Appreciate your comments, Opening Statements related to Nordstrom Team 2. I want to ask about that. We know it security, nordstrom 2 threatens European Energy security, increases russian monopoly over the region. This pipeline is a russian trap, strongly support the recent announcement aimed at stopping this dangerous pipeline. Congress is working to provide the administration with additional tools to prevent it from being completed. The last few weeks both the senate and house passed their own versions of the National Defense authorization act with sanctions. Could you talk about the administrations commitment to opposing the pipeline and applying sanctions against those companies aiding in the completion of this russian trap . Donald trump took it on that it was a threat, created enormous leverage for russia, and ukraine as well. We had good support from capitol hill and legislation that was appropriate to delay the project, we are prepared to use those tools. There were diplomatic capabilities at the other end. We want europe to have a secure, stable, diverse set of energy opportunities, the department of energy worked alongside us to do this in our department, making sure europe has secure, stable, safe Energy Sources that cannot the Nordstrom Team to is dangerous and we will make sure that pipeline doesnt threaten europe. The National Arms embargo is set to expire october of this year. To my astonishment we are persuading the International Community of the importance of preventing iran, the worlds leading state sponsor of terror from purchasing advanced weapons, for armed terrorist proxy groups across the region. Weve seen more weapons likely flow to hamas, hezbollah in lebanon, despite the terrible consequences, that it would be vetoed by russia and china, what do they want why would they want it to expire and the Chinese Communist party really willing to betray Global Security to be irans arms dealer . I hope not but i expect so. We are working to prevent the arms embargo to be extended for months and months. We are working with their counterparts. We will submit Security Council resolution near future where we are to extend it. It was only a 5 year ban. To purchase weapon systems, build out air Defense System and the capacity to protect a Nuclear Program should they continue down that path but to sell weapons around the world, we will do what we can. We have the capacity to do this, we hope the un Security Council will conclude the arms embargo, with fingertips to make sure the arms embargo is not lifted on october 18th. It decreases stability and it would threaten israel and reduce American Security as well. On to religious freedom, sam brown, ambassador at large for International Religious freedom recently wrote humanity is why religious freedom will always win out against government and nonstate actors seeking to repress and control it. Weve seen authoritarian regimes restricting religious freedoms and the rights of individuals. Can you discuss efforts by the administration to promote International Religious freedoms . We phrased the priority of International Religious freedom in the state department. That happened under donald trump and mike pence and all across the administration. We use our genetic tools to encourage it, build resilience, work with religious communities to provide security to the work we are doing in Northern Iraq as a good example. There are lots of challenges. What is happening in nigeria with christians today, your point about the threat for religious conscience and people of all faiths is under attack in too many places. The state department has an Important Role to increase capacity for people to exercise their rights and religious freedom. We were not able to do it this year because of the virus but we brought people across the world, the largest human rights gatherings in all history, around the central idea people need to exercise this important right for their own faith. Earlier today, you called Chinese Communist party the central threat of our times, we had your deputy here, had a chance to talk about issues to expand military capabilities. To dominate globally in the last few months, increased military aggression near taiwan, south china sea, japan, hong kong, what they have been doing at home. Talk about recent confrontations, what that taught us about chinas military ambitions in capabilities. When we go to secure briefings we ask about their capabilities, not just what they might do but what they can do. These actions in the last 36 months, consistent with what they have been signaling for decades. You might argue since 1989, since secretary xi came to power, they desire to expand their reach. Bringing socialism with chinese characteristics to the world, to identify some but claim what they made for real estate the incursion that took place in india, indicative of chinese attentions and they are testing and probing the world to see if we stand up to their threaten their bullying. Im more confident than i was a year ago that the world is prepared to do that. Thank you, good morning. I am grateful for your proposal to double the budget of the Global Engagement center, to counteract propaganda outside the United States established through legislation, i am glad you recognize the importance and good work of that Center Though we spend a lot of times talking about many of our concerns regarding our adversaries desire to use propaganda not outside the United States but in fact inside the United States including the 2020 election. Russia in particular has sought to weave together stories about us persons and ukrainian persons over the course of the past year in order to so chaos and dissent in the United States and to screw with ukrainian politics as well, a double whammy for the russians and you can see those efforts ramping up into the 2020 election, the most active for an individual pushing narratives about the United States and ukraine, ukrainian legislator who was the individual that magically came into possession of secret audio recordings, maintained, retained Government Relations council here and i would expect he will be a pretty active presence in us politics from here to the election. A simple question on behalf of my constituents should we view andre as a credible source of information . I will answer your question real quick, i want to make sure the doubling of the money, to make sure we can deploy it. Weve been successful but growing 100 year on you have a team driving, make sure we dont waste those resources. I dont want to comment on anything in particular but we are taking seriously the threat that russia will try to engage in disinformation campaigns, we were pretty successful at this in the 2018 election. Im confident we will be in this one as well. Why are you willing to opine on a specific individual if you had information to suggest its source was not credible . That is the core function of the us government. If it has information that would suggest malign influence to let congress and the American People know . When appropriate i will. There is still work ongoing and still unsettled intelligence around these things i will try to resist a little more carefully. Let me turn to china. China is seeking to use the United Statess failure to control covid19 to leapfrog us in a leadership position when it comes to Global Health. Senator romney referred to this since the beginning of this outbreak, the first two with the president s remarkable fawning over chinas early response to the virus 47 times commending china for their response and transparency but also pretty happy with our withdrawal from the who and you believe as i understand it that our withdrawal from the who as a lever to seek internal change. I would disagree but it also seems to allow china to occupy that vacuum. As you step back and articulate this strategy to counteract chinas