, and we have heard that some of these deals come 
with, ``We will give you this good deal if you denounce 
recognition of Taiwan.''
    Senator Ernst. Okay, and there is definitely a risk in 
that. In particular, I have heard of opportunities for American 
companies to engage in some of these mining activities. 
However, with the pressure that is coming from China we do not 
have that same level of interest from the United States 
Government in assisting some of our own companies, and access 
to these critical mineral resources are extremely important. I 
appreciate your feedback there.
    General Bradfield, an increasing People's Liberation Army 
(PLA) presence in United States Southern Command's (SOUTHCOM's) 
area of responsibility (AOR) has direct implications for DOD 
requirements, given the strategic location along critical sea 
lines of communication like the Panama Canal and the Strait of 
Magellan at the southern tip of South America.
    In your professional military judgment then, how could an 
increased Chinese military presence near strategic lines of 
communication impact DOD's ability to execute contingency 
operations, both in the region and in other places like United 
States IndoPacific Command (INDOPACOM)?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the 
question. We are watching that closely and working with our 
allies and partners throughout the theater, not just Panama. 
But certainly your question is how could it impact? It could 
certainly impact if China, for example, had control of the port 
authority on either or both ends of the Panama Canal. It could 
restrict movement. They are also trying to gain access and 
strike a port agreement down in southern Argentina, and that 
could be of concern as well.
    Senator Ernst. [Presiding.] Very good. I appreciate that. I 
am going to yield back my time. Senator Gillibrand.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    Ms. Dalton and General Bradfield, you noted in your written 
testimony that one way China attempts to expand its influence 
in the Western Hemisphere is strengthened by the PLA's ties 
with militaries in the Western Hemisphere. What arguments are 
we making to our Western Hemisphere neighbors that they should 
engage with our own armed forces over the Chinese? One issue 
that is related and not unique to the Western Hemisphere is 
corruption amongst the political leaders and other elites. Can 
you speak to how our adversaries are exploiting corruption to 
their advantage and what tools should we use to counter that?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator Gillibrand, thank you so much for the 
really important question here. It is an issue that we are 
closely monitoring and seeking to counteract, given our 
longstanding defense relationships in the region. It is deeply 
worrisome to us that China is attempting to make these inroads.
    In terms of the arguments that we are using, it is the fact 
that we have decades-long defense relationships in the region, 
that quality of the security cooperation that we provide in 
terms of training and equipment, in terms of sustainment, is 
second to none globally, and that are part of, therefore, a 
network of global U.S. allies and partners that share common 
interests and values. I think that is a really compelling 
argument that most of our partners in the region, that 
continues to resonate with them.
    But I do think we will need to redouble our efforts as 
China seeks to make these inroads to ensure that we continue to 
live up to our end of the bargain and continue to build the 
relationships in ways that are going to be helpful to them. I 
do think that, again, there is an interrelationship here, as we 
were speaking about earlier, in terms of some of the other 
drivers of insecurity. You mentioned corruption. There is also 
the Transnational Criminal Organization (TCO) dynamic, where 
actors like China and Russia, through disinformation, through 
cyber means, are looking to piggyback on some of those dynamics 
and foster a sense of disconnection between the government and 
their people, potentially. This is an area that we continue to 
watch very closely.
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Senator, thank you for the 
question. The Joint Staff and North American Aerospace Defense 
Command (NORAD) and United States Northern Command (NORTHCOM) 
and SOUTHCOM are keenly aware of how China is maneuvering 
throughout the AOR and in our backyard.
    So what are we doing about it? We stand shoulder to 
shoulder with our partners and allies. We are on the field. The 
Joint Force is on the field every day with our partners and 
allies. We have some longstanding relationships that many of 
you on this Committee may be well familiar with as well--a low-
cost but high-return-on-investment program like Security 
Partnership Program through the National Guard. Four Members in 
this Subcommittee have states that work in the hemisphere, and 
we are proud of that. These are longstanding relationships 
where we build trust and we have earned the title of ``partner 
of choice.''
    While China will continue to do what they feel like they 
need to for strategy, our biggest strength in the hemisphere 
are our partnerships, our friends, our neighbors. So being on 
the battlefield and being in the space with them, both in 
training, exercises, and persistent engagements, is very 
important. We need to meet our partners and allies where they 
are, with their challenges. That is very important. The support 
of this Committee and Congress to find those activities is very 
important.
    Senator Gillibrand. Acknowledging that we are in an 
unclassified setting, the efforts that China is making to train 
foreign militaries, are those efforts successful, and how would 
you rate them, and how do you think we should best counter it 
with the partnerships that we have forged over several decades 
in Latin America?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. So we 
do get feedback from our partners and allies, and some do 
continue to send folks to training in Communist China, and 
again, you are right, at this level of classification--I could 
be more specific for the record later, ma'am. But it is 
effective because they keep going sometimes, because it is a 
free, paid-for school, but we do get the feedback that because 
we have an emphasis on human rights, a respect for civilian 
government and democracy, that we are the preferred partner of 
choice.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Senator Ernst. Senator Tuberville.
    Senator Tuberville. Thank you very much. Thank you for your 
testimony today.
    You know, we have got a lot of bad things going on around 
the world. You know, we are all worried about Ukraine and the 
people there. It is a shame what is going on. We will lose more 
in the first 6 months of overdoses in this country than they 
will lose, and it does not seem like we are much worried about 
it. We do not hear people talking about it, and this is my 
second hearing today about drugs. I think we all need to get 
more and more concerned about. Senator Kelly obviously brought 
it up in his home state of Arizona.
    At the end of the day, what have we got to do? I mean, we 
are losing. We are losing the war on drugs down at the border, 
and it is coming across right and left. We will have people die 
around here today, overdose, around our building here.
    Ms. Dalton, what do you think? I mean, is there anything 
else we can do, any more emphasis? What are we spending--800--
how much do we spend? What is our budget? 800?
    Ms. Dalton. Eight hundred million.
    Senator Tuberville. Eight hundred million? Just elaborate 
on that a little bit.
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you for highlighting this 
challenge again, and I am really impressed by the focus that 
this subcommittee is giving to this issue, and you mentioned 
the other engagement going on here today, because I do think it 
needs more due attention, given the impact that it is having on 
Americans.
    Again, I think the Department is absolutely committed to 
playing the important role that we do with our partners in the 
region to get after some of the upstream drivers of these 
illicit networks that are bringing drugs into our country. I 
think the Administration is giving a lot of emphasis to trying 
to come up with a comprehensive strategy that will address some 
of those upstream drivers.
    The challenge is that, you know, some of those initiatives 
will take some time to manifest because it fundamentally is 
about governance, it is about corruption, it is about the seeds 
that lay the foundation for those networks to be able to take 
hold in the points of origin.
    Through our security cooperation efforts in the region, 
continuing to work closely on the professionalization and 
capabilities and defense institutional capacity-building of our 
partners to try to address some of those upstream drivers I 
think is really critical, while, at the same time, bringing the 
focus here in the homeland to work with state and local 
authorities in our support capacity as a department, to support 
the important efforts of DHS, DEA, and other actors. I am 
grateful for Congress' continued support for our 
counternarcotics programs and our security cooperation 
programs, and in terms of what more we could do, I think 
