Transcripts For CSPAN3 Deputy Secretary John Sullivan Testifies On State Department Restructuring 20171002

We ask you all to take your seats if you 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 in u. S. A. Id would better promote our National Security and our many other interests around the world. So i have welcomed the administrations undertaking. Secretary state Rex Tillerson has started a process here as those that state will tell you where hes focusing on listening to the diplomats and listening to the employees. Our Foreign Service officers. I think this is very commendable. He has sought feedback from the bottom up. Many employees, he reports, have asked, and i think this speaks volumes, theyve asked for more responsibility and in turn more accountability for their performance. They also want better training in a modern it infrastructure. And i think they deserve these tools and we would be all better offer 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 has focussed 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 consrntz 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 that our diplomacy and assistance improves our National Security, improves our economic well being for a relatively small amount of money. Consider this committees word to strengthen rogue regimes like iran or north korea, it takes skilled, properly resourced diplomacy to build International Support for sanctions enforcement. In 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, youre only feeding them and sending the check, the foreign currency to the regime. That money is going into the a Nuclear Weapons program. That has to end because of our sanctions. That has to be explained by our Foreign Service officers or working with us to counter hezbollah or granting our Health Specialists access to halt an emerging pandemic in its tracks as was done in west africa with the ebola virus. Robust diplomacy is also needed in conflict zones to defeat isis and 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 in consulates. Where we depart we create a void for unfriendly actors to step in and promote interest 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 last 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. Angles opening remarks. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for calling this hearing and mr. Deputy secretary thank you. Thank you for your service and your time this morning. I was grateful you hosted the chairman and myself yesterday to discuss your reorganization effort and theres no doubt that state department should be as effective as pallable. Seize there are plenty of good ideas to theyre working in a bipartisan way i believe there was an announcement of a 32 cut to our International Affairs budget. I know we discussed it yesterday and i will try to ask you to repeat some of the things you said that more optimistic about that. I worry about starting with the budget and doing things in reverse. To me it makes more sense to lay out a vision for what modernization looks like, clear priorities to bring in our diplomats and other experts and then determine the right budget to get the job done. I hope in your testimony and afterwa afterwards, youll clarify why the decision was made to start with the dollar figure and work backwards from there. I worry about the reorganization process. I wanted to be more transparent and collaborative. I dont think it goes against anything you told us yesterday. The department has called this an employeedriven process and i have no doubt they have totally honorable intentions but i understand those involved are not allowed to discuss the plans involved with their colleagues and have kept tight control over documents related to the plan. The administration committed that there would be consultation with Congress Every step of the way and obviously we have more questions. So i hope we can talk about some of that today. And overall i must ask what is the goal of the process. Whats the administrations vision for American Foreign policy . For americas role in the world . For how the state department fits into that vision and how the process will make the state department more effective. The only consistent answer weve gotten is the department is finding efish aficiencies and iy when they talk about efficiency that its not a code for budget cuts. Cost savings that undermine effectiveness make america less safe and as the department focuses on redesign i worry the critical day to day work is suffering. Far too many senior positions remain vacant, depriving the department of leadership and making it harder for allies and adversaries alike to know who to call and whos calling the shots in washington. So i wish you could explain some of that today. Overseas diplomats jobs are getting harder because they dont know if establishing Foreign Policy will be reversed. Morale as the department continues to suffer as senior career officials flock to the exits. Uninterested in the input and expertise of our most seasoned professionals. Taken together, americas credibility around the world is wobbling. Our Global Leadership seems to be wayning and most importantly without a strong functional state department with a clear Foreign Policy vision, increasingly at risk. And let me be clear i support modernizing the state department. I want to see it leaning American Foreign policy. Civilian leadership that center of National Security policy is integral to our democracy at home and our leadership abroad. For Years Congress has sat on the sidelines when it comes to the state department and what do we have to show for it . Personnel shortages make it harder to address crisis or allow for 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. The expense of diplomacy, the expense of 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 do nide to modernize the department. Thats why ive consulted staff and other experts to be in thinking about what states should look like the next 40 years. I would value the imput as we move forward and again mr. Deputy secretary, i look forward to your testimony and hope you shed additional light on this process. And before i yell back, i ask unanimous consent to place in the record the documents dealing with the state department and u. S. A. Id. First is a report about modernizing foreign assistance. 