growing influence in the world how does withdrawal from the who counteract china . Good question. These are close calls. We left the human rights council, better to fight from within than reform from outside. There are reasonable arguments to be made on either side. The decision the president made, i concur with the decision, through multiple rounds of reforms in geneva, there was no capacity. Year on year it goes to benefit. The Global Health Security Issues the United States cares about if they dont participate in the world health organization, im not convinced the world will benefit. Weve seen it other places, we will absolutely lead. Good things can happen. It is an international body, there is no way there wont be a level of politics, the decisions made of historic adversaries we will go through but is a sciencebased organization that is indispensable. If we are not back in the who. With the capabilities we should be developing with our allies to counteract, to go around the world, shaming our friends went to doing business with china. Weve got to have an answer for things china is offering. On the Technology Front we dont have a great answer for 5g or whatever china will put out on a i or advanced battery technology. Isnt this essential to our Counter China strategy not just to shame others into taking Chinese Technology but to work with our allies to develop our own alternatives . Absolutely. Thank you. Senator portman. Appreciate the opportunity to let us talk to the secretary of state. This has been very informative. With regard to china and developing technologies with our allies we have a lot to do to get our house in order. We are pointing fingers at china, usually appropriate but we also are not doing much here to protect ourselves. You have provided great help from your career professionals with china keeping our technology. In particular china has these programs doing it for two decades where they come over here and find promising researchers and take it over china and it is military, economic, healthcare, everything. Over the last couple years we worked on legislation securing American Innovation but with regard to this issue career people testified before us saying they need more tools to stop folks they know are coming here to deal with export control to actually take steal our stuff and take it to china but are unable to stop those people coming in despite affiliations with the Peoples Liberation army and the Chinese Communist party and in many cases history of taking research. We worked with one of your pearson fellows. I took advantage of it. Theyve done a terrific job and put together legislation and the American Research enterprise to benefit from international cooperation. We dont want to have this Taxpayer Research from being stolen. Do you agree these new visa authorities are helpful to protect taxpayerfunded research and intellectual property from our adversaries including china . They are into need an expanded toolset to get those right. We are making progress. To identify these risks, working hard on this set of issues. Going back to universities in our state, alive and well, we need to be candidate canned across america. With this influence and operation being conducted. There are 5 provisions, one relating to our universities and Research Institutions and a number worked with them, with this legislation, with bipartisan supporters, their organizations pushing back hard and i think they are naive and not willing to face up to the threat out there. A National Security threat. Over the last couple weeks weve had the opportunity to confirm good nominees for the department of state and im concerned the backlog build up to the point where you had a tough time running the department. We have more nominees next week. The ambassador of japan. I want to ask in particular about ukraine. Senator cardin not here today but in 2014 we went to ukraine and those six years a lot of good happened in ukraine and a lot of bad too, the ceasefire is not holding, there are 100 violations. The russian aggression continues. Ukraine made a decision to turn to us and we still have the situation where we are not getting the support they need, two questions, how important is it to get Lieutenant General dayton confirmed as the ambassador in ukraine . He is highly qualified. And number 2, do you agree with the National Defense authorization bill, to have a record amount to ukraine . Going from 50 million to 125 million in that legislation . To defend itself . They are doing good work. There is a loss when ambassador volcker departed the work he was doing was important to the overall effort in the region. We are hoping to get that position with the right person filled as well to have a full on effort to help the ukrainian people to maintain their democracy. A chance to talk to Lieutenant General dayton remotely but hes done a good job modernizing their military and ukrainian issues, the right person at the right time and i am pleased hes stepping up to do it, a good choice. With regard to germany, my point of view, moving troops out of germany is a good idea if they stay in europe and poland has been asking for years now to allow us troops to come to poland and offered a base several years ago where they agreed to pay for the base but the baltics in Eastern Europe in particular seems to me an appropriate place, i agree germany is not the place for the number of troops they have, should be closer to where the action is in the country that most risk right now. I would hope they stay in europe. One thing i will add, the positions and numbers, what with respect to poland we dont have defense Cooperation Agreement quite done so the state department with our dod colleagues in the event the department of defense makes that conclusion that it is the right thing to do, we put those forces in a way that protects them as well. Thanks for raising those issues, same questions i would have asked, trying to reorder and take the dod money, to use it more effectively. We agree that it needs to be well spent. There is a timely example in this was the United States has provided 2. 3 billion to help other countries combat covid19. Weve gotten very little credit and hope we can do more in terms of talking about what we are doing. China and russia are spreading disinformation that weve heard about, the virus was created in a lab by bill gates are brought to china by american soldiers under false narratives. Global engagement is a perfect push back on that and i dont know if you have comment on that. I think with respect to covid19 the world gets it. I am convinced efforts of the United States and other countries to push back against disinformation have been powerful and effective. Thank you, mister chair, mister secretary, welcome. The context in which we have this hearing is very complicated and almost too much to talk about. We passed 150,000 deaths in this country to coronavirus and in my view and the view of many a sizable percentage of those were preventable had the United States handled the pandemic better. The terms of commerce indicated the economy shrunk at the greatest rate in recorded history in the second quarter, the president is suggesting the president ial election should be delayed. This is not something you or i were prepared to talk about. The president sent out a tweet, delay the election until people can securely and safely vote, not saying it will happen but raising a question. Kenny president delay the november president ial election . Im not going to enter a legal judgment about that onthefly. You are an honors graduate of west point, graduate of harvard law school, you were on the harvard law review, at a red sox game. You are one of the most highly trained and accomplished lawyers who are part of this administration. Can a president delay a president ial election . The department of justice and others