additional congressional focus and funding for our civilian-led 
agencies, like DHS, like the State Department, like DEA, that 
need the capacity to get after this challenge.
    Senator Tuberville. Well, here is a problem, I see what has 
happened over the years. Marijuana, heroin--most of those 
things you have to grow, right? This fentanyl is synthetic, and 
this can right here of fentanyl could kill everybody in this 
city, and they are making it right and left. It is easy to get 
across the border, and it is awful. I mean, it is absolutely 
awful, and nobody seems to be worried about it. I know that it 
is you all's job, but we have got to do something about it or 
we are going to have a catastrophe in this country of somebody 
putting it in our water supply, putting it in air systems. We 
have got to wake up and smell the roses.
    A couple other things. On the African continent we have one 
military base. In COCOM we have 76 bases in Latin America. Is 
there anything else we need to do down there to help? You know, 
it looks like we are pretty well targeted, you know, in Latin 
America, to helping things like this. We are not concerned 
about it in Africa. Any thoughts on that?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you. I believe that those key 
nodes that we have in the region support the longstanding 
defense partnerships that we have been cultivating the last 30-
some years, and those are critical to supporting the ongoing 
training, exercising, and capacity-building that we are doing 
with our defense partners in the region in support of the 
civilian-led law enforcement efforts in the region as well.
    So combining that, again, as part of increased support for 
our interagency colleagues and their capacities to also work 
with our partners I think is the pathway forward.
    Senator Tuberville. Yes. One other quick question. We are 
hearing at the end of March title 42 is going to expire. Right 
now we are seeing 5,000 to 6,000 a week come across the border. 
I think that would probably enhance people coming across. It is 
going to be tougher to stop the drugs. It is going to be 
tougher to stop the human trafficking. It is really going to 
get bad. Do you all expect that?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank for highlighting that. We are 
closely coordinating with DHS and other interagency partners to 
anticipate the possible lifting of title 42 order. While we are 
committed to providing support at the southwest border, from a 
homeland perspective, and again continuing to work closely with 
partners in the broader hemisphere, the Secretary has not yet 
made a determination for onward support for fiscal year 2023. 
But I am happy to work closely with you all as the Secretary 
makes that determination.
    Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Kelly. [Presiding.] Senator Kaine is recognized for 
5 minutes.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, and thank you to the witnesses 
for what you do. You guys do really good jobs at what you do. I 
am going to be critical, but I am not going to be critical of 
you, because I think my criticisms lie elsewhere. They lie with 
successive administrations and with us, Congress.
    You do a good job with what you have. We do not give you 
very much. We do not give you very much. We have had testimony 
again and again before this committee that we can spot an awful 
lot of drugs coming to this country, in response to Senator 
Tuberville, but SOUTHCOM does not get the resources to 
interdict what we know is coming. SOUTHCOM has always been 
underfunded, even in terms of the Intelligence, Surveillance, 
and Reconnaissance (ISR) they get. SOUTHCOM asks for help for 
cyber defense and United States Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) does 
not have any resources to give to them. What they say is, ``Use 
the South Carolina Guard. They will help you with cyber 
defense.'' Good on the South Carolina Guard. That is great. But 
CYBERCOM tells SOUTHCOM, ``We do not have resources for you.''
    We act like there is an east-west axis to the world and 
there is not a north-south axis. This is not just defense. This 
is also in the diplomacy space. Vaccines. Eight percent of the 
population lives in SOUTHCOM, the global population. Thirty 
percent of the deaths were there. How about our distribution of 
vaccines? We sent 8 percent of our vaccines there. We sent what 
the population was, but not what the death toll was, and you 
could argue that because SOUTHCOM is so connected to us through 
migration, even if they did not have an unacceptably high death 
toll we should have been doing better by them.
    Six of us went to Central and South America in July, three 
Democrats and three Republicans. We went at the time the U.S. 
was delivering vaccines. They were thrilled that we were 
delivering vaccines because Sinovac and Sputnik vaccines, China 
and Russia were really making a play. They like our vaccines 
better. We were giving them. China and Russia were selling 
them. They thought our quality was higher. If they said 
something good about Taiwan, China would suddenly cancel it.
    We have a little open door with vaccine development, but 
even then I think we were under-distributing in the Americas 
when we could have been really building up powerful goodwill 
there because of the death toll there and because they really 
want to do business with us.
    I am the chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee on 
Foreign Relations. Again and again, when we meet with heads of 
state they tell us, in Spanish, usually, when the translator is 
gone, they say, ``We would much rather work with you than with 
China or Russia. We would much rather work with you. But they 
have resources on the table and you do not.''
    You have talked about the security cooperation funding, and 
this International Military Education and Training (IMET) 
funding. I am going to look really carefully. I think the 
President is going to send us a budget next week, and I would 
encourage everybody here, you guys have said we should do this 
hearing, look at that budget next week and see what happens to 
security cooperation funding and IMET in SOUTHCOM. I bet you 
are going to see it going down. I bet you are going to see that 
we are deciding to prioritize other parts of the world instead 
of SOUTHCOM. I am hoping I am wrong about that, and if I am 
wrong I am going to say publicly I was wrong. But I have a 
feeling we are going to see a continued devaluation of what we 
need to be doing in this region.
    Now there are some bright spots. Ecuador, where we have 
virtually no presence for a very long time because they were 
pro-China, a year ago they swept out the president, they swept 
out 70 percent of their national assembly because China was 
ripping them off--building crummy projects, drying up rivers, 
vacuuming up fish around the Galapagos. Even though we really 
were not doing much with them, the Ecuadoran population decided 
to sweep out an old crew, and they put in a very potentially 
friendly United States Government. That is positive.
    The Chilean elections have produced somebody who is not 
necessarily Mr. Pro U.S. He is a candidate from the left, but 
he has been willing to speak out against Cuba, speak out 
against Nicaragua, speak out against Venezuela, speak out 
against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There is an 
opportunity there for us.
    Honduras has replaced a president, one who was corrupt and 
complicit in the drug trade in the United States, again, to 
somebody who is not necessarily going to be an ally of ours but 
at least there is a chapter that is open to us.
    The last thing that has happened recently is Panama, Costa 
Rica, and Dominican Republican have announced an alliance for 
democracy and development to try to counter the democratic 
backsliding in the region and lean forward and be more pro-
democracy, and that gives us some opportunity.
    But I guess I just want to say to my colleagues, when we 
get this budget next week let's take a look at what the 
allocation of resources are into this AOR. I think you are 
going to conclude that no matter what kind of good people we 
have trying to do a good job, it has not been a priority. It 
has not been a priority, and it needs to be a priority.
    The only question I will ask is, do you agree with me? I 
mean, you testified to it essentially, but programs like IMET 
and security cooperation, they are not the real expensive ones, 
and it is some of the best things that we do in terms of 
building up alliances and friendships that can last for 
generations. Am I looking at this the right way?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you so much for highlighting 
that. I think what I would say, in response, is with the 
resources that we do get for this region that we will be 
creative and innovative and make sure we get the best bang for 
our buck in terms of leveraging it through the security 
cooperation tools that we have at our disposal.
    You know, through the National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA) the Department also has an opportunity through this 
Strategic Competition Initiative to highlight, both for this 
region as well as, I believe, for United States Africa Command 