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 service for Global Development. A practical vision for u. S. Development reform. One is from Refugees International called honoring a process in government reorganizization. And finally calling on the state department to structure staff and resources for the Refugee Bureau War Crimes Office and global womens issues office. So i thank you, mr. Chairman and yield back. Subject to the lengths limitations in our rules, without objection we will put those reports include themnt. 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. Co chaired its National Security practice and previous to that served in senior positions at the Justice Department and then at the Defense Department and the commerce department. Without objection, the witnesss full prepared statements will be made part nof record. Members are go having to five calendar days to submitical any questions or extraneus materials they want to submit for the record here and we would ask deputy secretary sullivan if you would please sums are your remarks. Then well go to questions. Thank you. Thank you, chairman, royce. Thank you all for inviting me secretary sullivan, lets make sure you push that and get it very close right there. Perfect. Thank you, mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee. Im thankful to be here today to discuss the redesign of state department. We appreciate the interest the committee has shown in becoming more efelfective in serving the American People. On secretary tillersons first day committed to harnessing all the Institutional Knowledge of our work force to do that. So he went straight to those who know best, our state department and u. S. A. Id 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 feedback from more than 35,000 employees, nearly half of our entire global work force. Hundreds more took part in inperson interviews. We also set up state and u. S. Id for staff to provide regular input. Weve received more than 1400 s submissions to those portals. After hearings from so many of our own colleagues, we convened a Cross Section of our rising leaders and seasoned professionals to create a rising reform plan. I want to stress its not an empty slogan. The secretary wanted employees to drive this prauocess from th beginning so the department and u. S. A. Id can better serve them, even as they serve the country. The executive committee i chair is composed of a balance of u. S. A. Id and state department leaders. Similarly the groups that drafted the proposals that fed into the reform plan were comprised almost entirely of reform staff in the u. S. And abroad. 72 of work stream members were working level employees. Those that deal with the day to day level of business and diplomacy. They proved to be invaluable. The resulting Agency Reform plan incorporates suggestions and feedback from all over the world. We submitted this plan earlier this month, consistent with the president s executive order, 137 al 81. Which calls for effectiveness in accountability for each federal agency. Let me share with you a few key features of our plan. First, we need streamline the policy creation process and optimize and realign our global foot print. State and u. S. A. Id need to be nimble. That means taking imputs from the field, turning them into evidencebased recommendations and executing them as quickly as possible. We will use the same approach to assess our physical foot print around the world to insure our missions abroad align with our Foreign Policy priorities. Second, we must maximize the impact of accountability. We need strengthen planning among the 20plus agencies to provide some type of foreign assistance to make sure our Foreign Policy goals are focussed, integrated and supportive. Third, we need implement a service to reduce operational costs and redundancies, increase efficiency and improve Service Quality for our personnel around the globe. We want to reduce red tape and bureaucratic hurdles by making them do what they were intended to do. Support our professionals as thad change posts and serve our country all over the world. Fourth, we need empower and retain a 21st Century Work Force by optimizing our hr support. Too often employees are bogged down trying to navigate broken processies. We bring hr to a more strategic role to attract aplore diverse work force and invest more in our most valuable assets, our people. We need 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 cyber systems. By modernizing our technology, we can save money in the long run and facilitate better Decision Making in the future. The redesign provides a new foundation for our diplomacy and development professionals. It will also generate significant savings as we increase deficiencies across the department. The proposals will save the american tax pay arminimum of 5 billion over the next five years with a goal of 10 billion. Some changes will require further guidance and approval. Still 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 in congress before any actions are taken. We are working to move quickly on the redesign. The reforms of the department can implement internally will be rolled out as soon as possible after consultation with congress. For example in the coming months we hope to move the state department towards a Cloud Computing platform and increase the number of Foreign Service family members we employ abroad. Let me emphasize throughout this process i commit to consulting closely with this committee. Your input as always is most important as we move forward. Therefore, im grateful for the opportunity to speak to you this morning about our