will make that legal determination. We all should want, i know you do too, want to make sure there is an election everyone is confident in. Are you in different to the date of the election . It should happen lawfully. You may not want to comment on it. A president cannot delay in election. The date of the election is established by congress. Was established in 1845. There is no ability for a president to delay and election. I dont think it is that hard a question or one that could lead to equivocation by someone with a line of succession let me ask another question. Was Marie Yovanovitch a talent Public Servant . Im not going to comment on that personal matter. Was she a valuable part of the state Department Family . The president made a clear decision that he preferred she not be in ambassador. That is completely every one of us to take this job knows that any minute we could be gone. This is not a question about the president s power. Im asking your opinion of her as a Public Servant. I didnt interact with her. You did not . Not significant we. You dont consider im not going to talk about this. There will be a place in a time to talk about this and i look forward to that. It is not the case i talk about personnel matters. You were willing to tell us what you didnt like about the Inspector General. A very different situation. There have been accusations of misconduct and malfeasance, assertions that i fired someone because they were investigating me. It demands a response. There will be a public report. This is different and i have been steadfast in this. You asked about other ambassadors too, they did wonderful things. I am trying to determine whether you have been steadfast since i have so Many State Department employees in the commonwealth of virginia who were concerned whether or not a secretary of state might have the back of a career professional who is a valued person. You were on a phone call with donald trump and president zelinski of ukraine when he said she is going to go through some things. You know what the president said when he said that . I dont. You were on that call. I was. When he said that did you follow up and ask the president what he meant . Im confident the reaction we took was appropriate. Thats not the question. But that is true. How about answering my question . Im not going to talk about internal discussions with the state department. Neither with your constituents, with what the secretary of state to talk about internal conversations. Can you listen to my question. You were on the phone call. You heard the president say that. Did you ask what the president meant, yes or no . Im not going to talk about that. Did i ask the president . I dont talk about that. You told me you dont know. What did you mean . I asked appreciate your question. Here was testimony we heard in the other day from your executive secretary who is here for hearing about her nomination to be ambassador. She said in her work with you, the work her office does, someday open, sort of categorized and classified before they deliver and there is a second category of correspondence they dont open if it is personal to you or for your eyes only or from another cabinet member they would not open that, just deliver it to you but there is a third category of documents, delivered by Rudy Giuliani which didnt go through the process of being opendoor coming to her or having it delivered became directly to you. What was your response to Rudy Giulianis response to sac ambassador yovanovitch, did you say this is not your job, this is my job . The United States has unconditional right to have the ambassador stipulated for the record. What was your interaction . Dont go into great magical effects how the package came, it is all silliness. You should know for the record that package was delivered by the former Inspector General who ran to capitol hill and made big news. You might think this is silly, that these questions are silly but when someone works their entire career for the state department and are slandered with lies and sacked for no good reason, that sends a message that could not be clearer to other state department officials. It may be a big joke, look at you smiling and laughing. I dont think it is silly to Marie Yovanovitch or the people that work for you. Every ambassador, every political appointee knows that the president has the right to terminate them. It is that easy and includes me. You should note i didnt slander anyone. This was handled appropriately and properly. History demonstrates wars are easier to start than end, we have agreement. The afghan war is a great example. Many are questioning the mission. Many questioning what the mission is in afghanistan for a decade or more including donald trump. I traveled with him to dover, receiving two of our soldiers, in effect him personally. He has been public and consistent and sincere in wanting to end the war in afghanistan. Lieutenant general dan mcneil pushed it this way, trying to get someone to define for me what winning meant before i went over. Nobody would give me a definition what it meant. Some people were thinking of jeffersonian democracy that wont happen in afghanistan. The statement was 13 years ago. When asked about the mission general douglas roots said we would avoid a fundamental understanding of afghanistan, we didnt know what we were doing. We didnt have the foggiest notion what we were doing, from five years ago. How long is it going to take . What is our Current Mission . Why are we in afghanistan . Do we have a cogent military reason to be in afghanistan . The president gave two missions, to reduce the risk to our young men and women who are fighting there, the second is to ensure that there is not a terror attack in that space. We set about conducting a peace and reconciliation process and reduced forces there by about half since the most recent peak. We are here to reduce it even further. Hopeful that we will get the afghans to begin their negotiation because donald trump is made clear his expectation enters into agreement the we will get our forces out of there. To make sure we protect america. Would you agree afghanistan issues one of hundreds of places that we potentially have terror threats or radical islamic threats and may not even be the primary. If you give me dozens, absolutely. Do you think we talk about in europe hundreds of thousands of troops in germany because the soviet union had 2 million, 3 Million People in their army and the cold war stand off, circumstances have changed and maybe your opinion has changed and i applaud that. The same in afghanistan. It has changed in 20 years, the war on terror has always been a global one but, and we have anchors and large bases, particularly in countries that are in the prolonged civil war but the other question is is our goal in these locations, National Security, is our goal muddied by the idea that we are in afghanistan for the equal rights amendment or womens rights or democracy or making a country out of afghanistan, building roads, we built 45 million natural gas gas station in afghanistan. You know, we build a 45 million natural gas gas station in afghanistan. They have no cars that run on natural gas, so we bought them cars that ran on flacheral gas. They have no money so we gave them a credit card. The gas station cost 45 million and is no longer functioning. So is our goal National Security or is nation building part of what we should be doing as a country . I think President Trump has made it unambiguous our missio i would add only does. There are times in road where we are better off if their democratic nations. State department is designed to provide to build a resilience to do this kind of thing but i do think our Foreign Policy sometimes has been overly ambitious, what it is we can accomplish the views of military force with respect to getting other nations