(AFRICOM), the ways that we are going to leverage security 
cooperation, irregular warfare, institutional capacity-building 
going forward, to achieve our objectives.
    We will come up with a robust framework to be able to 
describe how we are going to innovate with the tools that we 
have.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you. I appreciate it.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Senator Peters.
    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
our witnesses for being here today.
    Ms. Dalton, my first question is to you. This comes from my 
perspective as chairing the Senate Homeland Security Committee 
and overseeing DHS. As you are well aware, many of the security 
challenges that we face in Latin America are really more of a 
political and economic instability rather than the typical 
state-on-state competition. In fact, I think most of the 
security challenges that the United States faces in the region 
in dealing with Latin America is much more about homeland 
security than they are about national security, broadly.
    My question to you, as a senior DOD official at the nexus 
of homeland security and national defense, how are you working 
with your DHS colleagues at home and abroad to proactively 
combat issues like human trafficking, drug smuggling, illegal 
weapons sales that are taking place in Latin America and impact 
us in oftentimes very direct ways?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you for highlighting this, and I 
think there is actually a great opportunity in terms of the 
ethos that this Administration is bringing to trying to break 
down the traditional silos of how we think about foreign policy 
and domestic policy. This was highlighted in President Biden's 
Interim National Security Strategic Guidance as an imperative 
for all of us to kind of think differently about some of these 
transcendent issues that you illustrated just now so well.
    For my part, I talk to DHS on a daily basis on this issue 
set, to see how we can work together on both ends of the 
equation, and frankly, also in terms of how, now in the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) policy office, we are 
orienting the assistant secretaryship that I oversee, it allows 
us to work with DHS both on the homeland dimension, in support 
of their lead activities on the southwest border, but also 
working with DHS and other interagency partners in support of 
addressing the upstream drivers of migration that brings both 
legal and illegal migrants to our borders.
    Senator Peters. Great. Thank you.
    Mr. Saenz, our Special Operations Forces have a very long 
history of working with Latin American partners to combat 
transnational criminal organizations, principally those related 
to the drug trade. Special Operations Command reorients itself, 
like the rest of the defense establishment, towards undertaking 
great power competition. I am concerned that this type of 
support and training may not be as readily available going 
forward.
    My question for you, though, is can you discuss what 
Special Operations support for counternarcotics will look like 
in an era of constrained resources and competing priorities?
    Mr. Saenz. Well, Senator, thank you so much for your 
question and pointing out that area of concern. The support 
that we receive in our counterdrug and counter-transnational 
organized crime work that we do across DOD does have a 
component of Special Operations which supports those efforts, 
and that component looks to continue.
    As you are aware, a lot of our Special Operations Forces 
are regionally oriented, and so they will continue to work 
within those regions. Within each one of those regions there 
are different sets of problems and challenges we want to get 
at. Certainly in the Western Hemisphere, transnational 
organized crime and drugs are a significant concern. There will 
always still be an opportunity for them to support.
    Currently right now we do have lots of support from Special 
Operations Command when it comes to doing our counterthreat 
finance work, which really works with the Department of the 
Treasury to help identify, through intelligence analysis, ways 
where we can get after the financial side of these criminal 
networks. That support that they provide is through individuals 
who have been specifically trained to do that work, and so they 
will always be focused on that type of work, as an example.
    Senator Peters. Right. Thank you.
    General Bradfield, so much of the Chinese influence in the 
region is built on--and we are seeing this elsewhere around the 
globe--massive subsidies for construction of infrastructure by 
the Chinese Government. We see sea and airports, electrical 
grids, roadways. You can name all sorts of projects that are 
occurring.
    My question for you is, should the United States re-
evaluate the type of material support we provide our partners 
and allies in the region to ensure that our offers of 
assistance remain attractive in the wake of what we are seeing 
in terms of Chinese cash flowing into these countries?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Senator, thank you for the 
question, and this is a topic of discussion at many of our 
security conferences throughout the AOR. The short answer, sir, 
is yes.
    You mentioned quite a bit there, and we are monitoring 
deals and influence that China has throughout the hemisphere in 
areas like 5G, finance, energy, construction, and port 
projects, and the list goes on to include foreign military 
sales. So the concern and the threat is about any access and 
long-term deals and access not only having strings attached, 
because typically it is not just about the headline of the 
deal. It is what else did they agree to, to get there, and then 
it is the enduring presence.
    Then there is the dual use, of if it is an economic or a 
business entity from China, because of the way they are 
structured it could be used for military purposes as well.
    So yes, sir, we are working with partners and allies, but 
also across the whole-of-government, interagency, private 
industry to address that.
    Senator Peters. Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Senator Peters. We will now go 
into our second round of questions. I will start out here for 5 
minutes.
    A little bit different topic here. You know, Russia has 
been intensifying its outreach in the Western Hemisphere to 
both client states--Venezuela and Nicaragua and Cuba--and also 
to other states like now Brazil and Argentina, even. We have 
had longstanding relations with some of these states, 
particularly Brazil and Argentina.
    If Russia uses offers of military assistance, bilateral 
military exercises, and air and maritime access agreements to 
create instability and undermine democratic governments 
throughout the region, they also have a strategy of offering a 
diplomatic lifeline to isolated states.
    Secretary Dalton, how would you characterize Russia's 
motivations in aiding proxy states like Venezuela, Nicaragua, 
and Cuba, which engage in destabilizing activities regionally?
    Ms. Dalton. Chairman, thank you so much for highlighting 
this issue. I think, you know, as we look forward as a 
Department in looking at the behavior of our strategic 
competitors we are trying to be mindful of the different 
approaches that the PRC and Russia are taking in the region. 
There are some similarities but they are also distinct.
    Just to briefly draw that contrast because I think it is 
important, I think we would characterize the PRC's approach 
more as a long-term strategy that they have been building 
towards over the last 20 years, and is, frankly, more 
concerning to us. As I framed it in the opening statement, as 
the pacing challenge. Whereas Russia is pursuing more of an 
opportunistic approach, and some of that has to do with 
resourcing, some of that has to do with the appeal and perhaps 
even now with Ukraine, global impression that Russia carries 
with partners and other actors in the region.
    To your specific question, you know, in terms of their 
support for authoritarian regimes like Venezuela, Nicaragua, 
and Cuba, I think it exacerbates the trend lines and pathways 
that these states are already on in terms of the approach and 
example that they potentially set in the region, and looking to 
counteract that example, if you will, with the strong defense 
relationships that we have with the vast majority of countries 
in the region I think is so important.
    You know, the case of Brazil is interesting. I believe that 
we are confident in our defense relationship there, although 
Russia and other actors are attempting to make inroads. But we 
are building upon a strong foundation there and do have, as I 
mentioned in the opening, an opportunity with the upcoming 
Inter-American Defense dialogue this summer. Brazil is going to 
host it, and I think that is a really important testament to 
the strong foundation that we have there.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. General Bradfield, do you have an 
assessment from the Joint Staff on the impact of Russian arms 
sales in the Western Hemisphere, including weapons to Cuba and 
Nicaragua, and aircraft and any missile systems to Venezuela? 
Can you speak to that?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Sir, thanks for the question. 