reform plan and hear your feedback and id 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 are bust engagement before you seek to close a diplomatic post because our members have decades of experience and strong views on this. Absolutely, mr. Chairman. I appreciate that and let me emphasize why i think this is key. Just to follow through on the legislation that we pass in this committee, for example the legislation we passed on sanctions in north korea. I explained a little bit of this but our respauonse to that thre is to have our diplomats state they have to cut ties with that rogue regime or suffer the consequences of it. Its our diplomats who have these relationships across the world who follow up and explain directly how serious the United States takes this. There are eyes and ears. In northern nigeria, for example, boko haram arrived seemingly out of nowhere. We have no diplomatic presence in northern nigeria. 140 million people. Because we closed our consulate in the 1990s. The Previous Administration looked and once closed theyre veryense pencive and difficult to open. Nor in the case of the conversations i had with the governor of that state where now boko haram holds sway. Who told me money was flooding into the area from the gulf states. Setting up at that time to recruit. He told me about one across the street from where he got his education. But the new one. Young boys were wearing bin laden tshirts and he explained 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 it 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 in washington d. C. And in san francisco. Will the department consider an 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 veteran group to find out better ways to increase our diversity which is a key goal of the secretary as you know. Yes. And i just in my opinion think that if you were to deploy a strategy and it was well understood we were going to do this at military bases and those interested in serving the Foreign Service would have that option. In terms of the secretarys commitment to increase efforts to higher veterans and this effort on diversity. This would be a helpful way to make that happen. And i appreciate your willingness. With that said, let me go to mr. Angle for his questions. Thank you, mr. 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 its very important. So one thing we discussed and id be grateful if you could reafirm it today is that they will respond in a timely fashion for request for documents and information that come from myself or the chairman or our staff. Absolutely. Congressman, angle. Thank you. I wonder if you would clarify like you did yesterday regarding the necessity of a chairmans letter for certain types of information so were clear about that. Surcertainly. 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 to phone calls, request for documents. A request from this committee is a high priority for the state department. You have my commitment on that and if we fall down on the job, please let me know and ill remedy that situation. Thank you. I appreciate that. And secretary tillerson stated that and when i went to him again, he reafirmed that commitment. So im thankful youre reafirming that as well. Quote we will eliminate overlap, set priorities and fund only the work that supports these priorities. Well empower our people to make decisions and hold them accountable for the results. This begins with the chiefs and missions in our embassies around the world. Well give them the tools they need to over sea the work of all u. S. Government agencieagencies. It sounds basic but its the kind of change that will help us attack the full potential of our civilian power. Does this sound like it aligned with secretary tillersons vision . Theres a report and im quoting from the 2010 qddr. Secretary tillerson recognizes the need for modernization at the state department. But wrone of the criticisms is that it failed to meet 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. Because these ideas were not linked with resource said, they didnt lead to the transformation of the department in the ways we hoped they would. With the secretarys reorganization makes this state department more effective, youll find enthusiastic support on both sides of the aisle. But how can the Administration Carry out real or lasting reforms rkreform s when youve tied your hands with respect to the budget . As we discussed yesterday, one of the key goals of the redesign is to empower our men and women the chiefs in the field implementing Foreign Policy. Thats one of our overriding goals thats been clear from the secretarys first day on the job. The budget process started before secretary tillerson was confirmed and took office. He came on board. I followed several months later. We had a budget prosacy already underway. The redesign effort as ive said in other contexts, the secretary would have been taking this, even if wed have a budget increase. Its important to be good stewards of the taxpayer money and there will be areas where as we go forward, particularly with respect to i. T. Infrastructure where we will, in the future, need investments and the secretary has made commitment to the department and i will repeat it here to this committee. Where we need more resources to do our jobs more effectively, we will seek them. It is one area i predict we will need assistance in the future. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. We go to chairman of the subsmitty on europe and urasia. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. How many people do you have working at the state department . Whats your pay roll . Praksly 75,000 employees world wide. How moaany again . 