to the part of the support of democracy does mean we have to pay for trying to institute out image and some of the country because it just doesnt frankly work. When we look at trying to end the afghan war i think in some ways we are stuck in the sense that people have decided we can only leave with some sort of treaty with the taliban come some sort of agreement with the taliban. Im of the opinion in some ways it might make it worse because the taliban are not necessarily trustworthy and if we live under the agreement that they havemi o meet certain parameters which is what were looking towards and they break those parameters we arehe right back in with a thret to stay in. I think its almost the threat has to be, and maybe the threat should have been 20 or 30 years ago the threat should be if you harbor terrorists that are organizing International Terrorism that there would military repercussions but those would have to be landing 50,000 troops. By preventing 50,000 thousand bombs. Absolutely right. We need to think about, at a think we have and escape. We are stuck in this idea of weve occupied this acreage and we had to do something with it and we cant leave until its perfect. Its never going to be perfect there and the only thing i would just say is lets dont base is completely on, that we have to have a perfect deal too late. Theres always the threat we can come back and people say theres ten alqaeda left and, it might be plotting right now. The president has admit, you saidin they are a shadow of themselves. The president admitted their reports now were talking dozens come that hundreds. Were talking dozens not thousands. Same with the Islamic State. General lute game that spoke to one d of our committees and he said he could name any group that he thought had the capability to attack the United States and he said theres no evidence of the socalled Islamic State presents a the threat to the u. S. From afghanistan. I think we do need to be mindful but work towards finishing it and i think i would say because i dont want to finish this without mentioning that it takes friends of the president. The president has policy and people have to try to fulfill his policy and for a long time for several years john bolton was trying to thwart that and he was an enemy of the president policy. I hope the people will try to fulfill the president policy ans get us out of the war in afghanistan. If i may take one second. Your point about the Global Spectrum of terrorism and the fact there dozens of alqaeda left in afghanistan i think thats a central thing that the American People need t understand. Wherever we were 15 or 20 years ago is not where we are today and resources whether its a decision in germany or the decision but o force posture in asia or africa or in afghanistan, syria or anyplace else we need to make sure its updated for the actual threats presented to the United States america and thats what President Trump is driving us to do. Thank you. Senator merkley. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, mr. Secretary. Im going to start with events that have occurred in hong kong what it really seest as violatin of the agreement made with britain between china and britain. Now that these events, this new chinese law that really exerts enormous violations of civil rights in hong kong has occurred. Should we extend asylum in these opportunities to those who are being executed by the chinese in hong kong . Senator, we are reviewing that, considering. The british have made it decision, this trillions have made the decision they will accept up to hundreds of thousands of people. Were looking at how best we might accomplish this, and consistent with making sure that we always want to encourage people to try to work from within to the extent they can as well, so its important that we get this right. The president is actively considering how we ought to treat those who seek asylum coming to us from hong kong or to korea, a visa program that surrounds that. Sounds like like you are opo the opportunity and are reviewing it and i do feel like the folks who will be highly targeted, and they are concerned up for the locked rest of the lives come young folks, 18, 20ck years old in chinese prisons. Do the events in hong kong change our perspectives on taiwan or make us think about ways to beng more supportive of taiwan . We obviously do a lot of arms sales and soo forth but should e be morepp active in supporting taiwanese participation in International Institutions . Senator, there are different situations. There was an agreement with hong kong. Taiwan, they are different but i think its fair to say that the Chinese Communist party use them as the same. If you ask the Chinese Communist party they would both view them as part of their territory, so that requires diligence. Your question about organizations, not only the team that ive assign to that at the regional bureaus as well our work at multiple points. We took a a run at this in the World Health Assembly now a couple months back and we have taken this on at the United Nations to make sure that taiwan is represented everyplace that its appropriate that they be represented. Its part of formal and informal international gatherings. By re as part of formal and informal international gatherings. Theres a long standing convention that the president of the United States should not meet with the president of taiwan because it would offend china. Do you agree with that longstanding convention . Senator, if i may defer that. Im happy to have a conversation with you about it. Heres what ill say with respect to taiwan. There are a series of understandings that have been held multiple administrations, multiple parties. We understand taiwan, the relations act and the obligations the United States government has with respect to that. Were working to recognize the changes that general secretary xi has made with respect to this, and we want to make sure we get this right. Saudi arabia has been abetting the flight of saudi nationals who have done horrific crimes in america. And so really two questions. Do you agree that this effort to sweep people out of our country who have done or are charged with doing horrific things before they can be tried is unacceptable . And do you agree if it continues to occur, the u. S. Should use significant diplomatic consequences for saudi arabia . Yes to both questions. Thank you. So there is the report that well, we have done several things in regard to the situation in shin jong and the chinese incarceration basically, slave camps of a million uighurs. And we have done some recent things. I applaud those recent steps to impose sanctions, to block exports that were done with forced labor in china. But i also feel like theres another narrative that has undermined kind of the effectiveness of this. And as we have heard about the president s comments in november 2017 trip to china where he indicated that president xi should go ahead with building concentration camps and then again in june 2019, a year and a half later, the president our president , President Trumps conversation with president xi saying again, basically, go ahead building the camps, its the right thing to do. I think its absolutely the wrong thing to do. And we have done some, as i noted, some steps that suggest that, but should we be more robust at every level in condemning the chinese enslavement of the uighurs . Senator, im actually i think the answer is yes. Im proud of what we have done, the way the United States has responded. Not only the responses we have taken directly but the work we have done around the world to convince the whole world of whats taking place there. I have been disappointed to see muslim countries not respond when theyre often significant muslim populations being impacted there in western china. Were urging them to take this on. In a serious