I would like to provide a more full answer at a classified 
level, so I would like to take that for the record. But I can 
tell you that we are watching very closely the current crisis 
in Europe, and with embargos and sanctions how it is affecting 
partners and allies. Some of our partners and allies did 
purchase Russian equipment decades ago, when it was an 
economically good deal, but they are using them for good, for 
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and security 
cooperation. If they are not able to maintain that equipment 
and use that equipment that is certainly something of concern 
and be seen as both a risk yet an opportunity for those that 
might want to step in, but also an opportunity for other 
adversaries. We are watching that closely, sir.
    Senator Kelly. I will have some more follow-up on this area 
here in a second, but I want to recognize Senator Ernst for 5 
minutes.
    Senator Ernst. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and General 
Bradfield, how are the Chinese and Russians using 
disinformation and information operations in the region? How 
are they doing that, and are they undermining U.S. credibility 
and maybe those of our partners? Are they being effective if 
they are doing that?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Thanks for the question, 
ma'am. So certainly that is part of the campaign, 
misinformation, disinformation, and with Spanish-speaking 
countries they do have internet and also television and radio 
broadcasts. Fortunately, due to the atrocities in Europe some 
countries have decided to stop broadcasting, but our 
adversaries do find other ways to spread mis- and dis-
information.
    I cannot give any kind of metric on how effective, but we 
are working hard to work across the diplomatic, information 
technology, military, and economic (DIME)--I do mean the whole-
of-government--and the whole DIME. But we are basically, 
because we follow the rule of law and we work so closely with 
our partners and allies that we are trying to spread the truth 
through those relationships and trust.
    Senator Ernst. Good. Ms. Dalton, did you have any thoughts 
on that as well?
    Ms. Dalton. Thank you, Ranking Member. I do think that this 
is an important area to watch. We have seen Russia, in 
particular, providing support to local media, and Russia Today 
is broadcast in the region, I believe, in five different 
broadcasting areas, and through that is able to perpetuate 
disinformation campaigns through that medium.
    It is an important area to watch, and I think Congress' 
support for State Department and for United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID) and for other mechanisms to 
promote the free and open expression of media more broadly in 
these societies is really important to counteract that.
    Senator Ernst. Right. Thank you, and for any of you, we do 
know that Russia and China are actively trying to influence 
different elections in the region to put in place leaders that 
are more sympathetic their particular interests, and, of 
course, those that are hostile to the United States, and 
particularly as we look at the upcoming Colombian and Brazilian 
elections.
    What is your assessment of Chinese and Russian efforts, and 
again, are they being effective in doing so?
    Ms. Dalton. Thank you, Ranking Member. I am happy to take a 
start at that and welcome other comments from my fellow 
panelists. I do think that there are active attempts, both by 
the PRC and Russia, to shape the political debate in 
democracies in the region. I believe, though, that among the 
two that you mentioned, both Colombia and Brazil, the fact that 
we have such a strong defense relationship with both countries 
and the fact that the people themselves are committed to their 
democratic process I think bodes fairly well in terms of where 
things will be headed, vis-a-vis U.S. interests, as we move 
forward.
    But it is an important area to watch, and I think both 
competitors are seeking to be influential and opportunistic in 
shaping the debate in these countries.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you. General Bradfield, did you have 
any thoughts?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. I was fortunate 
enough to be able to travel in the AOR last year, to include 
going to Colombia. The President told the SOUTHCOM commander 
that he was very concerned about the elections and the 
influence and mis- and dis-information and influence in cyber. 
He did say that he was interested in seeking assistance in 
countering that, but it is certainly a concern.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you, and of course we have watched 
everything that is going on in Europe right now with Ukraine, 
and our partners there have really been quite effective in 
pushing back against the misinformation that is put out there 
by Vladimir Putin and the Russian military. They are exposing 
what they can, as they can. What lessons should we be taking 
from what the Ukrainians are doing and how can we apply that 
here in the Western Hemisphere with some of our partners in 
Central and South America?
    Mr. Saenz. Well thank you, ma'am. I think that is a very 
important point you make there, and I think there are lots of 
lessons that we can learn from the situation in Ukraine and how 
things are evolving and how that can be applied in the Western 
Hemisphere.
    To the point that you made there about the disinformation 
and the misinformation, I think it supports when we have all of 
our partners working together instead of just one nation, with 
one bilateral partner, us, the United States, trying to work 
against whatever that challenge may be, whether it be 
disinformation, whether it may be our counternarcotics work. 
Whatever we are working against, if we can attack that not only 
as a whole-of-government but as a community with all of our 
other partner countries in the area working together, I think 
we have a better chance of combating these things.
    Senator Ernst. Very good. Okay, and with that I will yield. 
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator Kelly. I want to follow up again on Russia. We have 
been able to impose some significant economic and financial 
costs for their unlawful and unprecedented invasion of Ukraine. 
Do you see any way for us to impose additional costs in the 
Western Hemisphere, maybe with our partners, you know, for 
their destabilizing activities in the Western Hemisphere but 
maybe also as a follow-on to what we have been able to do to 
their economy through economic sanctions?
    Ms. Dalton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it is 
worthwhile to think holistically about the approach to Russia 
and the fact that, you know, based on, I think, the inspiration 
of the Ukrainian people there is this global mobilization to 
push back on Russia and what it is doing in Ukraine currently.
    You know, I think the sanctions regime that has been put in 
place by the United States and our allies is significant and it 
is going to have impacts in terms of what Russia is able to do 
within the Western Hemisphere and also, frankly, vice versa, in 
terms of what our partners are going to be able to do in 
certain respects.
    In terms of what specific steps we may want to take on top 
of that in the hemisphere I think we will want to be able to 
walk forward both the cost benefit analysis for horizontal 
escalation, vis-`-vis Russia, and how they will perceive it and 
ensuring that that is supportive of our overall deterrence 
aims, while also ensuring that we are doing that in close 
coordination with partners in the region so that it does not 
have unintended effects on their economies, their democracies.
    Forgive me for not having the specific answers there in 
terms of ideas. I would be happy to take that back and follow 
up. But I think having an overall framework that is able to 
calibrate that cost benefit analysis will be important.
    Senator Kelly. Have you seen any change in their activities 
in the Western Hemisphere in the last, let's say, 2 or 3 
months, just leading up to the invasion, and since then? Has 
anything been noticeable in what the Russians have been 
involved in?
    Ms. Dalton. Mr. Chairman, thank you. What I would say is 
that we are closely watching, as a Department and as a 
Government. What Russia is doing globally and how it is 
posturing its military to be able to be cognizant of potential 
escalation factors, and I am happy to follow up more in 
classified channels.
    Senator Kelly. Okay. I want to switch back to China and on 
space competition in the Western Hemisphere. In the past few 
years China has built space tracking facilities, including in 
Argentina. The purpose of these facilities is unclear to us, at 
least unclear to me at this time. You know, I think that this 
point we do not have a solid picture of the purpose of their 
tracking stations. Under the terms of a bilateral agreement 
that the Argentinians have with the Chinese they have no 
oversight over what this tracking station does.
    Secretary Dalton, are Chinese space-related activities in 
the Western Hemisphere a cause of concern for the Department, 
and is there a potential use for these facilities for malign 
purposes?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you for raising this important 
