Transcripts For CSPAN3 Deputy Secretary John Sullivan Testifies On State Department Restructuring 20170928

Programming and score opposing opinions. 100,000 will be awarded in cash prizes. The grand prize of 5000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. For more information, go to our web site, studentcam. Org. The House Foreign Affairs Committee Questioned deputy secretary of state John Sullivan this week on the departments restructuring forts d a broad range of diplomatic priorities. Other questions focused on Foreign Policy priorities in north korea, iran, and myanmar. This overnight hearing is 2 1 2 hours. This hearing has come to order, ill ask the members all to take their seats if they will. Today we hear from deputy secretary of state John Sullivan on the proposed reforms that he and secretary tillerson are working on for the state department, and for the agency for international development. I dont think there are many that question the need to improve the operation of both agencies. A more efficient and effective state department and usa id would better promote our National Security and interests around the world. I have welcomed the administrations undertaking. Secretary of state Rex Tillerson has started a process here as those at state will tell you, where hes focusing on listening to the diplomats and listening to the employees. Our Foreign Service officers. I think ats very commendable. He has sought feedback here from the bottom up. Many employees he reports have asked, and i think this speaks volumes. They have asked for more responsibility and in turn accountability for their performance. They also want better training throughout their careers in a modern it infrastructure, and i think they deserve these tools and we would be all better off if they had them. So i welcome secretary tillersons efforts to address the departments aging Technology Infrastructure and to strengthen the diversity of the departments work force, including increased recruitment. He is focused specifically on veterans and minority candidates and this is a goal, the committee here has long supported, but as a country with global challenges and opportunities, i do have continued concerns about whether our diplomats and Development Specialists will have the resources they need. Yes, there is room for savings. We need savings. But we should not, we cannot lose sight of the fact that our diplomacy and assistance improves our National Security. Improves our economic well being for a relatively small amount of money. Consider this committees work to sanction rogue regimes like iran over their Missile Program or like north korea, it takes skilled, properly resourced diplomacy to build International Support for sanctions enforcement. And the same is true when it comes to convincing nations to turn away cheap labor from north korea, for example, takes our diplomats going out and explaining, when youre doing an arrangement, where youre not paying those workers from north korea. Youre only feeding them and sending the check, the foreign currency to the regime, that money is going to do Nuclear Weapons program. That has to end because there are sanctions. That has to be explained by our Foreign Service officers. Or working with us to counter hezbollah or granting access to halt an emging pandic in his tracks as was done in west africa with the ebola virus. Robust diplomacy is also needed in conflict zones to defeat isis. And to defeat other threats, and that is what we hear from our generals who understand the critical need for our country to have successful political and not just military strategies. But this leadership requires us being present. And im concerned about reports of closing embassies and consulates, where we depart, we create a void for unfriendly actors to step in and promote interests to hostile to our interests. Where there is a diplomatic void, we have no eyes, we have no ears to detect the next threat or the next opportunity. And so i want to thank the department. I want to thank the department specifically for starting a dialogue with congress on these reforms and on its policies and on its management, more broadly, and some of the proposed reforms that we see here will require legislation, while others can be undertaken administratively, but in both cases the committee has a significant oversight role to play, as we are doing today. And after our successful work well ask congress to get the first state authorities bill signed into law in well over a decade. The committee continues to have reform ideas of its own, which we look forward to sharing, and i will now turn to our Ranking Member for mr. Ankles opening remarks. Thank you very much for calling this hearing, and mr. Deputy secretary, welcome to the Foreign Affairs committee. Thank you for your service and your time this morning. I was grateful that you hosted the chairman and myself at the state Department Yesterday to discuss your reorganization effort. Im going to raise some of the concerns this morning that i mentioned to you yesterday. Theres no doubt that the state department and all our federal agencies should be as effective as possible to address the challenges and to seize the opportunities were facing. This committee has taken some steps to modernize our Foreign Affairs agencies including last years state department authorized bi. Erare plenty of good ideas that could bring the state department, us a id into the 21st century. I was troubled that the apparent first step in the reorganization process was the announcement of a 3 it percent cut to our 32 cut to our International Affairs budget. I will ask you to repeat some of the things that you said that are more optimistic about that. I worry about starting with the budget and finding the reforms is doing things in reverse. To me it makes more sense to lay out a vision for what modernization looks like, set clear priorities to bring if the diplomats, Development Professionals and other experts and to determine the right budget to get it done. In your testimony and afterwards, youll mention some of the things you mentioned yesterday, and clarify why the decision was made to start with the dollar figure and work back from there. I worry about the reorganization, i wanted to be more transparent and collaborative, i dont think that goes against until you told us yesterday. The department has called this an employee driven process and i have no doubt that the career employees involved in the exercise of totally honorable intentions, but i understand those involved are not allowed to discuss the plans with their colleagues and that the private sector consultants brought on have kept tight control over documents related to the plan. The administration committed to this committee that there would be consultation with Congress Every step of the a, and obviously we have more of the way, and obviously we have more questions so i hope we can talk about that today. Overall, i must ask what is the goal of the ocess, the administrations vision for american Foreign Policy, for americas role in the wod, for how the state department fits into that vision, and for how this process will make the state department more effective. The only consistent answer that weve gotten is finding deficiencies and i worry when the administration talks about efficiency, its not a code for budget cuts. Cost savings that undermine effectiveness arent efficient. In the long run, they make america less safe. As the department focuses on redesign, i worry the critical daytoday work of diplomacy is suffering. Far too many senior positions, we talked about this again yesterday, remain vacant and make it harder for adversaries and allies to know who to call and whos calling the shots in washington. I wish you could explain some of that today. Overseas our diplomats jobs are getting harder because they cant know if established american Foreign Policy will be reversed. Morale as the department continues to suffer as senior career officials blocked the exits, report to continue to surface of a group surrounding the secretary uninterested in the expertise of our most seasoned professionals. Taken together, americas credibility around the world is we believing. Our leadership seems to be waning and most importantly without a strong, functional state department with a clear Foreign Policy vision, our interest, values and security are increasingly at risk. And let me be clear, i do support modernizing the state department. I want to see it leading and directing american Foreign Policy. Civilian leadership at the center of National Security policy is integral to our democracy at home and to our adership abroad. The Years Congress has sat on the sidelines when it comes from the state department, and what do we have to show for it, antiquated it systems, Personnel Shortages make it harder to address crises or allow the professional development. Traditional responsibilities of a department moving to other agencies like the pentagon, distracting from its core diplomatic mission. Im glad that the president sees the necessity for more funds for dod but we dont want it at the expense of the state department. Ty making sure our embassies are safe. In 2020, the Foreign Service act will be 40 years old. It was written during the cold war and the world has changed. We need to modernize the department. Thats why i have instructed my staff to consult with former diplomat Civil Servants and other experts to begin thinking about what states should look like for the next 40 years. I would value the input of any member of this committee as we move move forward, and again move forward, and again deputy secretary, i look forward to your testimony, and i hope you shed additional light on this process. Mr. Chairman, i ask unanimous consent to place in the record the following documents dealing with the reorganization of the state department and usa id. The first is a report by modernizing foreign assistance, new foreign aid architecture fit for purpose, the second is a report from the u. S. Global leadership coalition, entitled opportunities for reforming and strengthening diplomacy and development, the third is a report from the center for Global Development, a practical vision for u. S. Development reform. Next is a report from Refugees International called honoring a distinguished tradition, Crisis Response and u. S. Government reorganization. And finally, a submission from Amnesty International usa calling on the state department to preserve the structure, staffing and resources for the Refugee Bureau of War Crimes Office and global womens issues office. So i thank you mr. Chairman. Subject to the length limitations in our rules, so without objection, we will put those reports and include them. Thank you. Thank you. We now go to our introduction here of deputy secretary John Sullivan. Prior to this position, mr. Sullivan was a partner at the mayor brown law firm. He cochaired the National Security practice and previous to that, mr. Sullivan served in senior positions at the Justice Department, then at the Defense Department, and the commerce department. Without objection, the witness full prepared statements will be made part of the record. Members are going to have 5 calendar days to submit a statement or any questions or any other extraneous materials that they want to submit for the record here, and we would ask Deputy Secretarysullivan if you would, please, summarize your remarks and well go to questions. Thank you. Thank you chairman, royce, Ranking Member, ankle members of the committee. Thank you all for inviting me here to discuss. Secretary sullivan, lets make sure you push that and then get it very close right there. And everyone will be able to hear you. Thank you, mr. Chairmanment Ranking Member ankle. Im honored to discuss the redesign of the state department and usa id. We appreciate the interest the committee has shown in the departments efforts to be better equipped, more effective in serving the American People. On secretary tillersons first day, he promised to deploy the talent and resources of the state department in the most efficient ways possible. He also committed to harnessing all the constitutional knowledge of our work force to do that. Our state department and usa colleagues to determine where reform was most needed. From the very beginning, our reform effort has been employee led. We commissioned a listening survey that produced feed back for more than 35,000 employees. We also set up state and u. S. I. D. Web portals for star to provide input and continue to guide our planning. We have received 1400 submissions to those portals. After hearings from so many of our own colleagues, we convened a Cross Section of the most 300 rising leaders and seasoned professionals to create a reform plan. I want to stress that the employee led nature of the redesign is not an empty slogan. The secretary wanted employees to drive the process from the benning the department and usa i. D. Can better serve them as they serve our country. The redesign committee which i chair is composed of a balance of usa i. D. And state department leaders. The five work streams, the groups that drafted the proposals that fed into the reform plan were comprised almost entirely of career staff, both in the u. S. And abroad. 72 of work stream members were working level employees. Those who deal with the dayto day business of diplomacy and development, their presence and contributions prove to be invaluable. The resulting Agency Reform plan incorporates the suggestions and feedback from thousands of our public survantas serving servants serving all over the world. Consistent with the president s executive order, 13781 which calls for improvements, efficiencies and effectiveness for each federal agency. Let me share a few key features of our proposed plan. First, we need to streamline the policy creation process and optimize and realign the global footprint. The world is changing quickly, and state and usa i. D. Needs to be nimble. That means turning them into evidence based recommendations and executing them as quickly as possible. We will use the same approach to assess our physical footprint around the world to ensure our missions abroad align with our Foreign Policy priorities. Second, we must maximize the impact and accountability of u. S. Foreign assistance. We need to strengthen planning among the agencies that provide some type of foreign assistance to make sure our Foreign Policy goals are focused, integrated and supported. Third, we need to implement a more effective Global Service delivery frame work to reduce operational costs and redundancies, increase efficiency, and improve Service Quality for all personnel around the globe. We want to reduce red tape and bureaucratic hurdles by making management and Administrative Functions do what they were intended to do. Support our professionals as they change posts, develop their skills and serve our country all over the world. Fourth, we need to empower and retain a 21st Century Work Force by optimizing our hr support. Too often employees are bogged down trying to navigate broken processes or redundant systems. We envision hr to a more strategic role to help attract a more diverse work force and to invest more if our most valuable assets. We need to improve our i. T. Platforms, and upgrade our Technology Infrastructure so our employees can work anywhere, anytime and as effectively as possible. We need to integrate our i. T. Systems and Cyber Security platforms. By upgrading our systems and modernizing our technology, we can save money in the long run, reduce overall risks and facilitate better Decision Making in the future. The redesign provides a new foundation for diplomacy. And significant savings as we steam line processes and increase efficiencies across the department. The proposals we are pursuing will save the taxpayers 5 billion over the next five years with an aspirational hole of government target of up to 10 billion. Some of these changes will require further guidance and approval from omb. Others will require close coordination with other agencies. Others will require a change in law by congress, and be assured that for all aspects of the redesign, whether or not a change in law is required, we will consult with this committee and congress before any actions are taken. We are working to move quickly on the redesign, the reforms of the department will be ruled out