way. And then i guess the last thing i would say is, i think with the objective of changing the behaviors that are taking place there, this is an important economic region. And so the things that were endeavoring to do, its important we get the human rights piece of this right, its important to get the individual sanctions piece right, but its really important and im really happy with the work were doing to convince businesses, not just american businesses because its an international place, a business that they should really look hard at their supply chains, not their just direct employees but their supply chains and whats taking place there. If we get that right, we have the opportunity to change whats taking place there. A quick point and a final question, because im running out of time. The u. N. Factfinding mission on the rohingya, the holocaust museum, the state Department Investigating atrocities have found strong evidence of genocide by burma. I really hope the United States will declare it to be genocide because it is. And it would strengthen our representation and advocacy for human rights in the world, but i want to turn to honduras in my final question. The state Department Human rights report talks about extra judicialal ki akillings, tortur violence against indigenous hondurans, violence against lgbt communities, and in addition, we had in october, a u. S. Federal court find that the president was indicated as a coconspirator in widespread Drug Trafficking and money laundering, and theres huge reports of systemic corruption and human rights abuses. In a context of all of this, is it time to reevaluate our relationship, which has been quite cozy, with the president of honduras . Senator, were constantly demanding that the leadership in honduras take these set of facts onboard. Were well aware of whats taking place, and like in too many countries around the world, we have not had the effect that we desire. Were working on it. I yield. Mr. Secretary, welcome. Good to have you here. In response to Media Coverage over the last few days and the washington post, nbc news, the daily beast, and my hometown newspaper, the indianapolis star, i would like to bring up the situation of peter kasich, and three other americans who lost their lives at the hands of isis. Mr. Chairman, i would like to request the following columns from the washington post, indy star, nbc news be added to the record. Theyll be included. Mr. Secretary, you may recall meeting with the kasich family last year, but as brief refresher, in october 2013, indiana native and former army ranger peter kasich was on a mission in mercy. He was delivering humanitarian aid to suffering people in syria. He was taken hostage by isis and sadly, after months of torture and incredible hardship at the hands of these isis terrorists, and in spite of his embrace of islam, he was brutally beheaded. Sadly, three other americans, james foley, steven sotloff, and Kayla Mueller also lost their lives at the hands of isis murderers. I know each of their stories are familiar to other members of this committee. Since that time, some of the murderers known as the beatles have been killed in u. S. Led drone strikes, but others remain at large, and i know you agree they must be brought to justice. I believe that the United States government should work tirelessly independently, and with the cooperation of allies, to hunt down the killers of these americans and bring them to justice here in the United States of america. Mr. Secretary, do you agree with me . I do. And you should know that the president of the United States agrees as well. What efforts can the state department and our missions overseas take to bring this about . Its a broad effort. I think were making progress. The department of defense, their intelligence assets, the broader set of u. S. Intelligence assets all aimed at making sure we understand and then working with important partners too who who want justice but have a different set of rules about how to think about that, so working to convince them that proceeding to bring them to justice is the right approach. I am very hopeful that we will in the coming weeks have a good outcome here. You alluded to different perspectives that exist out there. What precise obstacles stand in the way, and what can you do to overcome them . So, an example. And ill stay away from this, but in example, when we make a decision from time to time to bring someone back from someplace else, either direct extradition or through another legal process, the country will say because we have a Death Penalty or because of a certain set of rules we have here, they wont either permit that to happen or share the information we might need to complete a successful prosecution, and one of our roles is to make sure that those countries will permit us to do that. I do want to interject, and its important to note here, though youre just using an example, its my understanding that the four families are no longer pursuing the Death Penalty for these terrorists. Their hope is that this shift will alleviate any challenges whatsoever that we have encountered with the British Government and their Justice System in allowing the prosecution to move forward in the United States. I appreciate that, senator. And thats important. Ill leave it at that. I am committed to working with you, and i suspect there are other members of this committee who will join me in that effort to insure that justice is delivered and delivered here in the United States. Will you commit to working with me and this committee to insure that we pursue this matter accordingly . Of course, yes, sir. Thank you. I would like to move to the United Nations and how over the past several years, mr. Secretary, the u. S. Has lost ground in its engagement with a number of u. N. Bodies and programs. Most recently, the administration formally submitted paperwork to withdraw from the world health organization. At the same time, the role and influence of other countries, particularly the communist government in china, has been growing at the u. N. Its expanded its role in a range of u. N. Agencies, with chinese nationals currently holding the top job in four of the organizations 15 specialized agencies. The International Civil aviation organization, the food and agricultural organization, the International Telecom union and u. N. Industrial development organization. For comparison, a French National leads two specialized agencies, the imf and unesco. The uk leads one, the ilo, and the u. S. Leads just one, the world bank. Although u. S. National does lead the u. N. Childrens fund and the world food program, which are large and prominent u. N. Organizations. So building on senator murphys earlier line of questioning, why dont we look beyond the world health organization, and i ask you, mr. Secretary, what implications does this, this losing of ground within u. N. Bodies and agencies have on advancing u. S. National security interests and other Foreign Policy priorities that we might have in the u. N. System. Its very significant, and it is at least a 15yearlong slide that has taken place and growth of the Chinese Communist partys influence on these organizations. We have done a couple things to turn this around. We had real success at the World International property organization. The chinese thought they had the fast track to that. It wasnt an american candidate, but a candidate we believe has an understanding of intellectual property in the same way freedom loving democracies do, and we crushed them. And it was an amazing diplomatic effort. We built coalitions with the indians, the brits, the australians, and build it across the world. We were asking for about 20 million in this budget to take the team we built there and make it a Permanent Team focused on these major elections for these 15 institutions and then theres another set