question. As I mentioned in my opening statement this is an 
area that we are concerned about, so yes, in answer to your 
first question, and then the answer would also be yes in terms 
of potential dual use or malign purposes, and again, I am happy 
to follow up in classified channels.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Senator Ernst do you have any 
other----
    Senator Ernst. I am done. Thank you.
    Senator Kelly. I have got a few more questions. That does 
not mean you have to stay. I know you have got a busy day.
    United States Southern Command has announced its intention 
to expand space-related engagements in the Western Hemisphere 
as a counter to the activities of Russia and China. Potential 
partners on space include Brazil, Chile, maybe Argentina, and 
Peru. Do you see this as potentially a productive area of 
cooperation with these countries?
    Ms. Dalton. Mr. Chairman, thank you for highlighting this 
area of cooperation. I do think that this is a future pathway 
that we are exploring actively with our partners, including 
also cyber and information domains and how those are all 
interconnected.
    Do you want to add anything?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. 
Senator, thank you. Yes, we definitely see value, and it is an 
important part of integrated deterrence, but also in our quest 
for better domain awareness. So it is critically important.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Senator King.
    Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for 
being late. I was at an Intelligence Committee meeting that 
ironically overlaps.
    One of the things that was mentioned at the hearing that I 
was just at, and I keep running into this, is a lack of ISR. 
The testimony was a very limited amount of ISR available in the 
Latin American region. I guess my question is, why is that? Why 
can we not build more Global Hawks? What is the problem? I 
mean, it seems to me that is a very solvable problem that is 
not--it is math. You have more resources to watch, whether it 
is satellites or other assets. Give me some thoughts on what 
appears to be a lack of ISR, particularly in the Southern 
Hemisphere.
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Senator, thank you for the 
question. In my 11 months on the job and working with SOUTHCOM 
I have never heard them say that they could not use more ISR. 
So to your point, sir, the Joint Staff allocates ISR based on 
global priorities, and SOUTHCOM is certainly very important to 
the hemisphere.
    What they are doing, sir, is through integrated deterrence 
and working with partners and allies and also innovation and 
private industry and other aspects of the interagency, they are 
working very hard to come up with other ways for domain 
awareness. But, sir, they have told me repeatedly that they can 
always use more ISR.
    Senator King. Well here is what is bothering me. If this 
were a terrorist cell in Latin America, killing 100,000 
Americans a year, we would not be sitting here talking about 
not enough ISR and allocating it. I am really absolutely sick 
of this. The drug trade is one of the primary threats to this 
country. It is killing two people a day in my state. I mean, we 
need to think about it as an attack. It is an attack on our 
country, just as sure as it is an attack that came from Russia 
or Iran or anywhere else, and we are saying, oh well, we have 
got other needs. If we have got other needs in other places, 
let's buy some more resources to have them here.
    I realize this is not your job, but this is, I think, a 
gross misallocation of priorities. The reason I seem frustrated 
is because I am, because I have been on this for 5 or 6 years 
and nothing seems to change. Did you want to comment?
    Mr. Saenz. Yes, Senator King. Thank you very much, and you 
do raise a very significant point about the need for ISR. When 
it comes to the counterdrug work, we are trying to find ways we 
can better approach that, and so what we have done with our 
funding provided is in the past we have purchased four De 
Havilland Dash 8 Pale Ale aircraft to do that ISR mission for 
the counterdrug
effort.
    What we are doing now is we are looking through our budget 
process to see if we are able to buy a fifth aircraft that will 
add another 1,800 hours of ISR capability per year, and those 
are U.S. Government-owned by run by contractors for us.
    Senator King. I understand. I think the problem is, 
counterdrug is over here and military challenges are over here, 
and they are just separate. No. We have got to change our 
imagination here. This is an attack, and we have got to put the 
resources on.
    The second problem is--and we are going to have testimony 
coming up from SOUTHCOM--even with the limited ISR we have, we 
are only interdicting 25 percent of the shipments that we know 
of--that we know of. That is inexcusable. We know 100 ships are 
coming and we interdict 25 of them because we cannot get the 
Coast Guard and the Navy and their partner nations together in 
such a way as to deal with this.
    I am really tired of--this is the sixth or seventh year 
this question has come up, and, you know, when you know where 
the shipments are, even with the limited ISR, and you cannot 
stop them because we do not have enough ships or airplanes that 
is inexcusable, given the state of the threat.
    Ms. Dalton, what are we going to do about this?
    Ms. Dalton. Senator King, thank you for your commitment to 
this issue, and it is an absolute tragedy that hundreds of 
thousands of Americans are dying and have lives that are being 
devastated by this phenomenon, and it is a national security 
threat, plainly.
    I would say that the Department is committed to playing an 
important role, both in the region, in working with our 
regional partners to strengthen their own capacity to address 
the transnational criminal organizations that are bringing 
these drugs into our country, and also we are committed to 
working closely with our interagency partners on the southwest 
border and within the United States to be able to detect and 
monitor and provide intelligence-sharing and support to that 
important mission. We are absolutely committed to that.
    I do think that when it comes to the ISR question, Senator, 
there is not enough ISR to cover China, Russia, Ukraine, Iran. 
It is a global challenge.
    Senator King. Well let's buy more Global Hawks.
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you for highlighting that, and I 
know through----
    Senator King. I will write a letter to the Appropriations 
Committee.
    Ms. Dalton. Senator, thank you, and through the program 
budget review process I know that this was an issue that the 
Secretary and senior leadership of the Department looked 
closely at.
    Senator King. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Kelly. Well, ISR is part of the puzzle. It is like 
what do we do after we identify it, right? It seems like 
everybody, at least in this room right now, probably agrees, we 
need to be doing a lot more. You know, the interagency 
cooperation is important, but can we get like to some 
specifics? Like what do we think DOD--what more beyond 
identifying shipments, what are the other levers we can push on 
here through the Department of Defense? What are the other 
things that DOD could be doing to undermine these transnational 
criminal organizations, to interdict drugs coming into our 
country, whether through the southern border or through our 
coasts? What more, specifically, could DOD be doing?
    Mr. Saenz. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for that 
question, and you are absolutely correct that we need to always 
continue to look at all the different options we have and what 
more we can do to help support getting after this very 
difficult, very challenging, and very troublesome problem.
    There are different areas in which we support beyond just 
the detection and monitoring. We provide a lot of support when 
it comes to intelligence support, and we do provide a lot of 
support down with our partner nations when it comes to doing 
security cooperation work and some other logistical support 
work.
    We work with the entire interagency and our partner nations 
to try and help provide better processes and better tools for 
identifying targets and then helping our law enforcement 
partners effect those targets.
    Some of the things we are looking at right now is we are 
looking at how we can take some of the best solutions that have 
been developed in different regions and then invest in that 
solution so they can provide global support across all of our 
COCOMs and across all of our efforts. We are also looking at 
new ways of leveraging artificial intelligence and machine 
learning to take large amounts of data that is almost 
impossible for an analyst to get through in a reasonable amount 
of time, using machine learning, so that that can be dealt with 
quicker, and taking analysts from a time that took them 6 
months down to a time that takes them just a couple of days to 
help identify targets that they can go after.
    We are looking at ways to be able to leverage. Also a lot 
of information that is available in the public sector. We are 
trying to use geospatial information that is open to the public 