as soon as possible after a consultation with congress. For example, in the coming months, we hope to move the state department toward a Cloud Computing platform and increase the number of Foreign Service family members we employ abroad. Let me emphasize that throughout this process, i commit to consulting closely with this committee. Your inpuas always is most important as we move forward. Therefore, im grateful for the opportunity ill speak to you this morning about our reform plan and hear your feedback, and i would be happy to take your questions. Thank you. Well, thank you very much, mr. Sullivan. Let me start, as you know, the state Department Basic Authorities act requires the department to notify this committee no less than 45 days before closing a diplomatic post. Will the department commit to rebust engagement, our members have strong views and experience on this . Absolutely, mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. And let me emphasize here why i think this is key. Just to follow through on the legislation that we passed in this committee. For example, the legislation we passed on sanctions on north korea. I explained a little bit of this. But our response to that threat is to have our diplomats make it clear to every country on earth that theyve got to cut ties with that rogue regime or suffer the consequences of it. Its our diplomats who have the relationships in these countries throughout the world who follow up and explain directly how seriously the United States takes this. And as i mentioned also in my opening remarks, there are eyes and ears in northern nigeria, boca raton, emerged seemingly out of nowhere, we have no diplomatic presence in all of northern nigeria, the Muslim Population and africas most populated country was over 140 Million People because we closed our consulate in caduno, in the 1990s, the Previous Administration looked at reopening the consolation and once closed, posts are very difficult, expensive to reopen. China certainly isnt trimming back its diplomatic presence there, as you know. Nor is the case of the conversations i had with the governor of that state, where now boca raton told me money was flooding from the gulf states, setting up at that time, madrasas. To recruit, he told me about one across the street from where he got his education. The new one, young boys were wearing bin laden tshirts and he explains what the consequences were going to be, and he was right. But we have to have that presence on the ground to see these kinds of things coming and has to be our Foreign Service thats engaged there. Let me ask you another question. And this goes to this issue of hiring veterans and increasing diversity. The Foreign Service will be the most effective that it can be when it draws on the strengths of the American People. However, its my understanding that the interview is only offered, you know, washington, d. C. , and in san francisco, will the department consider offering the interviews in more places such as on military bases. If i could ask you that question. Yes, mr. Chairman. I met in fact last week with all of our employee affinity groups, including our Veterans Group at the state department to discuss better ways to recruit more the of the department to increase our diversity which is a key goal of the secretary as you know. I just, in my opinion, think that if you were to deploy a strategy, and if it was well understood that we were going to do this at military bases and that those interested in serving the Foreign Service would have that option, i think in terms of the secretarys commitment to increase efforts to hire veterans and this focus on diversity, this would be a very helpful way to make that happen, and i appreciate your willingness. With that said, let me go to mr. Engel for his questions. Thank you very much mr. Chairman, mr. Secretary, i wanted to, again, thank you for taking the time to meet the chairman, and myself for lunch yesterday. Its very important for this committee and the state department to have a good working relationship. And i believe the commitments you made yesterday go a long way in advancing a constructive working relationship. We wont always agree but i think the constructive working relationship is very important. So o thing we discsed and i would be grateful if you would reaffirm it today is your commitment that the state department will respond in a timely fashion to the request for documents and information that come from myself or the chairman or our staff. Absolutely, congressman engel. Thank you. I wonder if you would clarify as you did yesterday, the departments policy regarding the necessity of a chairmans letter for certain types of information so were clear about that. Certainly. Subject to legal restrictions imposed because of executive privilege. My policy and the departments policy will be to be as responsive as we can be, both in responding to phone calls, to requests for documents, youre getting a call for any member of the committee, a request is a high priority for the state department. You have my commitment on that. If we fall down on the job, please let me know and ill remedy that situation. Thank you. I appreciate that, and secretary tillerson made the same commitment and when it wasnt being fulfilled, i went to him and he reaffirmed the commitment. Im pleased youre reaffirming that as well. I would like to read something to you, quote, well eliminate overlapped, and fund only the work that supports the priorities. Well hold our people accountable for the results. This begins with the chief submission and our embassies around the world. Well give them the tools they need to oversee the work of all u. S. Government agencies, empower them, and engage them or fully in policy making in washington. It sounds basic, but its the kind of change that will help us the full potential of our civilian power. Thats the end of the quote. Does this sound like it aligns with secretary tillersons vision for improving the department . There is a 2010qddr report, and im quoting from the 2010qddr, secretary tillerson recognizes the need for modernization at the state department, and both of his immediate predecessors saw it as well, one of the criticisms of the qddr effort, including from our committee is that it failed to realize many of its goals so in my opinion, id like to hear your opinion, one of the reasons we failed was a lack of funding. This document is full of important and insightful ideas but because the ideas were not linked with resources, they didnt lead to the transformation of the department in the ways we had hoped. Youll find enthusiastic support from this committee on both sides of the aisle. How can the Administration Carry out real or lasting reforms including it modernization thats dramatically underresourced when you have tied your hands with respect to the budget. As we discussed yesterday, one of the key goals o. Redesign is to empower our men and women, our ambassadors in particular, who are in the field, implementing u. S. Foreign policy. Thats one ofour overriding goals that has been ear from the secretarys first day on the job. As we also discussed yesterday, the budget process to which you refer started before secretary tillerson was confirmed and took office. So we came on board, i folded several month followed several months later, we had a budget process underway. The redesign effort as i have said in other context, the secretary would have been taking the redesign effort even if we had a budget increase. Its important for us to find efficiencies in the department, to be good stewards of the taxpayers money, and there will also be areas as you have noted where as we go forward, particularly with respect to i t infrastructure where we will in the future need investment and the secretary has made a commitment to the department, and i will repeat it here to this committee, will we need more resources to do our jobs more effectively, we will seek them. It is one area where i will predict we need assistance in the future in reforming our it infrastructure. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We go to. Thank you very much mr. Chairman, how many people do you have working at the state department . At the state department, we have 75,000 employees worldwide. How many again. 75,000. Yes, worldwide. And how many of these, what is the number of people, political employees brought in by the new president , how many spaces are there. There are a couple different categories, all of the ambassadors, approximately 190. Of those, roughly 30 are political appointees, in other words, they are not career Foreign Service officers. Right. So thats one category. Then there are positions at the state department itself under secretaries myself, deputy secretary, assistant secretaries. Right. There would be fewer than a hundred of those. Theres only a hundred . Approximately. Okay. And of those hundred, how many of those have been, are now filled . How many of those political appointees are sitting now and have their authority . Those who are in office at the state department, there would be fewer than 20. Thats a rough guess on my part. We have 30 nominees that are pending before the Senate Foreign relations committee. 30 nominees. 30 nominees pending, and for both appointments at the state department, under secretary for management, legal adviser, assistant secretary for european affairs, and then we have another category of individuals who have been selected by the administration but who are undergoing their Background Investigation and filling out their Financial Disclosure forms and being reviewed by the Foreign Relations committee. That would probably be her anot 20 or 30, i would say, of those. Okay. So youre saying that about 50 people that could have been appointed by the president are not now in that positions, so when we say elections count in this democracy, we have 50 people now who the slots are either being taken by career people until they get there or actually are there any appointees from the last Administration Still in those positions . To my knowledge, there are no political appointees who are filling those positions. There are, however, career Foreign Service officers who are filling those positions. All right. And mr. Chairman, i think that across the board we have seen, if our democratic process means anything, the president has to have people in there to help direct policy because thats who the people voted for, and i think that we are seeing something that i havent seen for a long time. I have never seen is that throughout our government, not just state department, elsewhere, we have seats that are vacant that should be president ial appointees. Let me ask about mg os, and their relationship to the state department. Do we actually provide services for nongovernmental organizations that are active in dierencotries . I believe among other things, we provide Financial Assistance to ngos that in turn provide assistance whether it be Life Sustaining food, water, medical assistance, so we will contract with, among others, ngos for those type of services. And are ngos, we have standards, when ngos go to another country are they required to respect the culture of that country . That would certainly be expected congressman, yes. So ngos, we get complaints, ive gotten complaints as i have traveled around from people that the ngos are actually trying to change the country. Of course we want a certain amount of change. At some point it becomes a disrespect for the culture of those countries. Good luck in trying to find that line, and good luck in your new position. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. We go now to brad sherman, Ranking Member of the Sub Committee on asia and the pacific. Mr. Deputy secretary, i want to thank you for your comments about wanting to get information to congress and answer our questions. Rex tillerson, the secretary was here on june 14th, and of course we only get 5 minutes and a lot of us have a lot more questions than that. Thats why we have questions for the record but the questions for the record for the june 14th hearing havent been answered yet. I wonder if you could commit to having the june 14th, questions answered the vast majority of them by october 15th and all of them by october 31st . I think i can do better than that, congressman, sherman, i believe i heard this morning on my way up and it is strictly a coincidence, surely, those responses were provided this morning, so if there are any that are outstanding, i will make sure. I am eagerly awaiting one of those, and that is i asked, youll be submitting a budget that involves drastic cuts and the secretary agreed to say how he would propose spending 10 or 20 or 30 more money than the administration was asking for. Because that would give congress the expert view or at least the executive branch view of not only how to spend the amount of money youre talking about but how we would allocate more and i hope that you can commit to answering the qfrs for this hearing within 30 days. Can you do that . Absolutely. I hope this isnt a reason for delay for filling posts, others have asked about that delay, and when it comes to the administration, it has a muscular tone in its Foreign Policy. Sanctions are an important part of that. Sanctions are very labor intensive. Its not a matter of just giving a speech at a rally. Its a matter of convincing a danish or a dutch bank or government on this deal or that deal, and i would hope that the un and secretary would convince the president that a muscular Foreign Policy requires a fully staffed ate department. Tom lantos was our chairman here, the special envoy or global antisemitism. I know your department is filling that post. Can we count on that be filled soon. You have my word on that. If i dont, its my fault, and i assure you it will be filled promptly. Okay. Now, there has been a report of a plan to transfer the bureaus of population refugee, and migrations and counselor affair to the department of Homeland Security. Can you put those rumors to rest. I can. Thats not under consideration. That is not under consideration. That is a great answer. We have all around the world counsel, its the consulates report to the embassy, and the embassy reports to washington. The one exception is our consulate in East Jerusalem, and i wonder whether part of your reorganization could be to have the same policy there as everywhere else, and have the consulate in East Jerusalem report to the embassy. Well, the issue of our embassy in israel. Im not asking the bigger question about moving the embassy to jerusalem. Assuming we keep the facilities we have now, would the consulate in East Jerusalem report to the embassy which is located in tel aviv. I would take that under advisement, congressman. Not everything that relates to Foreign Policy can be in the state department. I would hope that you uld provide guidance as you have a process of doing to the bbg, the broadcasting board of governors, about the importance of broadcasting in the regional languages of pakistan. I dont have to tell you that this is one of the, well, north korea has one language, pakistan has several. And if youre trying to reach the population of this important country, you cant just broadcast. And finally, im going to ask you to convey to the secretary of the treasury or the assistant secretary for tax policy, the importance, they have to allocate their time and where to negotiate a tax treaty, and they have been doing it on a paint by numbers basis, how big is the gdp of this country or whatever. Ignoring the geo politics, there are places in the world where having a tax treaty furthers the objectives of the state department. And your assistant secretary of europe testified in a smaller hearing that having a tax treaty with armenia is important geo politically, i hope we can get that influence over to the treasury department. Well go to joe wilson. Thank you, mr. Chairman, mr. Secretary for being here today. I was very fortunate in august, i was with paul cook on a delegation. We visited romania, bulgaria, latvia, lithuania, republic of georgia, and poland. I can report firsthand all of the state Department Personnel who were with us were first class. They were very comfort, capable, they were connected with this very important new allies of the United States, and so it was just a very uplifting experience, and each of those countries