that are slightly different but still very important. And then we have a second set of operations which is its not just the leaders that matter at the u. N. Organizations. They have big bureaucracies underneath them, and we are sadly inadequately represented at every level inside of these international bodies, and it matters. It matters theres someone there. It matters that theyre american, but it matters if theyre not american, that they come from a nation that understands the rule of law and how the world ought to be conducted in a way that we do. So i have actually worked closely with about seven other countries to build out an effort that is very focused on exactly this. Sometimes, frankly, we had opportunities but we just didnt put we were offered a place and didnt put anybody forward. Thats not the right way to go. We need to make sure we get it right. Im confident that in a year, two years, well be in a better place than we are today and i hope well have the resources to do that. Its a resource issue, but a lot of the focus issue. I think i have cleaned that up materially. Senator perdue. I want to correct the record on a couple things here that have been said this morning. First of all, i believe that secretary tillersons two predecessors oversaw probably one of the most major withdrawals in Foreign Policy from the global stage that america has ever seen. It created a power vacuum that allowed iran, north korea, russia, china, to step into that vacuum and actually during that period of time, created a physical caliphate that allowed the rise of isis in syria. Since january of 2017, mr. Secretary, i believe the world was more dangerous than any time in my lifetime. We faced five threats across five domains. Iran, north korea, russia, china, and terrorism across air, land, and sea, and we woke up and realized that our wouldbe adversaries had been developing capabilities in cyber and space that the priorstration hadnt oned us about. We woke up, and i think we have all now figured out in the United States, theres a consensus on both sides, for the last 50 years with all good intentions, we got china wrong. I think theres a general awakening to that. You have had three other cabinet members along with yourself make tremendous policy speeches here just in the last month, and i would like to quote some of that, that you wrote about. But you had secretary obrien, our National Security adviser obrien talk about ideology, fbi director wray talk about espionage. Attorney general barr talk about economics. And you talked about the warning here. Im going to quote. This is your quote. We had a very clear purpose in those four speeches. A real mission. It was to explain the different facets of americas relationship with china, the massive imbalances in that relationship that have built up over decades, and the Chinese Communist partys design for hegemony. Its interesting you chose that word because the chinese love to quote confucius, and they quote one of his famous sayings as just as and they do this recently. Just as there cant be two suns in the sky, there cant be two emperors on the world. Its not benign deckitatoictato hegemony. You said further, our goal is to make sure the threats to americans that China Addresses are clear in our strategy for securing those freedoms are established. You went on to say in closing this out, securing, and i think this is the most important sentence in the speech, in my opinion. Securing our freedoms from the Chinese Communist party is the mission of our time, and america is perfectly positioned to lead it because of our founding principles give us that opportunity. Tremendous statement. That will go down in history. The fact that only 6 of chinas population belong to the communist party, mr. Secretary, i would argue our fight is not with the chinese people. Its with the communist party. Theres a statement from the administration here dated may 26th, 2020. It says we do not seek to contain chinas development, nor do we wish to disengage from the chinese people. Can you articulate what threats the Chinese Party represents to our democracy and our freedoms here, and what are we doing to the chinese strategy as we try to manage during your administration here as we try to manage this turn in our relationship with china, to confront them, to stand up to them, but also to protect our freedoms here at home . Senator, there are multiple fronts to this. And these arent created by the department of state. Theyre created by what the Chinese Communist party says, to your point. President trump recognized that. He talked about it in his campaign, as far back as 2015. We have to get this imbalance corrected. And when we do, there will be costs associated with that. We have got the largest increase in our military buildup that President Trump has led. Were very focused on an arms control, Strategic Dialogue were having today, was in vienna on the 27th and 28th of this month. A few days back. We need china to be a part of that too. Theyre now a significant nuclear power. We have seen whats happened on the economic front, the belt and road initiative. Theyre competing. Senator rubio talked about their technology spheres. It will take not only the United States government but the United States citizens to understand this challenge and then we have to build out the global alliance. The last thing ill say here is i have seen the United States is asking nations to pig sides between china and the United States. Its fundamentally false. Were asking every sovereign country to pick between freedom and tyranny. And thats the choice every leader has to make, and thats when i go around the world and thats what i talk to them about, and they all know. They all know that the United States is the country they want to be alongside. They all know that freedom and our value system and the rule of law and Property Rights and the protection of these rights is essential to their country and why i think the tide is turning around the world and people are seeing the Chinese Communist party as what it is, a threat to the freedom of their people. I characterize it a little different. Theres state control and self determination. The world is turning into a binary equation. Russia, china, venezuela, cuba. If you add up all the gdps of those state controlled country, its probably less than 23 billion. If you add up the gdp of the rest, its over 70 billion. I want to relate that back to the last question that goes to your comments earlier about the number one thing, and i think you agreed with it 100 with senator murphy, about allies being the answer here with china. And this is a huge effort thats going to take years to develop, but right now, we have an opportunity with the quad, the quadrilateral security dialogue. United states, india, japan, and india is strongly considering inviting australia to that exercise. Would you comment on how important this particular group is in relation to the bigger conversation you just mentioned, the fact that the gdp of the quad is more than twice that of china today is not to be lost on the conversation. Will you make one last comment on that . Its more populous than china as well. These are nations that all have elected leaders. All have democracies, all understand in different cultures and different settings, all have a central understanding about how commercial enterprise should be conducted and how military should engage and how security is achieved. The good news is i think this grouping is stronger than its ever been. Maybe we were gifted by general secretary xi. He took actions that caused each of the leaders of those countries to recognize the value of this group. I meet with them with some frequency, either by phone or in person, and were working on economic efforts together. Were working on covid responses together. Theres lots of places where were finding common