75,000 world wide. And how many of those what is the number of people that a president political employees brought in by the president , how many spaces are there for those . How Many Political appointees are there . Well, there are approximately 190 of those roughly 30 are political appointees. In other words theyre not Foreign Service officers. Then there are divisions under secretaries, myself, assistant secretaries. There wds be fewer than 100 of those. And of those hundred, how many of those have been are now filled . How many of the political appointees are sitting now and have their authority . Those who are now in Office Actually at the state department or in their ambas dorial post t would be fewer than 20 and thats a rough guess on my part. We have 30 nominees that are pending before the Senate Foreign relshzs committee. 30 nominees. And thats for . For both appointments at the state department, for example under secretary for manager. Assistant secretary for European Affairs and another category of individuals who are undergoing their Background Investigation and filling out their Financial Disclosure forms and being reviewed by the it Foreign Relations committee. That would probably be another 20 or 30 i would say of those. So youre saying about 50 people that could have been appoint fwhied president are not now in their positions. So when we say elections count in this democracy, we have 50 people now who slots are being taken by career people until they get there or actually are there any appointees from the last administration in those positions . To my knowledge there are no political appointees filling those positions. There are however career Foreign Service officers filling those positions. All right. And mr. Chairman, i think across the board we have seen were already into october and the president of the United States if our election needed anything, the president has to have his 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 never seen is that throughout our government, not Just State Department but elsewhere, we have these seats that are vacant that should be president ial appointees. Let me ask you about ngos and their relationship to the state department. Do we actually provide services for nongovernmental organizations that are active in Different Countries . I believe among other things we provide Financial Assistance to ngos that in turn provide assistance, whether it be Life Sustaining food, warter, headical assistance. So we will contract with, among others, ngos for those types of services. And are ngos obviously we have our believes and we want we have certain standards but when ngos go into another country, are they required to respect the culture of that country . That would certainly be expected, congressman, yes. So ngos we get complaints. Yrv gotten complaints as ive travelled around from people that theyre actually out trying to change the country and of course we want a certain amount of change but at some point it become as 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 Ranking Member of the subcommittee on asia and the pacific. I want to thank you for your comments about wanting to get information to congress and answer our questions. Rex tillerson, secretary was here june 14th and of course we only get five 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 by october 15th and all of them by october 31st. I think i can do better than that, congressman. It is strictly a coincidence that those responses were provided this morning. So if there are any outstanding, i will make sure i am eagerly awaiting one of those and that is i asked youre submitting a budget that involves drastic cuts and the secretary agreed to say what 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. This reorganization plan i hope is not a cover for filling posts. Others have asked you about that delay. And when it comes to the administration the a administration has a muscular tone. Sanctions are an important part of that. Theyre very labor intensive. Its not just a matter of giving a speech at a rally. Its a matter of convincing a danish or dutch bank or government on this deal or that deal and i would hope that you and the secretary would convince the president that a muscular Foreign Policy require as fully staffed state department. We tom lantos was our chairman here. He pushed forward legislation with the special envoy on desemtism. Can we count on that being filled fairly soon . You have my word on that, congressman. If i dont, its my fault and i assure you it will be filled promptly. Okokay. Now there has been a report of a plan to transfer the bureaus of population refugee and migrations and Counselor Affairs to the department of Homeland Security. Can you put those rumors to rest . I can. Thats not under consideration . Its not. Thats a great answer. We have all around the world kounslets. They report to the embassy and the embassy reports to washington. The one exception is our consulate east jerusalem. Wthe issue of our embassy in israel im not asking the bigger question about moving the embassy to israel. Assuming we keep the facilities we have now, would the consulate report to the embassy which is currently located in tel aviv . I would take that under advisement, congressman. The department not everything that rilaelates to Foreign Policy can be in the state department. I would hope you would provide guidance as you have a process of doing to the broadcasting board of governors about the importance of broadcasting in the regional languages of pakistan. I dont have to tell you this is one of while north korea has one language, pakistan has several and if youre trying to reach the population of this important country with over 100 Nuclear Weapons, you cant just broadcast. And finally im going to ask you to convey to the secretary of the treasury orsistent secretary to tax policy the importance in they have to allocate their time on where to negotiate a tax treaty and theyve been doing it on a paint by numbers basis. Ignoring the geo politics and there are places in the world where having a tax treaty firthers 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 and i hope we can get thet influence to the treasury department. Ill do so. Thank you. Joe wilson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I was very fortunate in august. I was with congressman cook on a delegation. We visited lithuania, republic of georgia and poland. I can report first hand that all the state personnel were first class. They were very competent, capable. They connected with this very important new allies of the United States and so it was just a very uplifting experience in each of those countries. 