and i was so proud of the dedication of your personnel on behalf of the American People. I do know the Foreign Service attracts thousands of africans each year, and a greater diversity of experience, including veterans and those from underrepresented portions of the country. Successful administrations have pledged to increase veteran recruitment with limited success. Does the department intend to target veterans for recruitment . If so, what reforms to the recruitment process are being considered to meet this goal . Thank you, congressman wilson, yes, recruitment of veterans is a priority for the department as they discussed earlier with the chairman, one issue we have discussed is recruitment at military posts. I have met with retired general david petraeus, who came to speak to our Veterans Affinity Group about this issue, d i have met with our group leader as well. And many veterans who have Language Skills that can be so helpful, too. Currently the department only interviews candidates for the Foreign Service in washington and san francisco. Not exactly the most representative of u. S. Cities is the department considering conducting the oral assessment exam at military bases across the country to encourage veteran hiring. Yes, we are. Super, please, thats good. And what other influence is the department considering to recruit Foreign Service officers with more diverse backgrounds and skill sets like veterans. Well, a commitment to diversity is a priority for secretary tillerson and not just with respect to veterans, but with respect to all aspects of american society. The state department should reflect america and were committed to that. Veterans hiring is a priority for us as i have said and discussed this with chairman royce, and we are doing all we can for outreach to veterans but also to other groups as well who are under represented in the state department. Well, thank you very much and i look forward to working with you on that too. Given the prominent role designed to the department by the president s executive order on Cyber Security, imened can about plans to down im concerned out planto downgrade and merge with an existing office within the bureau of economic and Business Affairs at a time when the u. S. Is increasingly under attack online, shouldnt the state department continue to have high level leadership focused on the whole range of cyber issues not relegated to economics . Yes, congressman wilson, it is a priority for the secretary. The move you discussed for the special envoy is the first step in our approach to Cyber Security. I have discussed this with the secretary. We are committed to raising this to a high level within the department, and working with the white house on that issue. And in fact, the house passed legislation, hr600, the digital gap act expressing the sense, there should be an assistant secretary for cyber space to lead the departments diplomatic cyber space policy. The Department Taking into consideration that provision, which effectively calls on the secretary to elevate the role of cyber diplomacy before there was the provision of downgrading. Yes, i can commit to you that Cyber Security, our whole cyber effort will be elevated at the department beyond the level it is now. And with that understanding and we are pleased to learn that the departments cyber space functions will continue to focus on a full range of activities beyond just economic issues, doesnt that call into question your plans to house the office within the economic and Business Affairs bureau. That issue, the final decision about where and at what level we will place the Cyber Security responsibility hasnt been decided. The initial decision that was made is for the special envoy office which exists, we have moved that into the bureau, thats only the first step in addressing the larger cyber issue and we will consult with the committee on where the appropriate level is and what bureau its in. Thank you, and i hope you will be pushing hard on the pending ambassadorships that they be secured as soon as possible. Thank you. We go now to greg meeks, Ranking Member of the Sub Committee on europe. Mr. Secretary, first, let me congratulation and thank you, it seems as though anytime that you have been called to come and serve our great country in various administrations you have done that, and i think thats something to be thankful for. Thank you and like wise when i look at our individuals in the state department, we have said it just about unanimously, no matter where we travel we look at the men and women in our state department and how they serve our countries it is just miraculous, a number of us are very concerned when we hear the drastic cuts and i dont know, sometimes i get nervous when i hear the word modernization, i dont know what that means. Does that mean that theyre going to get the equipment and make sure we have the new technology thats necessary so that our state department has all of the tools it needs to continue to do the great job, the job that it often does with its hands tied or does it mean that were going to have to cut personnel and make their jobs even more difficult than it already is because they have tough jobs, and i think as general manager says, the more that we take away from the state department, the more we have to put into dod. So you ow, re nervous and as i travel, i think that a number of the employees in the state department are nervous. I listen to your Opening Statement where you said that, and i say 66 of the individuals responded but they still dont know what the final plan is and the information plow has not gotten down flow has not gotten down. There seems to be a lot of morale problems now, because they dont know the uncertainty, whether or not what they have recommended would be heard, and then when we have what took place for example, what concerned me at the un this past week in new york, where i believe there was some 140 officials that were there, and it was down from twice that number the year prior. And when i look at before was consistent, here is an opportunity to have our diplomats in the state Department Working with all of these heads of state at various levels. That is how this works. When i see that reduction, that to me means theres difficulty in getting our diplomacy out and talking and working with these other governments. Can you tell me, you know, is that going to be the trend. Are we going to see less numbers of diplomats and people from the state department that are going out to promote our diplomacy as we exhibited at the un last week. Absolutely not, congssman, i approached this job when i interviewed with secretary tillerson, i spoke to him of my enormous respect in regard for the Foreign Service and it comes from my family. My uncle served in the Foreign Service. My fathers brother, 32 years in the Foreign Service. He was actually our last u. S. Ambassador to iran. It was his staff taken hostage on november 4th so i understand the burdens that Foreign Service and Civil Service face when they are posted abroad. I committed to secretary tillerson. Secretary tillerson is committed to the department that our goal is to empower those women and men in the Foreign Service and the Civil Service who serve the United States abroad in dangerous places on our behalf with little thanks and our men and women in uniform are absolutely deserving of our respect and admiration and thanks for our service. Our Foreign Service and civil Service Officers are equally deserving of that respect and thanks because they serve just as our military does in dangerous place. Absolutely. And again, there is the decision that puzzled me a little bit that its been reported that after initially turning down funding for the Global Engagement center that focuses on antipropaganda efforts, secretary tillerson approved the request for the transfer of 40 million from dod. And i think the two should be. I dont want to, you know, get involved. The state department deserved to haveitown fuing, can you tell me why the state department is relying on dod funding for its own civilian efforts to combat terrorism and propaganda from our government. Certainly congressman meeks. There is an appropriation for our Global Engagement center that is state department money, and we are spending that money. A separate statue authorized the department to speak from the department of defense an additional amount of money, which defense could transfer to us. Thats the 40 million that we sought. So we have our own money. Weve sought an additional 40 million from the Defense Department, and thats because of the way congress wrote the law, we had to ask the Defense Department for the money. We did and its been transferred to us. Thank you for your service. Thank you. We go now to mark meadows of north carolina. I dont think hes with us at the moment. Adam kinsner of illinois. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you for being here. Thanks for your service to your country and its very much appreciated. I think sometimes the Unsung Heroes of conflict mitigation, and we never see some of the success they provide because its in a lack of a war, for instance, you know, which is hard to quantify. You mentioned the 40 million coming from dod. We have requested and received from the Defense Department, we have our own apropuated funds which we are applying to the Global Centers mission. That is happening then. Right. If you look at your overall idea of redesign or fixing the state department, i would say how does the Global Engagement center figure into the plans, where do you see this going. In countering the maligned activities of terrorist organizations. The new aspect of the mission and the 40 million which we have gotten from the Defense Department is to counter the efforts of propaganda, russia, china, north korea, which is a different form of mission, that gec was initially focused on terrorist organizations. Its now also focused on state efforts of propaganda, both are important, both are being funded properly, and both will figure prominently in our Public Diplomacy going forward. And you can respond to this or maybe just state it for the record. I think the intention of congress was to really focus on the counter propaganda efforts of russia cae as we have seen with our friends in eastern europe, theyre the victims of a lot of this, and we have seen the victim of that on our own shores. I think thats essential, and i officially believe the state department, Unsung Heroes and conflict mitigation. Our diplomats and aid professionals, we need to provide the capacity to operate in conflict zones. We can work to provide hope and opportunity to the 7 and 8year olds that we see in refugee camps, which i would call the next generation of war on terror, and it could either lead to guns and bombs or it can lead to frankly a generation that rises up to reject terror within their own communities. I think thats frankly how youre going to actually win this, i think, bombs and guns are important in the current fight, and i think we have to look at the next generation. This could be a war were engaged in for the rest of my life, and something i think that is essential. How does the redesign in your mind inflexibility to operate in conflict zones like syria and elsewhere . I think youre absolutely right, congressman, about the challenge we face with refuges, whether refuge camps in jordan, from the conflict in syria, the refugee crisis we see now on the border of burma and in bangladesh, those enormous refugee populations are a global problem and will continue to be unless its properly addressed. We have at the state department modest means, not the complete means to address them. Its a global problem. So for example in burma, we have spent 32 million now to start to address the refugee crisis there. Our ambassador in burma is looking to go up to the ra keen state to get to the border within the next two days. Were doing all we can to address that problem there. We have spent large sums of money to address the refugee crisis thats been generated by the rise of isis in iraq and syria. And with partners and allies with the help of the jordian government which has done a heroic amount of work, were trying to do all we can to address that is problem because as you know, this is a generational problem and will be a problem that will face us for years to come. Thank you. I wont ask account question but i will make the statement, as you look at diplomatic outposts maybe to consolidate or shutdown, we didnt have a diplomatic post in afghanistan pre9 11. So a lot of areas around the world when we look where to do this, we need to be thinking not in terms of the conflict today but what could be a conflict tomorrow and the benefit of having a presence there for conflict mitigation which we cant quantify how many confl t conflicts weve stopped with state and us aid. I want to thank you and the people that work for you. Ill yield back. The Ranking Member on the stern hemisphere into thank you, mr. Chairman and for holding this hearing today. Thankor beak here and the work you do to serve this country and all the people that work for you. I get a chance to travel quite a bit. They are professional working hard every day. And quite frankly, some of them are in real dangerous situations. Im concerned. And i also want to thank you for the coincidence of answering our questions that happened this morning. We submied about three months ago the question. I get concerned, go ahead, sir. Theres nothing like a congressional hearing to focus the concentration. Not a coincidence, right . Just an observation. I get concerned when we throw numbers like 30 that were going to have this kind of cut in the state department. You can imagine what it does to the people that work you and what it does for the countries that we deal with. And one of the things that really concerns me is this hiring freeze and how it impacts the family members that work for these people. Some of these people are not going to be able to work and its hard enough already for some of the employees with the searle that they get to make tends meet in some of these place but now you have a situation where even the family members cannot be employed if we implement this 30 . Can you talk a little bit about that, even schooling of the children. Thats all part of it. Absolutely. The employment of family members at u. S. Embassies abroad is vitally important not just for the support the monastery support it provides for those families but for the services that those family members provide to our embassy. So weve had a hiring freeze in place that was an administrationwide hiring freeze. The department has continued that hiring freeze until we get a better handle on our redesign. There are a lot of the exceptions though toe that hiring freeze, among them has been an exception for the employment of family members. I believe the numbers are, weve employed since the hiring freeze went into effect, weve brought on somewhere between 800 and 900 authorized family members to work at our embassies. Its a consistent concern i hear from our ambassadors when they come back from posts to washington and i meet with them. Employment of family members at embassies is always a topic they raise. And schooling, too. Schooling, as well. Thats what we hear also where we travel. Can you, i hate to bring this into this cuban Foreign Affairs situation, but i know that tillerson is meeting with some of the cuban diplomats in havana. Is that correct . When is that happening . Weve had regular contact with the government of cuba. If youre referring to the acoustic incidents that have been happening. Yes, i was coming to that. In havana. Weve had regular contact to register our deep concern with whats happened in havana and to remind the cuban government this obligation under the Geneva Convention to protect our embassy employees and their families down there. Weve been trying to get a Briefing Schedule and we cant seem to get it where, where we are with this acoustic situation from the state department. If you need a briefing, congressman, i will guarantee you, this committee, whoever wants a briefing will get one. And our staff can perhaps speak with the chairman after this hearing and we will arrange to get the information you need to understand whats happening in havana at our embassy. Im also concerned about the crisis in venezuela. And our role with the oas. How involved are we with the oas . I actually had the honor to represent the United States at the oas General Assembly in cancun in late june. It was it was there was a diplomatic accomplishment but the United States and our allies at that meeting where we got over 20ountries in the region to back a resolution on venezuela. Unfortunately, we didnt reach the twothirds threshold to get that resolution passed. So my time is running out. Im wondering if some of these cuts you think is going to impact our ability to do Something Like this in the future . Absolutely not. We will not. These countries all i dont want to interrupt. Theyre all frightened and were not going to be as active as weve been in the western hemisphere which i work with. It is venezuela in particular is a priority for this administration. And we will continue to work hard on that topic and bring pressure to bear on the maduro government which is as you know as well as anyone as driven the venezuelan country, its economy into dire straits. Will the gentleman yield . Might i suggest youre the Ranking Member on western hem that we formalize the request right now to the state department concerning a private briefing for the members here with respect to the concerns our Foreign Service officers have who were stationed in havana with respect to some of the Health Issues that theyve raised. So that we can learn about the ongoing discussions here. We will undertake to have that briefing for you. We appreciate that. Thank you, mr. Chairman, for making that suggestion. Thank you, mr. Sullivan. For your testimony and being with us today and thankyou. We now go to dan donovan of new york. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me add my sincere gratitude to your service to our nation, as well. Recognizing were not appropriators in your efforts to redesign the state department to better serve our nations interests throughout the globe, is there anything that this committee can do legislatively or anything to help in those efforts . Well, well have a number of requests that will come to this committee on with respect to our redesign effort. To give you an example, weve shared with the committee a letter from the secretary that sets forth proposals for all of the special envoys that we have. Its almost 70. Some of those offices were created by statute, and what we propose to do with them in consultation with the committee may require legislation to affect change. So we will be coming to this committee with changes that we seeking to help us with our redesign and we very much want to a, cooperate with you and consult with you on these proposed changes but we will need legislation for some of them, as well. Thank you. Recognizing that a stable globe is very much in the interests of the United States National Security, our hope land security and thats the other security that i serve on besides Foreign Affairs is there any redesign efforts that youre contemplating now involving usaid . Yes, there are substantial redesign proposals that are under consideration. However, i should state up front, one of them is not merging aid into the state department. So we have a number of proposals that were considering with input from senior aid officials to make aid a more efficient to align our Development Policy with our Foreign Policy as we go forward. But we are not considering at this point merging aid into the state department. Wonderful. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i yield the balance of my time. Thank you. We go now to mr. Ted deutch of florida. Thank you. Deputy secretary sullivan, thanks for being here. Secretary tillerson told our committee in june throughout the redesign process he said we will work as a team and with congress. With all due respect, this has not felt like a team effort. Modernizing the state department so it can be as effective as possible and advancing National Security and appropriating u. S. Interests abroad is a shared goal but many of us as youve heard today are worried this whole process is a downgrading of our diplomacy by another name. President trumps 30 cut is particularly dangerous at a time when we need deft diplomacy and skilled states men to promote peace in the middle east and push back against russian aggression in ukraine and frankly here at home. At a time when foreign diplomats speak openly about how they look to the white house because the state department is so understaffed, id like to ask you, the state department, about a few specific Foreign Policy topics to get an understanding of the administrations position. Firs in theiddl meast, we saw brutal reminder of the challenges that israel faces in its search for peace today when a terrorist killed three israelis and seriously wounded others near jerusalem. Meanwhile in gaza, hamas continues to hold the bodies of slain ids soldiers and civilians as bargaining chips. Earlier this month, i met with the parents of lieutenant golden who was killed by terrorists using an underground tunnel during a ceasefire in 2014. Ive met with the family a sergeant also killed by hamass in 2014. Their refuse to return the bodies to their families for burial is an obvious violation of International Law and basic human values. So to where we are today. Jason greenblatt is the continuing the administrations push towards peace. For many of us, were still in the dark what that looks like. He said last week it is no secret our approach to these discussions departs from some of the usual orthodoxy for after years of well meaning attempts to negotiate an end to the conflict, we have all learned valuable lessons. What id ask you, deputy secretary sullivan, is what are those Lessons Learned that . What are the unorthodox approaches that youre pursuing and is it this administrations intention to present its own peace plan . Thank you, congressman. Yes, as you know the, the white house jason greenblatt, the president s special representative, Senior Adviser to the president Jared Kushner have been deeply involved in negotiations between this administration and the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority. The president met with Prime Minister netanyahu with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority last week. The president himself is personally committeded to this process. As other president s have been. I think the commitment of this administration is clear to the peace process. I would have to defer to mr. Greenblatt on what he specifically meant with those comments. I would say that secretary tillerson though has been involved, as well. He was with President Trump when he when the president visited israel in june. Which all of which were aware of. Can you tell us whether its the administrations intention to present its own peace plan . I would have to defer to the white house on that, sir. Next moving on to iran. The vice chairman of the joint chiefs said in july that you it appears iran is in come compliance with the rules laid down in the jcpoa. There are very real flaws in the jcoa including the sunset provisions. However, in order to lead an International Effort against irans ongoing support for terrorism, their superior of the hezbollah militias in Syria Development of the Missile Program all outside the terms of the jcpoa, we need the support of the International Community and allies and partners in europe. Wouldnt decision mot to certify come compliance because of factors outside the jcpoa ri risk making it more difficult. The secretary said as late at last week, iran is in Technical Compliance with the jcpoa. He said, as well however, that iran ising in violation of the spirit of the jcpoa for all the ma line activities youve just described. Weve been in close consultation with our allies to address those both those ma line activities and the flaws in the jcpoa including the sunset provision. President will he have a decision in october whether to certify or not but our work on irans ma line activities and trying to improve the terms of the jcpoa will have continue. And finally, mr. Chairman, just if i may, my last question, as you know, deputy secretary sullivan, bob levinson has now been held by iran for ten years. The family was told that the u. N. General assembly was be used as an opportunity to push forward bobs case. Can you seeing any progress and can you commit to us that is bringing bob and other americans being held unjustly by iran will remain a priority for thrt administration . The levinson case is a priority for this administration as are all thether american hostages held worldwide. Of just as a note, i have met and spoken with the levinson family on multiple occasions. I have a picture on my desk of bob that be reminds me every day hes our longest held hostage in iran and i have personal Family Experience with americans being held hostage in iran. This administration has no higher priority than bringing home all of those americans including mr. Levinson. Have you my word on that. And im profoundly great follow for that. Lee zeldin of new york. Thank you, circle pl chairman. Thank you mr. Secretary for your service to our country. The rising tide of antismitetism here in the United States and abroad is of great concern for myself for many of my constituents, for many americans. The u. S. State Departments Office responsible for monitoring and combating antisemitism has how many active members currently . I would have to get you that answer after this hear. I cant tell you off the top of my head. I apologize. And previously in responding to a question from one of my colleagues, you mentioned filling the special envoy position as a top priority for the state department. Are there potential candidates being vetted . Where are we in that process . How imminent is this . Yes, there are candidates being vetted. Unfortunately, because a final decision hasnt been made, i cant disclose those names or where things stand. But you have my commitment that that position will be filled promptly. Thank you, mr. Secretary. How many undersecretary and assist secretary positions are there at the state department . Is it about 30 . There are six undersecretaries. Assistant secretaries theres more there are more than 30, i believe. Do you know how many of those positions are filled as of right now . Filled with confirmed office holders, i cant give you a precise number. Its its well below 50 and far fewer than it should be, and that is not a good we are not pleased with that situation. And i want to see you be successful. I want to see secretary tillerson be successful. And i believe very strongly that its very important for those positions to all get filled. Were here now at the end of september. And this first year for secrety tillerson is pretty close to an end. As you know, better than i do, a lot of these positions get filled up with acting heads of these different offices. And i think that you all would be much more successful to fill those as quickly as possible. Whats the timeline and goal for getting the remainder of these positions filled . As i mentioned earlier in the hearing, we have 30 nominees that are pending now before Senate Foreign relations committee. We have in the pipeline, so to speak, individuals who are undergoing vetting for many more positions. My hope is subject to the Senate Calendar that, we will get the vast majority of these positions filled by the end of november or beginning of december. But its wares behind the curve. We should be ahead of the curve. And were doing all we can to catch up. Thank you for that. Im very much appreciate the administrations efforts, the state departments efforts, ambassador haleys efforts at the United Nations as it relates to north korea. I knows a very challenging situation and time line keeps shrinking of how quickly north korea can get to that point where they have the capability to deliver a Nuclear Warhead to the United States. And that the state department is working hard on getting multilateral diplomacy, ramping up economic pressure, it the information effort within north korea so that they understand that its their own regime responsible for many of their struggles. And its no small feat government has pulled off at the United Nations on a massive sanctions package, bringing china to the table more than ever before. And because the military option is absolutely the last possible option that anyone should want to consider, because there really is no good military option, i greatly appreciate everything that youre working on top increase that pressure and try to deal with north korea situation and while it may not get covered as much in the news, all those victoriesing with regards to bringing china and russia on board, i want to let you know on behalf of myself and my constituents im very grateful for your achievements so far. Its certainly far from over. I yield back. Thank you. We go to mr. Gerry connolly of virginia. Welcome, mr. Sullivan. You said that of this is as employeeled effort, a visionary doment with no predetermined outcomes. How can you say that when the president s budget already recommended a 32 cut to cut to our state Department Budget and usaid budget estimated to 5 billion to 10 billion over the next five years . Well was that a bottom up recommendationing . Thats the president s budget which we have to live with. And its also a budget thats passed by congress ultimately. So we deal with the budget that we have with the amounts that have been an prop yeaed for this year and going forward. Apart from that, as i said earlier, whether or not we were going to have a budget decrease or increase. I must, i only have five minutes. I take your point. But candidly, youre going to have a bottom up you know reorganize for the state department and aid and they already know theres going to be a third cut. Leading to the attrition or the layoff of somewhere probably north of 2,000 employees. Id say that puts a little damper on my enthusiasm on the bottom up effort to reorganize state department because im worried about my own job security and i wonder how sincere the effort is if in advance ive already been told what the parameters are. The budget parameters are only one aspect of the redesign. Pretty big important one, isnt it . It is. It sends a message, doesnt it . The budget what kind of message does the bottom up process to those employees in terms of the value of their work . The message . Yeah. That the secretary has sent to t employees that they are enormously valued by him, by us and their service is recognized every day. Well, im sure he means it, but to some employees, especially many i represent in my district, it sounds like empty rhetoric, frankly, mr. Sullivan, because the fact is, weve got a president and a budget hald cut a third of their budget. That doesnt seem like a real high value being put on their work. Would you argue in the course of this process morale is high at the state department and the usaid . No. Why not . I think theres uncertainty. Were doing our best to reduce that uncertainty. This testimony by me today is part of that process. Ive had a town hall meeting with employees, ive had Small Group Meetings with employees. The secretary has initiated a regular outreach, both by email and in person with employees. Were doing all we can now to reassure them that this process is employee lead. They are valued and diplomacy is valued by this government and by this secretary. So let me okay. Good to hear. I hope they believe it and i hope the actions corroborate what you just said. Do you believe that usaid should be folded into the department of state or is that still an open question . No. No. No, its an open question . No, it is not an open question. As i testified earlier today, there is no intention to merge aid into the state department. Do you believe that a. I. D. Should enhance be enhanced as the lead Development Office of the United States government . I believe the role of a. I. D. Should be enhanced and made more effective and more efficient. Well, good. Im glad to hear that, actually. I have a bill, maybe you want to take a look at, that would do just that. Id bppy to. Because part of the problem im concerned about is that over the years, weve seen sort of a diffusion of things, all with good purpose, whether it be hiv aids, whether it be africa, whether it be other special programs to help certain mid to advanced countries. And what its done is disperse the focus of u. S. Development