touch points where we can develop real strength in unity that can in fact provide the bulwark we can build out from all across the world. Thank you. Senator graham. Thank you, mr. Secretary. I appreciate the good job you do for our country, and leaning in to hard issues forcefully, and we need more of that, not less. When it comes to u. N. Envoy for libya, do you support that we need a new one . Yes. Good. And im going to try to get a letter from everybody in the committee to the u. N. Secretarygeneral saying please appoint a special envoy, and mr. Secretary, anything we can do to up our game would be great. I know you work with the berlin folks. And we need the ranks. I know you agree with that, not just a new one, but the right person as well. The seizers act, i thank you for using it quickly and holding assads son accountable is a great first step in what i think will be a long journey to punish his regime. Is more coming . Yes, senator. Thank you. Great job. I talked to a general yesterday with sdf. Apparently, they signed a deal with an American Oil Company to modernize the oil fields in northeastern syria. Are you supportive of that . We are. That would be a great way to help everybody in northeastern syria. The deal took longer than we hoped and were now in implementation. You have been terrific in that regard. When it comes to afghanistan, is my understanding correct that any withdrawal from afghanistan would be conditioned space . That correct. And the innerafghanistan dialogue will start fairly soon . Yes. Hopefully. Yes. I dont mean to make light of that. Were very hopeful in the next week. I have heard i may have said that once before, but we see the conditions that have now completed enough that we think theres a real chance we can. In case the taliban are following the hearing, i doubt they are, im a pretty hawkish guy on afghanistan. You have been great on Foreign Policy from my point of view. I would like to end the war too and get everyone to have a say in the democratic pros, and the taliban are part of the afghan culture. Theyre a minority, by no means a dominant voice in afghanistan, but if we could help pakistan and afghanistan achieve a working relationship they have never had before on terrorism, we could get an inner Afghan Dialogue started, im willing to invest in an afghanistan that has a place for the taliban, but not to the exclusion of women or religious minorities, so count me in for your efforts, and i very much appreciate what theyre doing. When it comes to china, is it fair to say that in 2020, Chinese Communist party is running concentration camps to that house religious minorities . Let me be careful about the language. I have described it this way, senator. Something like it . Its the worst human rights violation we have seen this century. Okay, fair enough. Thats a good description. You closed the houston conflict down because they were using the diplomatic platform to cheat, steal, and lie when it comes to intellectual property. Intellectual property and other items as well, yes. The special status of hong kong has been virtually destroyed. Is that fair to say . Yes. I appreciate you speaking about it and taking action. When it comes to the rule of law, the Chinese Communist party sees its more of a nuisance than anything else. I think the litter of promises broken across multiple forums demonstrates that they take those agreements for having very little value. If you got a property, you generally dont build a military base on the contested property. You go to some kind of court and work it out. We just passed in the Judiciary Committee legislation modeled on chasta, allowing americans who have been victims of the coronavirus to sue the Chinese Communist party. Have you do you support that . I havent had a chance to take a look at it. Well get it to you. Please get back to us if you could. Bottom line, syria is never going to end until we get the entire fabric of Syrian Society in a room, working together. The northeastern footprint we have where were working with the sdf, who helped us destroy the isis caliphate, they did most of the heavy fighting. That gives us leverage. I appreciate you being an advocate for the sdf. I appreciate that youve tried to work with a new leadership in iraq. Its important that isis never come back. Its important that we have a say about that part of the world. Finally, as to iran, where do you see the Iranian Regime in terms of their potency . Are the sanctions working . And what would you advise this committee to do Going Forward with iran . So senator, the sanctions have clearly had an impact. It has diminished their capacity to underwrite hezbollah, shia militias in iraq. But clearly hasnt achieved the ultimate objective, which is to change the behavior of the Iranian Regime, so our view is this were happy to see them change, but until such time as they do, we see the best tools to starve the regime of the capacity to inflict terror around the world, so your support in doing that is very important, and i talked a little earlier, i think you hadnt arrived just yet, about the u. N. Arms embargo were working so diligently to make sure doesnt expire in a couple months. Thank you, i think you have done a very good job from my point of view for our country leaning into difficult issues forcefully and with reason. Developmental aid, the house 3 trillion bill didnt have money for vaccines going to the developing world. The republican bill has about 4 billion. I would urge you to work with us to try to find a way, if we can get a vaccine developed, to get it to the developing world sort of like what we did with pepfar, because it will do no good to eradicate here if we dont eradicate it everywhere. Would you work with us in that regard . Yes, we are working on something that is modeled on pepfar, that can be very successful. Well be happy to work with you on it. Thank you very much, senator. Thank you, senator graham. Senator cruz. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, welcome. Senator. Thank you for your testimony, and thank you for your service as well. Lets cover a number of topics. Lets start with nordstream two, and stopping the completion of that pipeline. As you know, over a year ago, i joined with senator shaheen in passing Bipartisan Legislation, went through both houses of congress. With overwhelming bicameral, bipartisan support, imposing significant sanctions on companies that participated in laying the pipeline of nordstream ii. The president signed that legislation around 7 00 p. M. , if i remember correctly, on a thursday, and 15 minutes before his signature was on the page, the Swiss Company that was laying the pipeline announced they were immediately ceasing all pipeline construction activities. Those sanctions worked. Russia has not stopped. They have a pipeline that is 90 to 95 complete. Now the good thing about a pipeline is a pipeline that is 95 complete is a pipeline that is zero Percent Complete because it aint transmitting anything until they connect the two ends. Its my intention they never complete this pipeline. Both russia and germany continue to press forward aggressively to try to find ways to complete this pipeline. As you know, senator shaheen and i, again, introduced Even Stronger sanctions to any Companies Involved in any way whatsoever with the construction of the pipeline. Those stronger sanctions were included in the ndaa that passed this body with overwhelming bipartisan support just last week. And so im hopeful as the ndaa moves forward that we will have those stronger sanctions in effect. At the same time, you made an important decision within the state department. Under katsa, the administration has the authority, i believe, to sanction Companies Working to build this pipeline. Your predecessor, secretary tillerson, had issued, as i understand it, a guidance that was widely interpreted