sector, interlay those altogether to produce a product that is 
very easy for people to understand and therefore very easy for 
us to hand off to law enforcement, both U.S. and international, 
who can take that information and quickly act upon it, and also 
be able to use it in future proceedings in court, because it is 
no longer classified.
    There are a lot of different things like that that we are 
looking at in how we can best improve the processes that we are 
using as a whole-of-government to get after this problem set.
    Senator Kelly. Do we feel that DOD has all the authority it 
needs to be as effective as it could be with the resources at 
the Department's disposal?
    Mr. Saenz. Mr. Chairman, thank you. That is a very good 
point. Yes, we think we have the authorities that we need to do 
what we need to do to support everyone in getting after the 
counterdrug problem. We would like to thank Congress 
specifically for the authorities of 1021 and 1022, provided 
through the NDAA. Those have helped us greater. 1021 helps us 
in Colombia to counter illegal armed groups that threaten a lot 
of our interests and work to move a lot of the illegal drugs 
who may or may not be associated any longer as a terrorist 
organization. We appreciate Congress extending that through 
fiscal year 2023, and we would like to work with Congress to 
extend that through fiscal year 2025.
    The 1022 authorities allows us to use counterdrug 
authorities and funding to support law enforcement in its 
efforts against terrorist organizations, transnational 
organized crime organizations that are identified through a 
specific process. We appreciate that those have been extended 
through fiscal year 2027, and we would like to continue to work 
with Congress to see if we can make that a more permanent 
authority.
    I think all the authorities that we have through U.S. Code 
and these additional authorities make a great set that we need 
to be able to do our job.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Senator King?
    Senator King. One of my principles of management is that 
you always want one throat to choke. Who is in charge? What 
individual in the United States Government is in charge of 
stopping drugs coming from Latin America? Mr. Saenz, is it you? 
Do not worry--I will not choke you.
    Mr. Saenz. Senator King, thank you very much for that 
question. I appreciate that you will not choke me.
    We do work as an interagency and we do work closely 
together.
    Senator King. See, that bothers me. When I hear 
``interagency'' and ``whole-of-government,'' to me that means 
nobody is in charge. Is there one person--if the President 
calls and says, ``I want to talk to the person who is in charge 
of keeping drugs out of the United States,'' who is going to 
show up in the Oval Office?
    Mr. Saenz. Certainly the President has his Director of 
National Drug Control Policy, Mr. Gupta, who is responsible for 
our policies for controlling both the supply and demand of 
drugs in the United States at a strategic level.
    Senator King. The policy. How about operations? That is 
what I am after. Who is in charge of the operations, going 
after the transnational organizations, going after the drug 
shipments? There is not anybody, is there?
    Mr. Saenz. The Department of Homeland Security is 
responsible for the flow of drugs and those organizations that 
flow those drugs into the United States. They certainly cannot 
do it alone and they rely on the rest of us to support them and 
help them.
    Senator King. How do we measure success? Do we have any 
metrics? You are getting a fairly sizeable budget. What 
constitutes success?
    Mr. Saenz. Senator, if you are speaking about success of 
the overall problem of the supply of drugs coming into the 
United States, certainly a measure of success would be how much 
of those drugs we are able to stop from coming into the United 
States. That becomes a very challenging question, a challenging 
problem, when we are dealing with illicit trafficking, and so 
it is hard to put an exact number of what the overall amount of 
drugs coming this direction are and how many are stopped.
    Senator King. Final question. It appears that a lot of 
the--a lot, a great deal of what is coming in is coming through 
Mexico, not through the water, although that is something we 
can certainly do better on. A lot of the fentanyl is coming in 
from Mexico. What authorities or what power or what leverage do 
we have over Mexico to force them to take this seriously and 
stop this horrible crime in progress? My sense is it is open 
season in Mexico.
    Mr. Saenz. Senator King, thank you so much for that 
observation. Certainly the vast majority of drugs coming into 
the United States are coming from Mexico, across our southwest 
border.
    Senator King. Is the Mexican Government serious about 
trying to stop it?
    Mr. Saenz. Certainly there are a lot of things that we 
would like the government of Mexico to do and to support 
countering that flow of narcotics into the United States. I 
would have to defer to the Department of State and their 
efforts in working with Mexico on how to best motivate the 
country of Mexico to do additional efforts, different efforts, 
whatever it takes to assist.
    Senator King. Thank you. We have got a problem, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Senator Kelly. We do.
    I have two final questions and then we will conclude here. 
How often does DOD have some kind of direct action with a 
transnational criminal organization?
    Mr. Saenz. Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question about 
our direct action with a criminal organization. The Department 
of Defense does not have authority to interdict drugs or to 
make arrests or to stop any criminal organization. Our support, 
our defense-unique support is in providing the information, is 
helping to assess that information, and analyze that 
information to law enforcement who has that authority and that 
capability.
    Senator Kelly. If you had that authority do you think DOD 
could be effective engaging directly with transnational 
criminal organizations (TCOs)?
    Mr. Saenz. Mr. Chairman that is a very interesting 
question. Thank you for that question. I think that has lots of 
areas of opportunity and lots of areas of risk that need to be 
considered. When the Department of Defense, when the militaries 
start engaging in what would otherwise be law enforcement 
activity, when they start engaging on those type of on-the-
ground operations in foreign countries, there are a lot of 
different factors that need to be taken into consideration 
before we should consider doing something like that.
    Ms. Dalton. Mr. Chairman, may I add to that?
    Senator Kelly. Yes.
    Ms. Dalton. Thank you, and thank you for the question. The 
Department of Defense, of course, brings tremendous 
capabilities to any equation, but just to complement Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense Saenz's comments, I think we 
need to be cognizant too about how that would play out in this 
particular region where the role of the military, particularly 
in democracies, has had a particularly checkered past. So given 
that our efforts in the region would be a by-with-and-through 
approach, typically, that could then enhance the military's 
role in what is principally a civilian function in democracies 
I think is a pathway we would need to be very careful in 
walking down, in which I would be very cautious.
    Senator Kelly. I want to come back to something Senator 
King said, as we have 100,000 Americans dying each year. I 
think at the beginning of the hearing we established that this 
was a national security threat to our country, so we should be 
looking to do more. Just doing the same thing every year, we 
should not expect to get a different result. I think we should 
be looking for other opportunities to be effective.
    Finally, is there anything else you think we possibly could 
be doing that we did not bring up during this hearing today?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Sir, I think it was pointed 
out earlier that there is certainly a limit of resources. But I 
would like to drive home again that integrated deterrence is 
not just a catch phrase. It is a powerful tool and a lever at 
our disposal. Empowering our partners, making sure they are 
trained and equipped and have the information that they need to 
help us, because we cannot do this alone, is a force 
multiplier.
    I think that is one area that we are making strides. I will 
note that so far this year partner nation narcotic 
interdictions are up 62 percent, and we hope that trend 
continues. But this is just one of the many challenges in the 
hemisphere. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Kelly. Well thank you, all of you. I really 
appreciate you taking the time. This has been an informative 
discussion. It is clear that this has national security 
implications, strategic importance. I want to thank our 
witnesses for participating, and I look forward to some follow-
up from us. I think there is more we certainly can do. That is 
clear. We need to continue to find new ways to fight this 
threat in the Western Hemisphere.
    So with that the hearing is concluded. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 4:02 p.m., the Subcommittee adjourned.]