assistance. It seems to me thats not a very Good Management model. Id be glad to work with you and hope you will work with us in trying to take a fresh look at that. Do you believe that let me ask this question. We have a famine going on in africa right now. Do believe that a. I. D. And the state department are currently well equipped to respond to that famine . And then my time is up. We are not doing as much as we should be to respond to that famine. We should do and will do more. Thank you and thanks for your refreshing testimony. I appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Anne wagner of missouri. Thank you, mr. Chairman for holding this hearing and i thank you, deputy secretary sullivan for making the time to be with us today. I appreciate your leadership and am keen to watch the state department redesign process unfold. As a former United States ambassador who spent four years at state, i am well aware that state department is a bloated bureaucracy and reassessing everything, from hiring to diplomatic programming to cutting unnecessary departments is critical to advancing u. S. Diplomacy into the 21st century. I believe we can balance the state departments checkbook while promoting American Leadership and strength. I trust you and secretary tillerson to make those difficult calls. One of my long time concerns is that state department deployments are not well balanced. To reflect the importance of American Leadership in the asiapacific in particular, despite the u. S. Rebalance to asia, it appears that we still have very large embassies in western nations where i served. Relative to the conflict that were facing, insufficient staff at our asia postings. Are you considering rebalancing the number of Foreign Service officers who are posted in china, south korea, india, and the asean nations to account for our interest in the asiapacific . Yes. Absolutely, congresswoman wagner. To rebalance the footprint. The chairman raised the issue of closing posts. Its not so much closing posts but rebalancing. Exactly. Whats our time frame . The redesign were looking at implementing subject to consultations with this committee and others in congress over the next several months, the rebalancing will be a process that that is ongoing and it should start immediately and continue through our tenure in office. I think it will be an ongoing process, as challenges rise and we find the need to have more Foreign Service officers, civil Service Officers at particular posts. Let me shift gears here a little bit, mr. Secretary. The last administration fought to lift sanctions against burma and give the country gsp status. But violence has raged on and were going be having, thanks to the leadership of chairman i dont yoho a hearing on that this week. How is the state department actively responding to the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in burma and how will the u. S. Protect this persecuted community . Well, our outreach has started at the top with secretary tillerson and our ambassador is working very hard, and looking to go up to the region this week. We committed already 32 million to address the crisis, more to follow and a lot more intensive effort for our department because this is, as i testified earlier, its not a burma problem, its not a problem for bangladesh or the United States, its a global problem. The scale is tragic. I agree. And timely also as weve seen 400,000 refugees in the last week move on to bangladesh. Syrian Civil Defense rescue workers have reported that theyve been directly targeted by Russian Forces even though they are in a ceasefire zone and should be protected by medical neutrality. What is the state department doing to address violence committed by russia in syria . Weve established a military to military chain of communication. The u. S. Department of defense from the chairman on down has been in contact with their equivalence in the Russian Defense ministry. That coordination and deconfliction has, for the most part, over the course of this summer, worked well, but there have been breakdowns including recent breakdowns we are addressing immediately in person with our militarys russian counterparts. Good. I thank you on that. I will yield back my time. Will the gentle lady yield for . Yes, i will. I want to say if you are interested in input from a member of congress who served at the state department in your rebalancing efforts, i have a lot of ideas, so i yield back the time. Look forward to hearing them. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate the ambassador, mrs. Wagner, yielding. The question she brought up about the rohingya issue is one i raised with you yesterday and raised with secretary of state. That is we have to figure out a way to g across to the military government in burma that they have to pull t militia out and the military out that are engaged right now in burning those villages. There are 400,000 rohingya people who have fled over the border, as you know, into bangladesh. They need to be welcomed back in. Its not enough to have statements from the counselor. She is not commander in chief. Their system reserved that for their military in burma. This requires not Just International pressure but a very focused amount of pressure on the burmese government to get usaid, get the u. N. In, in terms of being able to assist those in Rakhine State who have faced this ethnic cleansing. And also requires the press being on the ground. So again, i reiterate the Important Role that we must play in achieving this. We have a hearing coming up, i think later this week on this subject. I also just wanted to raise an issue, karen bass and i were yesterday, with the liberian president. That election is a month away. Let me put this question to you. I understand one of the things youre trying to do is get the versatility to be able to transfer or get the reforms in place where you can quickly do a deployment. So, if we have more people in the embassy in switzerland than we do in liberia and liberia has an election next month, can you deploy right now from europe, because weve been a decade late in making these realignments, can you deploy to the ground to make sure that fair and free elections which is what is trying to be engineered here by ellen johnson, certainly the president of liberia, takes place . We can. An example the recent elections in kenya, a huge logistical undertaking by the department of state. And we have to go through this again. Its a statistical challenge for us and we need for flexibility and authority to do that. Let us know precisely now. We understand how long the wait will be here and o b will review. Let us know this aspect of it now so i and the Ranking Member, congresswoman bass and mr. Smith can work on legislation to specifically rectify this situation immediately. And i appreciate that. We go to congresswoman karen bass of california. Thank you, mr. Chair, especially for your leadership on these issues. Mr. Secretary, i like to ask you three quick questions. One, wanted to ask you about the diversity fellowships. And let me begin by saying that i really appreciated secretary tillersons statement and i appreciate the timing that he made the statement, as well, the state departments commitment to diversity. Specifically, i wanted to ask you about the rangle fellows and payne fellows. And i wanted to ask, and i dont want assume but that those fellowships will be copied . Yes, congresswoman bass, those fellowships will be continued and are very important to our efforts in bringing in new talent to the department. Thank you very much. In august secretary tillerson sent the letter to several members of congress effectively stating the assistant secretary, acting assistant secretary for the Africa Bureau already fulfills the responsibilities that have previously been performed by the u. S. Special envoy to sudan and south sudan. I know one of my colleagues asked you a question about special envoys earlier, i want to specifically ask if that will be the case if the special envoy will be eliminated for sudan and in particular south sudan considering the instability in that nation. Thank you, congresswoman bass. I believe thats one of the special envoy positions for which we would need a statutory change. Oh. We would need to come to this. I could be wrong about that. I have to get back to you to confirm. That means as of now you cant change it . We have to seek if we were to make changes to that office i believe we would require a change to the statute. Good. Well follow up on that as well. A few moments ago my colleague was asking you about the famine, you said we could be doing more. I was wondering about what your opinions were. We did authorize in the cr a couple months ago close to a billion dollars and i went to the region with mr. Smith. And i was wondering, one, has all of that money been allocated and is it the ground . We were concerned some of it would be used as carry over and we didnt want to see that happen. I will get you the precise figures, congresswoman bass. I would be disappointed in the extreme if its not but i will confirm that for you. I would appreciate that. Id like the figures and where considering it was spread over four countries. Of course. Also, a minute ago you were referencing the election in kenya. Yes. I was there as an observer. You mentioned we had to deploy a lot. What did we do . Because i didnt see that. Diplomatic security, among other things for election monitors. So there were a number of groups that came to monitor the elections. Right. I was part of that. We provided Diplomatic Security . I know you Diplomatic Security, in fact i met with Diplomatic Security about their needs, the requirements for Diplomatic Security made by the embassy in advance of the election went well beyond what we would have otherwise anticipated for that embassy. So there was a substantial commitment of Security Resources to make sure that americans would be protected in the event that there had been violence, which is what there had been in the two elections prior. I see. So then the Diplomatic Security you were referring to was housed at the embassy. And there were also posts around the country where we had other americans that were we needed to protect. Mr. Chair, if you dont mind, when you were referring to support needed in liberia, were you referring to diplomatic what were you referring to . Because the electioon the ground is going to require all kinds of monitoring, it is a Good Opportunity to have the full comportment of security in place but also engagement on the part of the United States. I imagine we will try to have ndi and iri on the ground. All of that requires a tremendous amount of you and i have both been involved in the past. Ive been involved in these elections where you come in, you spend a week and you try to engage in making certain that everything is in place for what is going to be a tremendously complicated undertaking. To the extent that you have the staff there from the u. S. Embassy to assist, its very important. Whats at risk here is being able to get the ability, the discretion on the part of the secretary of state to move personnel. Unfortunately, were sort of locked in. And that is something i think we could all agree on would be a necessary change. You might not like the transfer momentarily temporarily from switzerland to, you know, to a situation where you had the war torn results where were trying post conflict to have another successful election there, but that should be the decision of those of us in congress with oversight responsibility and our secretary of state. Thats where im trying to drive the policy. All right. Thank you very much. Ill await your responses about the famine. Thank you. Yield back. We go now to ted yoho of texas. Oh. Frances rooney of florida, ambassador rooney is here. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Im glad to read that youre going to up grade i. T. I think when i was serving in rome we had windows minus one. Did i mix it up . Ted, you go ahead. No, you go ahead. You have the time. Just one quick question. Theres been some discussion about the counsel iractivities maybe going to Homeland Security. We have 40 of the illegal people in this country illegally overstayed visas and 700,000 people overstayed their visas last year. The question i have is can the state department adequately deal with the overstay problem in the United States or should that part go to Homeland Security . I think the overstay problem here in the United States is something that should be and is being addressed by the department of Homeland Security. I think Consular Affairs and the role of the consular officer in the embassy in screening visa applicants is an important function of the department of state. We are not there is no plan to transfer councilor affairs to dhs but there is definitely an overstay problem. Thank you. Thats au i was going to ask about. Thank you. We go now mr. Bill keating, massachusetts. Thank you, mr. Chair. I want to thank the deputy secretary. I enjoyed our conversation before. The second of the proposals that you had was maximizing the impact of foreign assistance or aligning foreign assistance with Foreign Policy goals. Heres a question i have. We had a question earlier on by one of our members about respecting culture. Weve also had President Trump signal maybe some changes in terms of how we approach autocratic regimes, sort of giving them, just leaving them alone or not being as involved as we were. Could you coent, ithis a change in our Foreign Policy because my understanding has always been our Foreign Policy goals reinforce our basic American Values, values like rule of law, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, human rights, civil rights, gender, equality, respect to for minorities in those cultures. Is that a change, frankly . Is there the president s remarks as well as maybe the thoughts behind the question of respecting culture . When were dealing with these autocratic regimes that act at odds with basic American Values, are we going to still reinforce those values and indeed is that something factored in aligning foreign assistance to those countries . Yes. Congressman keating. Our American Values are for us at the state department and me as an american, theyre immutable. Were committed to them. Its a difficult line we walk in dealing with foreign governments that have different institutions and cultures, and we walk a fine line. Let me give you an example to support my contention that were not we dont have a change in policy. For example, our foreign military, fmf program with egypt. The secretary has withheld 195 million. Its been notified, obligated to be spent, but it is being withheld until the egyptians show some progress on issues related to human rights with for example, the treatment of ngos. Its a an issue we confront everyday and we have to walk a fine line. But we never deebate from our values. We protect americans National Security and promote our prosperity and never undmine our values. Thank you for reaffirming that. In terms of the ngos and working with them, is the state department when theyre reducing some of the budget items they have, is that going to affect the nongovernmental organizations on the ground because of the hiring freeze and reorganization . Will we still be able to support a very robust engagement with these ngos when they reflect these American Values . Do you see these changes in budget cuts or reorganization affecting that . There wouldnt be any policy to change our relationship with ngos. There may be, incident to changes in our budget where our relationship with a particular ngo might change. But we will continue to interpret u. N. s Foreign Policy, particularly development assistance, as necessary through ngos. The peace and security act just passed the senate and house, on its way to the president s desk right now. That makes sure women are meaningful participants at all levels of Foreign Policy making and pleptation and requires commitment and resources to do that. With that reaching the president s desk, is that something again were going to reaffirm because that policy change is something that was in place in the last administration . Is that going to Carry Forward . I think the Senior Advisor to the president , ivanka trump would strongly reaffirm thats the policy of this administration as thpresident would. Were committed to that for the at the department of state. One thing i note for you, congressman, thats astounded me is talking about diversity at the state department the number of women we have in Foreign Service and Civil Service has actually decreased, particularly at the senior levels over last eight years or so. Weve got to do a better job in promoting women in the state department, in our Foreign Service. And were committed to it. Great. Thank you for making sure thats clear and for reaffirming that. Thank you for your presence and i look forward to working with you in the future. Thank you. Representative ted yoho of florida, chairman of the Asian Pacific subcommittee. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Appreciate you being here, deputy secretary sullivan. I was at a meeting about a year ago, and there was a lot of current and retired generals talking about a major teutonic shift of world powers and the state Department Since being around since 1789 as the first cabinet agency, with you in the position youre in now, youre to step back, look at the state department as a whole, probably that its never been looked at before in reform. I would have to ask, when is the last time theres been a major transformation or reform of the state department in there have been efforts at reform that have not been successful as they should have been includi in the mid90s. I would contrast that with efforts at reform at the department of defense where ive also served that have been more successful in this same time period. The Defense Department has done a better job. This is an unprecedented moment in time. I look forward to working through this to reform it and find out what works well and doesnt work well and get rid of those things that dont and lets make those things that are working well more efficient so we can get more bang for the buck, especially in these times of economic constraint. With that being said, what places do you think we need to redirect . Keep in mind, this builds on what Gregory Meeks brought up about the geopolitical knowledge. Weve seen how it failed in robert gates book duty we didnt take the geopolitical, customs of the area and tribal culture in afghanistan and iraq and didnt get the results we wanted, obviously. And how we can take that knowledge as we move into different areas as theres these different conflicts starting to develop and use that more to our advantage to create policies so that we get more favorable results in a timely manner. Where do you see we need to focus on more that we havent . I think as a starting point, id want to see a more diverse state department, that we have more diverse viewpoints contributing to the formulation of policy, whether its veterans, women, minorities, language, culture, expertise. Bringing all of that to bear, all of the strengths our country has, bringing those strengths to bear on these diplomatic challenges combined with working with our intelligence agencies and our experts at the state department to address those all of those issues that you have raised whether were dealing with a conflict in sya, in south asia, in mindanao in the philippines. Right. It really is. And were seeing escalation of radical groups showing up. I want for the record reiterate this, the amount of people you said youre 50 staffed or understaffed, i guess, yet the amount of people that have been nominated that havent been confirmed by the senate, thats where the holdup is the way i understand it, correct . Well, i want to be fair to the senate. A number of those. We have 30 nominees pending. Thats all right. This is the house. They havent been pending for six months. Some of them have been pending for only a relatively short period of time. Theyve all come out of the pipeline and now sitting before the Foreign Relations committee. Okay. Burma had come up. And you talked about the 32 million to start to address the rohinghya situation in burma. I would hope as we move forward, as youre redirecting this, weve known about this escalating over probably the last five years and weve seen it build up. Instead of investing the 32 million now which we have to, but i would hope that wed have the foresight, as we see this arising and starting to become inflamed, that we do a better job on the front end so maybe we can deescalate this. What are your thoughts on this . Youre absolutely right. This is not a problem that just arose over the summer, this month. Right. Thats so true on many of the conflicts that we have around the world. Thats where i hope with your leadership and secretary tillersons, we can look at that and say, these are hotspots, we need to get in here now so we dont have 400,000 refuges in the last couple months and over a million displaced, that will be the next hot spot we need to do now. What are you thoughts where we need to really focus . Right now, even though we should have anticipated this, were now stuck with the problem we have with hundreds of thousands of refugees. So weve got work with allies, partners, others, the u. N. We cant its not a United States problem. 32 million from us is a drop in the bucket. We have to get other countries and the u. N. Involved as well. I would hope i will offer this through our committee and the chairman, i think, would probably be okay with this, use this committee as a tool to get the legislation or direction that you need to direct the policies that we need, okay . I thank you for your time and i yield back. I concur with the gentleman, we go to mr. David cicilline of rhode island. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you, mr. Secretary. I think as you outlined the purposes of the redesign plan in terms of streamlining and maximizing efficiencies and avoiding duplication, i think we all agree with that. In fact, every agency of the federal government should be engaged in that work oan ongoing basis. One of the things that troubles me about this process is that the secretary of state sent out a memorandum and an email indicating that this redesign would generate, and i quote, a minimum deliverable of 10 , 5 billion in efficiencies relative to current spending over the next five years with aspirational general interest target of up to 20 , 10 billion. My first question is where do those figures come from . The 10 billion, what data did you rely on to come up with them and isnt it a perversion of the process that you have, unless its just about cost cutting, that you have as really the only stated goal cost cutting in these amounts without before the process has even begun . Very good questions, congressman. First on the budget numbers. To give you an example, the amount of money we spend now for legacy i. T. Systems, just to keep them running, is staggering. We have to we spend for outdated systems, to keep them patched and running, huge amounts of money. I guess my question is, where did those amounts come from at the beginning of the process . Youre talking about i. T. As one of the strategies. Right. But who came up with 10 billion and 5 billion cuts . Just pulled out of the air . Those arent cuts. Those are efficiencies we expect from the process that will result. Were not saying up front were going to cut. What the secretary said is when we implement these new processes, procedures and efficiencies we expect 5 billion in savings. If we dont get that, we dont get that. Well be disappointed. And not accomplished what we hod to achieve. Were not setting out with a 5 billion cut. Thank you. Members of the administration have given mixed messages when it cops to the role of democracy in our Foreign Policy. We sent a letter to secretary tillerson august 11 raising our concern about reports that democracy promotion was possibly going to be taken out of the state departments Mission Statement. We received a reply saying the department agrees that democracy promotion has been and should be a corner stone of u. S. Foreign policy. This response doesnt answer the question of whether democracy promotion will remain the state departments Mission Statement. My first question is, will it remain in the Mission Statement . Yes. Second question. When you the expression of support for democracy and rights matters, you have to view it in the context in which were currently operating. President of the United States who expresses admiration for the thug vladimir putin, a president who calls to congratulate president erdogan when a resolution passed that undermined the bake rule of law. A president who invited president duterte to the white house and a president who says americans should not impose values on others. Is somebody in the state department speaking to the president about the consequence of that kind of mixed message . You have a state department where its recognizing democracy and human rights as an important value that well promote around the world and the president of the country is doing things to undermine that Important Message . Its important t recognize its not just promotion of democracy for the sak of it but because its important to the stability of the world and american businesses to invest and all the kenses that democracy brings for all the reasons you state, its exceptionally important to us that we be committed to promoting democracy. Its necessary for our own National Security. That other countries are secure and stable. And that as you point out for example that our businesses have stable open markets with democratic governments in which to do business. How do we manage that objective with the declarations of the president of the United States which directly undermine that message . The president we have to deal with governments that are undemocratic. Whether they are you deal with them and praising them are two different things. I will defer to president on how he deals with political particular World Leaders but our commitment to democracy at the state department on half of the secretary is unwavering. If i could get in one last question. As you know, u. S. Foreign assistance programs are really critical to advancing the stability and growing economy of developing countries and are vital to u. S. National security and can help us avoid costly conflict. Robert gates noted. If youre able to do those thgs youre able to do them in a focused and sustainable way. It may be unnecessary for us to send soldiers. Do you share the view of secretary gates and many military. Are necessary for effective u. S. Leadership in the world . And if you do, how do you square that with the proposal to cut 32 of the state Department Budget by President Trump . The answer to your first question is yes. The answer to your second question is, its on us to manage the state department in a more efficient and effective way. And spend the money that the president asked for. But Congress Appropriates and spend the budget weve got in an effective and efficient way and promote that and implement that to promote our security and our economy. You dont think you can do that with a 32 cut in the budget . Do you . I believe we can. I believe we can. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield back. Thank you. We go to mr. Desantis of florida. Good morning or afternoon. In may when the president saned the waiver under the jerusalem. He said we will in fact move it. Its just a matter of time. Will we move it . When are we going to move it . Two questions. The first yes the president is committed to moving it. The decision on wh to move it de a strategic and tactical sion the president himself in consultation with the secretary will have to make. The president has been quite clear in his commitment. The state department view is commitment p. The state departments view is thats the president s policy. He has to pull the trigger but your agency is going to facilitate that move when it happens. We work for the president. Were talking about the Palestinian Authority will take money. Some from the United States. And theyll Fund Families of terrorists who murdered jews. Theyll name stadiums after terrorists. And we have a bill in the congress that trying to address at least some of that. Does the Administration Support the Taylor Force Act . I dont know whether we issued an Administration Policy on that bill. We at the state department are opposed to all of those things that you have said. That the Palestinian Authority does. Great. For the iran deal. This idea of Technical Compliance. Is it true that iran has exceeded on numerous occasions the amount of heavy water stock in permitted under the jcpoa . Im venturing into an area i dont have sufficient expertise. Ill offer the following. My understanding is there have been instances such as where there may have been iran may have gone over the line. They came back down. They have varied that. What about the operangore advanced Nuclear Centrifuges than were allowed under the jcpoa . That happened as well. Ill defer to the experts on that. Heres the issue. President does not like this deal. He campaigned saying it was bad. His u. N. Speech was very clear this was not a good deal. We see whats happening in north korea. Difficult situation. Five, ten years into the future, if this deal continues as is, its going to be the same thing, maybe even more intractable at that point. And so to simply recertify it as being within the National Security interest, i think would be a mistake. The muslim brotherhood, theres e a lot of nefarious influence they have. The president has said that. Other members of the administration. Yet they havent been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the state department. Why not . And is there a possibility state will designate them as such . I understand that issue has been under review. Not just now but in the past. I dont have a is it currently still under review . Ill have to get back to you. I know it was earlier. We havent heard as much about it. If a decision has been made that you dont want to identify them, we would like know that. If you can get back to me. I will get back to you. Cuba we see the attacks on your personnel. You acknowledge, cuba is a totalitarian country. Theres not much that goes on in the island that the government doesnt know about it. Cuba was directly responsible for this or at least know or knew who is responsible . Thats a reasonable suspicion. I dont know that. Its a reasonable suspicion. I say that on the basis of the fact that my family, my wife is cuban american. Her uncle was a political prisoner for 27 years. I can only imagine what she would infer about the regime. She told me last night they know. As a United States official i dont know that. What are we going to do we cant let this happen and not doing anything. We have two issues. We have first and foremost the health and safety of our employees and their families down there to make sure they are protected and cared for. And second we have our policy with respect to the government of cuba. Our expectations for them to comply with the convention and if theyre not to do something about it. I hope you guys do. We need a response to this. Obviously get the facts and dont do anything rash. This is unacceptable. My final question is as we look at the north korea situation how does the state department view kim jong un in terms of his rationality . Does he appreciate a response if he were to do some of the things theyre talking about . Hes a young, plump, immature kid. And we dont have as much information it seems on him and because of the nature of the regime. How do you view kim jong un . I defer to the intelligence agencies on their assessment of the leader of north korea. Were approaching this as were dealing with a government and assuming theyre rational. And that the Pressure Campaign that the secretary of state has led the significant Pressure Campaign will influence them. Through the pressure thats being brought to bear by the United States but by china russia and other members of the u. N. Who are applying the u. N. Security Council Resolutions. Well do all we can to give diplomacy a chance to resolve the problem. We have a meeting with the south Korean Foreign minister at 3 well get to everyone here. Well keep it to five minutes. Dr. Ammi berra. Thank you, secretary. I appreciate your candor actually. And thinking about where we are right now thinking about some of the comments of some my colleagues, one of the responses in response to mr. Connelly from virginia, again i think i heard you correctly, in your own understanding moral right now within the department is not high, is that correct . Correct. Thats obviously a challenge. In the results of your own survey, which you have referenced a number of times, those findings suggest many of the employees dont feel the support of the president and secretary. Am i interpreting those findings correctly . Im sorry, could you say that again . In response to your own survey and published reports many of the employees of the state department themselves dont feel the support of the president or the secretary. I dont know that was specifically addressed in the survey. Id say that when i say that morale isnt high, theres uncertainty. And that causes uncertainty leaves people unsettled. We need to address that. We could surmise if you work for a department and were told question ear going to cut your budget 30 , that u dont feel support. That you feel im not discounting there were also you have referenced outdated i. T. Redundancies. Duplicative processes. So were all for trying to improve efficiency. But again, widely reported surveys, you know, wall street journal, others suggest that many of the employees of the department dont feel that support from the white house. Mr. Kissinger asked a question, again, and i want to make sure i heard this correctly. Less than 50 of the under secretary positions are currently filled . By confirmed president ial appointees, yes. Mr. Rohrabacher asked a question and suggested that nearly 50 countries currently dont have an aresponsibilitied or confirmed ambassador. Im not certain about that statistic. Id have to get back to you. If they dont, they have a chargee performing the duties and functions. Again, there is an urgency to get those ambassador positions filled. We need to fill the positions as quickly as possible. Do we have a south Korean Ambassador . We do not. Do you have a nomination . We have an individual in the vetting process. But the nomination hasnt been announced yet. Do we have an ambassador to jordan . I dont know where that person stands in the process. My understanding is currently we dont. We dont have an ambassador now, but i thought the question this is one of the closest allies. A country that is stressed by 1. 