as essentially exempting nordstream ii, and you made the right decision to rescind that guidance. Can you explain to the committee the importance of that guidance and what authority the administration has right now today with no additional legislation, to sanction any company, any german company, any other company that participates in any way with completing this pipeline . Yeah, thanks, senator cruz. The president made that decision to change that language. It was my recommendation, so im not walking away from it, but i want everyone to know the president was fully onboard with that change. That language is important, and to your point, its a little too simple, but it was essentially a get out of jail free card for those conducting activity surrounding nordstream ii. Thats no longer true. We can see theyre responding as are their insurers, their board of directors, lawyers, all understand the express threat that is posed to them for continuing to complete work on completion of the pipeline. And we we remain hopeful those who have the capacity to finish this pipeline quickly will not do that, and we have the task of those harder to reach by sanctions making sure we do everything we can to stop them. The president has been so clear about the Security Threat this pipeline posed to europe. Not able to convince the germans of that, so were taking action ourselves to try to accomplish that, to preserve security for the european people. I know you care about this issue. I spent about six hours with the president yesterday on air force one, and nordstream ii came up in considerable depth as did the president s frustrations with the leadership of germany. Let me point out that the state department has a long tradition of sometimes obscure speech, perhaps rivaled only by the federal reserve. This is an issue in which ambiguity is not beneficial, and as you know, the russians are actively pushing disinformation that theyre not going to be sanctions for anyone involved in this pipeline. The russians actively push disinformation that the Bipartisan Legislation i had introduced previously was not going to pass. That was wrong. I remember that. We had overwhelming bipartisan support that passed it into law. And so i would encourage i believe under katsa, you have full Legal Authority right now to make clear and explicitly clear to anyone involved with constructing this pipeline that the consequences of doing so are catastrophic and not worth doing, so i would encourage the state department, and i recognize you work within an administration and there may be other agencies that have different views, but if there are those other agencies arent right in this matter. And so i urge you to speak with absolute clarity because it is only that clarity, i think, that has any prayer of actually stopping the completion of this pipeline, and if the pipeline is completed, it will do serious damages to the economic interests and the National Security interests of europe. It will do serious damage to the economic and National Security interests of the United States. And it will benefit putin and put billions of dollars in his pockets. Theres no need for ambiguity. The president hasnt been ambiguous about this at all. There was a reason we made the change in that language, essentially the waiver language, if you will. Were fully intent on sanctioning those who violate the provisions contained there, both in katsa and otherwise. Thank you. Thats helpful. Lets shift to another area. I hope thats clear enough. That last statement had substantially greater clarity, so i am grateful and look forward to amplifying it loudly. Thank you, senator. Lets shift to another topic that you and i have also discussed at length. Which is irans snapback. Mmhmm. I believe maximum pressure should be maximum pressure. That the Iranian Regime, the ayatollah when he says death to america, that under the terms of the Obama Iran Nuclear deal and the u. N. Security Council Resolution implementing it, the United States has the authority to invoke snapback sanctions if and when iran is in violation of the deal. We have that Authority Even though weve withdrawn from that deal. I ran has now nakedly, openly, flagrantly flouting the deal. They an opportunity to comply with the. It is obvious they are to find it and theyre telling us they are defined it. Will the United States invoke the snapback sanctions which would result in reimpose and not just america sanctions but far broader sanctions on iran for the violations of the deal . I think the president has been very clear. We believe we have the authority. Ive spoken toe this couple of times. We believe under a u. N. Security Council Resolution 20 to 31 we have the authority to do this and were not going to permit thisav to expire on october 18. We will introduce the secret account the resolution we hope and will be met with approval from the other members of the p5. In the event its not we will take the action necessary to ensure that this arms embargo doesnt expire. Will use it in a way that protects and defends america. Hanky. Thank you, senator cruz. Mr. P secretary, we promised you heart stopped at 11 30. We like to keep our commitments and we have by about 30 seconds according to my clock. Thank you so much for your service to the United States of america. Thank you for working with this committee as you have. We sincerely appreciate it. The record will remain open until the close of business on friday in any responses that are given will be made part of the record. With that again, thank you, mr. Secretary, and issuing is adjourned. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, ranking member. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] today at 90 in eastern on cspan2, niaid director dr. Anthony fauci, cdc director dr. Robert redfield and assistant secretary for health at hhs admiral giroir before the house select subcommittee on a National Comprehensive plan on the coronavirus pandemic. Watch hearing Coverage Today on cspan2, live stream and on demand at cspan. Org or listen on the go with the cspan radio app. This week on q a fox news anchor Chris Wallace on his book countdown 1945 on the creation of the atomic bomb and what led president truman to use it on hiroshima, japan, 75 years ago. He agonized over this decision. He complained of sleepless nights when he was in yet terrible searing headaches which she had throughout his career whenever he was under what he considered heavy stress, and his diary, thats one of the joys of doing a book about people who are all gone, winners of the president ial library i got hold of his diaries during this will period, his whole 116 days a talk of talk about countdown 1945, and he talked about the choice of using the bomb in apocalyptic terms. Ttip think this is the most terrible weapon ever discovered, and he compared it to the fire, to stretching, prophecies in bible. Chris wallace sunday at 8 p. M. Eastern on cspans q a. The senate spent much of yesterday exchanging debate points on what comes next in did it with the coronavirus pandemic in the u. S. 600 emergency unemployment checks and this week. A republican plan would extend those benefits but lower the amount to 200. Senate Majority Leader Mitch Mcconnell says democrats are unwilling to negotiate on the e 1 trillion Senate Republican economic recovery plan. On my descent republicans least a starting proposal for another major pandemic rescue package. Heres what we want to do. Continue of the federal supplement to Unemployment Benefits that is otherwise about to expire. Send thousands of dollars more in cash to american families. Keep funding the Payroll Protection Program to prevent more layoffs. Subsidize rehiring to get laid off workers for jobs back and create new incentives for workplace safety. Give k12 schools, colleges and
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.