    [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

            Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
                               venezuela
    1. Senator Blackburn. General Bradfield, how can the United States 
and its allies and partners strengthen counterterrorism collaboration 
to deter Hizbollah activity in Venezuela?
    General Bradfield [Deleted.]

    2. Senator Blackburn. Brigadier General Bradfield, what are the 
current vulnerabilities in deterring Hizbollah's illicit financial 
networks in Venezuela?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Officially, Lebanese Hizballah (LH) 
denies involvement with drug trade and when it has discovered intemal 
drug operations in the past, it has turned its members over to law 
enforcement. LH supporters' activities in Latin America are mostly 
limited to illicit financial and criminal activities, including money 
laundering-sometimes with Latin American drug cartels-and smuggling. 
Weak regional law enforcement enables LH to maintain its illicit 
revenue system in Latin America. Exposure of these narcotics networks' 
ties to LH could enable local criminal arrests, and encourage LH to 
take greater efforts to cease participation in these activities, or 
stop accepting donations from supporters publicly associated with the 
drug trade.

    3. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, how do Hizbollah's operations in 
the region fit into the larger strategic picture of illicit networks 
within President Maduro's regime?
    Ms. Dalton did not respond in time for printing. When received, 
answer will be retained in committee files.

    4. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, what shortfalls do you identify 
in the United States counterterrorism policy in Venezuela that allow 
the proliferation of Hizbollah operations and influence?
    Ms. Dalton did not respond in time for printing. When received, 
answer will be retained in committee files.