5 million to 2 million refugees and theyre struggling. We have to do everything we can to support jordan. Do we have an ambassador to qatar . No. We have a chargee. Do we have an ambassador to saudi arabia . For all these reasons you suggest, congressman, we need to have these positions filled. Theres a lot going on in the middle east right now. We need the folks on the ground representing us. I want to say that the career people who are in some of the positions will be filled by career people. But the state department through its Foreign Service officers who are standing up and doing their jobs are filling in either as act organize as chargees, so our work is being done. It would be better done if we had those positions filled. Absolutely, and i dont want to disparage our state Department Employees around the world. Theyre doing a phenomenal job under trying circumstances. Theyre stepping up. Theyre representing the values of the United States. They are true patriots. We have to get the positions filled. Would you say the hold up currently is within the state department or at the white house . Both. So and the senate. What can can we do as members of the Foreign Affairs committee to help speed up this process . Many of us travel and visit with folks. Were sensing we need these positions filled. What can we do to push the urgency . Well, for this committee, im not sure what i would recommend other than your support for our nominees that we have going forward. We can get the nominees through the pipeline up to the Foreign Relations committee. But to the extent there will be support for the nominees and get them confirmed as quickly as possible. Lets get the positions filled. Right. Chairman of the Homeland Security committee. Thank you, mr. Chairman and mr. Sullivan, secretary. Congratulations on your confirmation. Thank you. Welcome to your first hearing. I want to touch on Cyber Security. I deal a lot with that on Homeland Security issues. And i think the state department is going to be more and more involved in this area. As i see the espionage coming out of foreign adversary nationstates, cyber warfare. There are no rules of the road. There are no treaties or other things agreed to by nationstates. Would nato apply in the event of a cyber attack. There are questions raised about cyber that i think the state dapt as cyber becomes a bigger and bigger issue, state department will have quite a role in this arena. I want to ask you about what envision the few which are to be on the issue at state . Theres an office of cyber coordination for cyber issues being sort of down played. With another office. I want to thank chairman royce and engle, Ranking Member for introducing this cyber diplomacy act of 2017 which would essentially codify into a law an office of cyber issues headed by an ambassador reporting directly to the undersecretary for political affairs. Im not sure i want to put you on the spot with the bill itself, but can you give me your thoughts on the direction moving forward . I have spoken to the secretary about this. We have had a number of conversations about the need to elevate this issue within the state department. Cyber broadly defined not only the cyber defense, but our cyber diplomacy and interaction with the department of defense on cyber issues. My expectation is that part of our redesign we will elevate to a Senate Confirmed level the role and well have to figure out what the title is and where it figures in the bureaucracy but our commitment is to elevate and provide the appropriate resources for leadership on this essential issue. Thats excellent. This is no longer just a fbi homeland, nsa issue. Its a state department issue. Im very pleased to hear that. Secondly on as i look at hot spots and particularly in africa. These fragile states out of destable eeization destabilization, rises insurgencies and terrorists, safe havens and vacuums. What will the state department be doing to help stabilize this destabilization . It seems a very good use of the money rather than deal with the terrorism insurgencies after the fact. Ill give you a current example about our planning for a postisis syria. As we defeat i us is in raqqah, as we move further east in syria, the state department usaid, the u. S. Government, our allies and partners need to fill in, provide the basic services water, food, hygiene to get refugees back into their homes, to try to rehabilitate these communities. This isnt nation building. This is basic human necessity to try to address the calamity thats been visited on these cities and these regions by an occupation by isis. Thats a role thats where the state department, and our at lies need to step up. Defense department and our allies and partners are defeating isis we have to be prepared to step in after the battle is won and take the ball from there. Very good to hear that. Thats an excellent approach. Last ill make a quick statement. The Global Development lab i have been a strong support ere of that in the past. I ask you take a look at that in terms of state department support. Be happy to. Thank you, congressman. Thank you, sir. Brad snyder of illinois. E. Thank you, and deputy secretary, thank you for your long service to our nation and indulging us here today in this hearing and your candor in your answers. Were here talking about this restructuring and restructuring i think everyone agree any time we can find efficiency we should pursue those and pursue those aggressively. Restructuring whether in business or state department should follow a strategic structure. Strategy should follow from our mission and vision. What would you broadly state define as the mission of state department . The mission of the state department is to in promotion of American Democratic values to implement u. S. Foreign policy through active diplomacy. Within that secretarys vision of how to go about doing that in the world we face in 2017 and looking forward . Wow, thats a big question. We have got several layers of challenges. We have countries, regions where there are imminent National Security threats to the United States. Whether its isis in syria, al qaeda the taliban. The network in south asia which are obvious priorities to protect the United States. To protect our National Security. But beyond that, throughout the globe, there are areas where as s en raised elsewhere in the hearing where we want to be acve to make sure that were on the lookout for that next iraq and syria, for that next mindanao in the philippines so we are being proactive, we have people on the ground who are able to spot issues, spot problems before they become National Security threats to the United States. Thats one of the key jobs at the state department. That as a goal. Promoting u. S. Interests around the world has to be a goal. I think it was my colleague from illinois pointed out we didnt have those feet on the ground, the eyes in the community in afghanistan and paid some dire consequences because of that. Yet as we talk about this reorganization it seems the emphasis is on cost cutting, on the efficiencies. How does the reargs specifically fit within the goals underlying the strategy that you just laid out . So a lot of when we talk about efficiencies and effectiveness, much of the part of it is the budget and the cost savings. Part of it is also empowering our men and women in the Foreign Service and the Civil Service for redundant bureaucratic processes or bureaucratic processes that dont serve our people well. I have heard complaints since the day i arrived on the bureaucracies, the women and men transferred from post to post, thaw their bills are processed, how they do it, making their lives easier, as they should be, is in their service to our country is one of the things, when we talk about effectiveness and cost savings, eliminating redundancies. Absolutely. You describe a diplomatic corps, develop officers around the world who feel empowered. There was a business book and clearly from the reorganization plan theres many lessons taken from business here. One of my best favorite examples of how to have a good workforce is you esm power them, give them awe townmy, allow them to master their skills and let them operate with a clear purpose. Im not sure i see this from there. We touched on the morale issue. Thats one of my concerns. If we can present a narrative to the people at the state department and American People of what are we trying to achieve and how this better achieves it, that would be great. What im saying is this would be more of an emphasis on Cost Reduction and slashing than it is on pursuing and protecting and promoting our interests around the world. Let me take in the limited time i have take you to some other questions. One of the concerns many of us have arehe president ss tweets. Specifically relatin Foreign Affairs. Specifically as it relatesf recent moments to north korea. How is the state department managing that . How do we not get ourselves into to an unintended situation with north korea . Both secretary tillerson and secretary mattis have made it clear diplomacy is our prime objective in addressing the north korean problem and denuclearizing the north korean peninsula. Secretary made clear were not looking for regime change in north korea. Were not hooking to cross the 38th parallel. Diplomacy is our principle means of addressing this problem. General mcmaster and secretary mattis for that matter said that this is a regime that has weapons that can threaten the United States. We need to be prepared with a military response. But thats not our first resort. Our first and principle objective is to use american diplomacy, american pressure through our allies and partners and countries like china and russia to bring this situation to a rational conclusion and denuclearize the korean peninsula, which is everyones goal and the purpose of those u. N. Security Council Resolutions. Thank you. I agree with you diplomacy has to bhe front of that to make sure we have a good solution to this crisis. I yield back. Thank mr. Schneider for going on our dell vags to south korea last month. Mr. Tom garrett of virginia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would ask if the diplomacy is as effective a mechanism to effect change where other options are publicly and clearly not on the table. By other options i mean kinetic options. With respect to north korea . Sure. I guess the suggestion that i would submit for your comment quickly is that diplomatic efforts have a greater likelihood of success if there are some teeth to the possibility that there might be efforts that are more kinetic in nature. Correct. General mcmaster and secretary made it clear. I want to make sure its clear to anyone watching at clear to anyone watching at home e or perhaps in pyongyang or anywhere else in the world, that we want a diplomatic solution, but while the lives of americans and am lies are threatened, all options are on the table and that needs to be clear. Sorry for the soliloquy. Ive don a little bit of research on you and i find that you like myself made the mistake of pursuing a legal education. The only thing that you might do that would be looked upon being a lawyer is perhaps being a mberf thepotti. Im kidding. Maybe. I wonder if youre familiar with the u. N. Security Council Resolution 1929 from 2010 with regards to iranian Ballistic Missile and nuclear active pi. I am. Youre aware the wording of the resolution was iran shall not undertake and i stress shall not because that has meaning to lawyers and diplomat igs, et cetera, the testing of Ballistic Missiles that might be married to a nuclear program. It is phrased in the imperative, they shall not. Two, in 2015, the u. N. Security council form and the jcpoa which i of referred to not to be cute but based on whole hearted upon as the jcpos, which says iran is called upon not to undertake these activities. Are you familiar with that wording . I believe so. Yes. In 2010. Wording was shall not. In 2015 it was iran is called upon not to. You said earlier that the u. N. Had said iran was in Technical Compliance with the j kreshgs poa but violated the spirit of the jcpoa. When the wording is iran called upon not to opposed to shall not, does that make your jb more difficult as it relates to creating a circumstance where iran doesnt enhance Nuclear Capability and the ability to deliver such weapons . It certainly undeuts the argument that iran is proscribed from the Ballistic Missile activity that its engaged in. This is rhetorical. I wonder what sort of attorneys and diplomats hammered out language that was far more permissive than the precedent language and what the intent was or if it was complete incompetence. That was rhetorical. I want to take a moment to draw attention if youll grant me the leave to the gentleman and ladies in the room in yellow coats and those not wearing yellow e cotss coats which are emblazoned with free iran and the perpetual presence of these individuals in the committee to stand for a free iranian nation where individuals are empowered to make decisions for themselves without fear of rhettry pugs or a regime through the irc and the qods force ready to take the lives of their brothers and sisters. I want to applaud them and say perhaps one day well see the fruit of your diligence and per sis sense tense. I apologize for aside. Its important recognize you are always here. It matters to chairman royce and members of this committee. I get frustrated as a member of the body that sometimes i feel like things dont move quickly enough. But we will achieve an outcome that is just and fair for good people across the planet that flies in t face of the totalitarian and radical objectives of those who seek to oppress human bein. Thank you. Finally, i would submit that i believe that the application of appropriately spend funds on foreign aid might if properly done save money on things like bullets and bombs and rockets. I would ask if you would concur that foreign aid has a role in peace and stability throughout the world . I would join secretary mattis and agree wholeheartedly. So i appreciate that. I think some of the rhetoric in questioning here to for indicated that money is the sole