    5. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Saenz, how do current counternarcotic 
operations in Venezuela mitigate both the government and Hizbollah's 
ability to turn the region into a central hub for transactional 
organize crime and international terrorism?
    Mr. Saenz. DOD supports counterdrug operations in the Western 
Hemisphere primarily in three ways: 1) the detection and monitoring of 
aerial and maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States, 
including from Venezuela; 2) supporting U.S. law enforcement efforts to 
counter Western Hemisphere-based transnational criminal organizations 
(TCOs) that participate in drug trafficking, human trafficking, money 
laundering, illegal trade in natural resources and wildlife, and 
weapons smuggling; and 3) and security cooperation efforts focused on 
key regional security partners, such as Colombia.

                 hezbollah and crime-terror convergence
    6. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Saenz, how do you assess Hizbollah's 
External Security Organization (ESO) influence in the Tri-Border Area?
    Mr. Saenz. LH's Islamic Jihad Organization (IJO)--also known as the 
ESO--is the group's primary overseas unit and remains an integral 
element of Iran's threat network. LH sympathizers are concentrated in 
the tri-border area (TBA) between Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. LH 
sympathizers primarily conduct illegal fundraising activities in the 
TBA, ranging from drug and weapons smuggling and money laundering to 
illegal sales of textile and electronics. The porous borders in the TBA 
enable ease of access for traffickers' transport and sale of illegal 
items while corrupt officials at the local level allow the free flow of 
illicit goods.

    7. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Saenz, what vulnerabilities currently 
exist in Hizbollah's ESO narcotic operations?
    Mr. Saenz. LH activities in Latin America are mostly limited to 
illicit financial and criminal activities, including money laundering--
sometimes with Latin American drug cartels--and smuggling, by LH 
supporters. LH takes advantage of weak regional law enforcement to 
maintain its illicit revenue system in Latin America. LH activities 
could be constrained by increased anti-trafficking actions, such as 
drug interdictions by regional partners, anti-money laundering 
activities, including sanctions and related designations, and law 
enforcement cooperation throughout Latin America.

    8. Senator Blackburn. Brigadier General Bradfield, to what degree, 
if any, are Hizbollah and the People's Republic of China (PRC) 
collaborating in Latin America? What are their shared interests, and 
what fissures can we exploit?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Lebanese Hizballah supporters' 
activities in Latin America are mostly limited to illicit financial and 
criminal activities, including money laundering and smuggling. The 
PRC's primary engagements in the region are economic and infrastructure 
development, and persuading countries to switch their diplomatic 
recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. We see little collaboration between 
the two in terms of their Latin American activities.

    9. Senator Blackburn. Brigadier General Bradfield, to what degree, 
if any, are Hizbollah and Russia collaborating in Latin America? What 
are their shared interests, and what fissures can we exploit?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. Lebanese Hizballah supporters' 
activities in Latin America are mostly limited to illicit financial and 
criminal activities, including money laundering and smuggling. Russia's 
primary engagements in the region are military sales, security 
cooperation, and ideology. Both are concerning, but there is little 
collaboration between the two in terms of their Latin American 
activities.

    10. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, what effective measures have the 
United States and its allies and partners taken to mitigate Hizbollah's 
ESO globalized outreach and collaboration?
    Ms. Dalton did not respond in time for printing. When received, 
answer will be retained in committee files.
                         china in latin america
    11. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, what global logistics and 
infrastructure advancements have China made in Latin America? Which 
investment poses the greatest threat to U.S. access and placement in 
the region?
    Ms. Dalton. The People's Republic of China (PRC), our most 
consequential strategic competitor and pacing challenge, continues its 
efforts to expand economic, diplomatic, technological, informational, 
and military influence in Latin America and the Caribbean.
    The Department of Defense is concerned by PRC investments in 
potentially dual-use infrastructure. These include deep-water ports and 
infrastructure on both sides of the Panama Canal that could enable the 
People's Liberation Army to threaten sea-lanes vital to global commerce 
and the movement of United States Forces. Equally concerning is the 
PRC's pursuit of additional access to regional space infrastructure, 
particularly in South America because of its strategic location with 
regard to space operations.

    12. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, how can the United States and 
its allies strengthen economic and infrastructure security in the 
region to deter collaboration with China?
    Ms. Dalton. The Department bases its partnerships in the region on 
shared values of democracy, respect for human rights, sovereignty, and 
respect for the rule of law. The PRC seeks to incrementally undermine 
these partnerships with offers of no-cost training and favorably 
financed sales of military equipment. The Department remains committed 
to strengthening and deepening our bilateral and multilateral defense 
partnerships to minimize PRC activities when they occur, and to remain 
the most trusted partner in the region.

    13. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Dalton, what is your assessment of 
recent successes by the PRC in influencing Latin American countries to 
abandon diplomatic relations with Taiwan?
    Ms. Dalton. The PRC has spent decades encouraging countries that 
have diplomatic ties with Taiwan to switch diplomatic relations to the 
PRC, often by offering financial and diplomatic incentives. Nicaragua 
was the most recent country in the region to switch its diplomatic ties 
from Taiwan to the PRC in early December 2021. During the height of the 
pandemic, the PRC attempted to use vaccine diplomacy combined with 
economic influence to pressure the Government of Paraguay to change its 
diplomatic relations. The PRC will continue to seek ways to use its 
investments in the region to pressure governments to end diplomatic 
ties with Taiwan, since 8 of the 14 partners that have official ties 
with Taiwan are in Latin America and the Caribbean. I defer further 
questions regarding the diplomatic perspective to the Department of 
State.

    14. Senator Blackburn. Brigadier General Bradfield, nineteen 
governments across Latin America and the Caribbean have joined 
Beijing's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). What short and long-term 
threats does the BRI pose to United States national security and 
interests?
    Brigadier General Bradfield.
      Beijing uses its One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative to 
support its grand strategy of national rejuvenation, and the PRC's 
overseas development and security interests under OBOR will drive the 
PRC toward expanding its overseas military footprint to protect those 
interests. The PRC seeks to expand its OBOR infrastructure and 
investment mega project, build partnerships, and gain commercial access 
to ports in Latin America.
      Although the United States remains the prefened defense 
partner in most of the hemisphere, the PRC has made repeated overrures 
toward United States strategic partners, including Argentina, Brazil, 
Mexico, and Panama. The PRC invites military leaders to attend 
professional military education, donates military and security 
equipment, and offers subsidized arms sales to build closer ties with 
potential partners.

    15. Senator Blackburn. Brigadier General Bradfield, to what degree, 
if any, are China and Russia collaborating in Latin America? What are 
their shared interests, and what fissures can we exploit?
    Brigadier General Bradfield. The PRC's primary engagements in the 
region are economic and infrastructure development, and persuading 
countries to switch their diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the 
PRC. Russia values its defense relationships and influence in Latin 
America, primarily focusing on strengthening relations with its 
traditional regional partners of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.