and peaceful outcome, i would ask you is the intent of te are organization simply to perform our job more efficiently and as better stewards of tax dollars and not to gut our foreign aid efforts which would i think meet with bipartisan resistance from this committee and others. That is exactly the purpose. It is not to gut the foreign aid. I thank you for your efforts and applaud you. Look forward to working with you. Thank you. Lois frankel of florida. Good morning. Thank you for being here. I thank you for your service. I have great admiration for those who serve in the state department. I think its a very important function of our government. And just my colleagues have done a good job in covering a lot of issues. I want to say that ill start by saying i think reorganization is part of the bureaucracy. Every bureaucracy reorganizes. Thats part of bureaucracy. It doesnt make sense that before you would reorganize or go through the process there would be a suggestion of a onethird cut in the budget. Ill put that aside for now. I want to talk about the women of the world. All right . And heres what im very concerned about. Im not going to i wont be accusatory. Ill try to be diplomatic. Thats rare. But listen, i believe that the actions that this administration is taken is systemically going to add great suffering to women and families around the globe. And i just want to mention a couple of them. I think right off the bat of course is the elimination for funding for global Family Planning and reproductive health, eliminating funding for International Organizations and programs which support voluntary contributions to the several programs in the u. N. System. Prohibiting contributions to the unfpa which works not only with Womens Health but obviously Child Marriage and expanding the global gag rule, the old one wasnt good enough. I could go on and on. The proposed billion dollar decrease in Global Health programs which will disproportionately harm women and girls. Now, i do have a question out of this. I know youre waiting. There is an office of global womens issues and there is a proposal to downgrade it i think its a downgrade. Youll have to add tell me if it is, which is to downgrade the office of global womens issues from the secretarys office to one that instead reports to the undersecretary for civilian democracy and human rights. Can you explain the difference that will be . Is there plans to name an ambassador at large to lead the office . Those are my first two questions. Why dont you answer tse first. Sure. Yes, that in fact i have interviewed candidates for that position. It will be filled promptly. And it is the proposal that was sent up to this committee and congress on moving the office. The office is going to remain as is with the same structure and budget. Its moving it from the office of the secretary to a bureau under the undersecretary as you mention. We believe thats actually strengthens the office. Whats happened with the special envoys, almost 70 of them. They all report to the secretary. For the secretary to have 70 individuals reporting to him he doesnt have the time to dedicate to each and every one of them, all of them important. With this office, which is important not just to the secretary but to the president , if its got the support of the state department bureaucracy the bureau in which it will be located and i think the most important feature of this office is the person we nominate. The office is going to be as good as the person we nominate. Thats really the key issue. Okay. Thank you. Im glad to hear that. I want to say this as emphatically as ican. Theres no reorganization in the state department that is a substitute for enabling women around this world to be in control of their own bodies and to have reproductive health. So, that is the message i want to say. I think this administration is on the wrong path. Its going to cause a lot of harm not only to the health of women and their families but to the Economic Security of their own country, because when women cannot be in control of their own bodies, they dont work and they dont produce for the economy. With that i yield back. I have a question i have to ask on behalf of the committee. We need to hear about the redesign time line. When will you be coming back to the committee with the legislative reform proposal . Well, we have started that process, mr. Chairman, with the proposals on specialen joys. My expectation is that as the redesign goes forward we will be coming as theyre ready with proposals to this committee. My hope and expectation is that all of the major reforms that were going to propose will be done by the end of the calendar year. Thank you. Mrtom garrett will be presiding as chairman and mr. Espiat as Ranking Member from here on out. Thank you. Thank you. We now recognize representative norma torrez of california for five minutes. E. Thank you, deputy secretary. Congratulations. You are now four months and two days into your position. Congratulations. Modernization is a good thing for any government agency, bu bureaucra bureaucracy, whatever you want to call it. I fully support giving the state department the technology it needs to keep our nation abroad safe. At a time when we are facing serious threat from north korea, russia and elsewhere i firmly believe we need a state department that is fully equipped to keep us safe. Unfortunately this administration has followed a path huge budget cuts leaving senior positions unfilled that has weakened the state department and put our National Security at risk. So i am looking forward as my colleagues to seeing that redesign time line and how specifically and knowledgeably these cuts are going to be implemented. One of the most significant threats to our National Security is the prevalence of corruption across the globe. Threats to our homeland including terrorism and Drug Trafficking often arise in countries where corruption thrives. Corrupt actors also pose a real danger to the political and Economic System when they seek to launder funds in u. S. Banks, lobby our governme to advance their own interest, and even seek to interfere in our eltion. This past week i traveled to guatemala as part of the House Democracy Partnership delegation. Guatemala is currently in the middle of a crisis that is the result of political elites trying to protect themselves from a u. S. Supported anticorruption drive. Im very worried that if the progress we have made in guatemala is turned back, it could have very Significant Impact once again at our border. How will the reorganization process help state become more effective in combatting corruption and what steps are you taking to ensure that state coordinates more effectively with other agencies including the department of justice to ensure that we are protected from the influence of foreign corruption . Youre absolutely right, congresswoman. Corruption is a serious problem. Its a serious problem National Security problem for us in afghanistan. Corruption in afghanistan is an enormous problem. The Afghan Government acknowledges it. The issue you raised in guatemala, thats a very serious problem. The ray of hope i see in guatemala is the judicial decision that reversed the president s decision on removing the head of that commission. There is some hope that the rule of law will triumpther i cannot hang my hat if i wore one on hope, sir so, i specifically want to know what steps we are taking to ensure that the state department is more effectively coordinating with other agencies to ensure we know what is happening and that we take steps to prevent these governments from influencing our government. Well, we are working closely with the Justice Department and with other Government Agencies to in guatemala in particular to address this problem. We have made that our position clear that the United States doesnt support the actions that the president took. And there will be consequences. Im going to be a little bit critical of our folks down there because i think that they were not fully informed or were being very evasive with our members at disclosing everything that has been happening in the region. We are at in a place where there is no going back. Either we move forward there were 200,000 people demonstrating in the streets of guatemala when we landed. 200,000 people that could be seen from the air. If we dont continue to advance support the people there and ensuring this government in guatemala, the current government, understands that we will not stand for their e lootist corruption behavior, were going to be in serious trouble, sir. Were going to see more children come to the u. S. And i have spent the last three years working to ensure that that doesnt happen, that they can see a future for themselves. I understand that youve only been at this position for four months. But the first hour on your job i expect everybody to know what is going on and be prepared for the job. Recent years, usaid has made significant progress in monitoring and evaluating its programming. As you work to more closely align our Development Efforts with our Foreign Policy goals, how will you ensure the gains the usaid has made in this area are not diluted . Maybe you can write back or maybe answer some of the letters i have written in response to what is happening in the region. My time is up. Ill yield back. Thank you, maam. I would recognize representative raid ra knows a ka lot of new york for five minutes. Thank you, congressman garrett. Deputy secretary, thank you so much for your patience. Long time in answering our questions. Were rally thankful for your patience. I want to find out what is the given the current storms that have hit the caribbean hard, what is the extent that Usaids Office of foreign disaster assistant what are they doing and what is currently in place in these small nations that have been barbuda, the dominican republic, that have been hard hit by both hurricanes irma and maria in some cases . The dart teams at usaid are important tools for u. S. Government both with respect to the hurricanes that have hit had the caribbean and the earthquakes in mexico. Aid is really stretched to the limit at this point in its capacity in dealing with all of these horrible natural disasters that occurred simultaneously. Its a big challenge for us. Of course we have in our own puerto rico enormous problems we have to as a u. S. Government address. A. I. D. Is working on this with all of its available resources. Its a big challenge. In terms of funding, have you al kalted how much money has been allocate in response to these natural disasters so far . I will have to get you the exact figure. I will undertake to do that right after this hearing, sir. You mention puerto rico. Obviously the island that has been hard hit the most is puerto rico. A caribbean katrina. Fema has been also asking for help. Theyre really depleted. Their resources have been depleted. Is there any way you can team up with fema to help puerto rico and the u. S. Territories . We have sent teams down over the weekend both to assist the u. S. Government effort and to assist our at a timeepartmen colleagues who work in puerto rico. So for puerto rico though unlike Foreign Countries this is a these are u. S. Citizens in trouble. This is a u. S. Government problem not just a state department problem. So were doing all we can to support our colleagues and fema. Dhs is coordinated by the white house. Its an enormous challenge, congressman, as you know as well as anyone. Having said that, having heard that from you, we often assist u. S. Citizens for being evacuated from caribbean countries. But they are right now currently 20,000 Puerto Ricans that are waiting on a waiting list to be evacuated or to leave the commonwealth. Is there anything that could be done to help them . They are u. S. Citizens although they are in a u. S. Territory. They are waiting to come either to the United States or other places in the world where they may have families or seek the e help they need right now. Or medical emergencies for example. And get off the island. There have been problems as i understand it with the airport and airports. And im not as familiar because its u. S. Domestic territory, but were doing all we can at state department to support our colleagues at dhs coordinated by the white house in trying to address these problems. Will you be able to help them evacuate from the island . Well do all we can to assist. Thank you. Finally, with regard to the medical needs in puerto rico, do you have a Spanish Speaking personnel . Is there assistant from the Pan American Health organization to puerto rico going there . The second phase usually of these disasters is Health Issues, zika, other kinds of diseases that may spurt up because of stagnated water and the flooding. Do you have any plans for medical assistance with the help of the agents . Just as we did with the original hurricane that hit houston, state Department People went down, were mobilized as part of the response by dhs and fema. My expectation is that wwi do the same in puerto rico as soon as its were able to get people on the island. And to not expose them to danger. But to do all we can to help. My time is up. Thank you. I thank the gentleman from e new york for adhering to the time limits and i thank the deputy secretary for his time and the department for engaging with this committee in the process. I would ask that upon your return you provide information focusing on how we are not slashing foreign aid but instead trying to be more efficient and more effective stewards. Thats something you have heard a repeated call. With that, we stand adjourned. Thank you. This weekend, lectures in history, Gary Gallagher on the legacy of the civil war. The loyal white citizenry and africanamericans and former confederates have very different takes on the war as they went forward after an ma tox. They embraced versions of the war that suited their purposes. Sunday at 10 00 a. M. , president bill clinton marking the 60th anniversary of the integration of little rock high school. I wanted to say you did 60 years, take a victory lap, put on your dancing shoes, have a good time. But instead i have to say you got to put on your marching boots. And lead us again. Then at 7 00 p. M. Eastern on oral histories, we continue our series on photojournalists with an interview with darg heikes. We always tried to be anyplace we were working, especially the white house, to have the optimum lens in your hand and the maximum amount of film whenever something happens. Because somebody in just a splekd it could be there and youve got it and the person standing next to you does or doesnt have it. At 9 00 p. M. Eastern, hamilton playwright and actor Lynn Manuel Miranda accepts the u. S. Capitol historical societys 2017 freedom award. When youre a theater kid, you make friends from different grapds and social groups. You learn to work hard to create something greater than sum of your parts and just for the sake of making something great. You learn to trust your passion and let it lead the way. Without haw humanities and arts programs i wouldnt be standing here and without Alexander Hamilton and the countless other immigrant who is wilt ability this country its very probable very few of us would be here either. American history tv, all weekend, every weekend, only on cspan3. The former chair and ceo of equif equifax, richard smith, testifies before the House Energy Commerce Committee Tuesday about the companys data breach. Well have live coverage here on cspan3 starting at 10 00 eastern, also online at cspan. Org, or on the free cspan radio app. For as long as i live i will never forget that in no other country on earth is my story even possible. Its a story that hasnt made me the most conventional of candidates, but it is a story that has sered into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts, that out of many we are truly one. For the past 30 years, the Video Library is your free resource for politics, congress, and washington public affairs, so whether it happened 30 years ago or 30 minutes ago, find it in cspans Video Library at cspan. Org. Cspan where history unfolds daily. Attorney general Jeff Sessions spoke at Georgetown University law school this week about freedom of speech on college campuses. He also criticized professional athletes for not standing during the national anthem. Thank you very much, professor barnett