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 applicants each year but failure to recruit including veterans and those from underrepresented portions of the country. Success of administrations have ledged to increase recruitment with limited success. Does the department intend to target for recruitment, if so what forms are being considered to reach this goal . Yes, recruitment of veteran sz a priority. As it dus cussed earlier with the chairman, one issue is at military posts. Ive met with. Test. Test. Test. With our group leader as well. And many veterans have Language Skills that could be so helpful too. Currently the department only interviews candidates 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 hire sng. Yes, we are. Super. Thats good. And what other reform sthz department considering to crekrut with more diverse backgrounds and skillsets like veterans . 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 hire sag priority to us and ive discussed this with chairman royce and were doing all we can for outreach to veterans but also to other grougroup sads well underrepresented in the state department. Given the prominent role assigned to the department on Cyber Security, im concerned about plans to down grade for cyber issues and merge with 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 we have high level leadership focussed on the whole range of cyber issues, not relegated to economics . Yes, its a priority to the secretary. The move for the special envoy is only the first step in our approach to Cyber Security. Were committed to raising this to a high level within the department. And wurorking with the white hoe on that issue. And the house passed legislation, the digital gap act expressing concerns of congress. There should be an assistant c secretary and take into kin sideration that provision that calls on the secretary to elevate the role of cyber mr. D ploemacy before there was the provision of down grading. 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 Department Cyber space functions will continue to focus on a whole range of activities, doesnt that call for into question your plans to house within the it economic and Business Affairs bureau . That hasnt the final decision about where and at what leveling, we will places the Cyber Security responsibility hasnt been decided. The it initial decision made was that for this special envoy office which exists, we have moved that if to that bureau. But thats only the first step in addressing the larger cyber issue the Department Needs to and we will consult with this committee on where the appropriate level is and what bureau its in before that decision thank you and i hope you all will be pushing hard on the 30 pending ambassadorships that they be secured as soon as possible. Thank you. And now to greg meeks, Ranking Member of the subcommittee on europe. First, let me congratulate and thank you. It seems anytime youve been called to serve our country in varioused a min strashzs youve done that and i think thats something to be thankful for. Likes with, when i look at our individuals in the state department and i think weve said just about unanimously, we look at the men and women in our state department and how they serve our country, its just miraculous. A number of us are very concerned when we hear the drastic cuts and sometimes i get nervous when i hear the word modernization. Does that mean were going to get the equipment and make sure we have new Technology Necessary so that our state department has all of the tools that to needs to continue to do the great job, the job that it often does with its hands tied or does it mean 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 its general manager that says the more we take away from the state department, the more we have to put into dod. So were nervous and as i travel, i think that number of employees in the state department are nervous. I listen to your Opening Statement where you said and i say 66 of the individuals responded. But they still dont know what the final plan is and the information flow has not gotten down. So there seems to be a lot of morale problems because they dont know the uncertainty whether or not what they have recommended will be heard and what we had had took place for example, what concerned me at the u. N. This past last week in new york. Where i believe there was so some 140 officials that were there and it was down from twice that number the year prior. And before was consistent because here was an opportunity to have our diplomats at the state Department Working with all of these heads of state at various levels. So when i see that kind of reduction, that to me means theres difficulty in getting our diplomacy out and talking and working with these other governments. So can you tell me is that going to be the trend . Or are we going to see less numbers of diplomats and people from the state Department Going aught to promote our diplomacy as we saw exhibited at the u. N. Last week . Absolutely not, congressman. I approach this job. When i interviewed with secretary tillerson i spoke to him of my enormous respect and regard of the Foreign Service and it come s from my family. My uncle served in the Foreign Service. My fathers brother 32 years in the Foreign Service. He was 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 our Civil Service face when abroad. I committed to secretary when t abroad. Secretary tillerson, our goals are to empower the men and women who serve the United States abroad in dangerous places on our behalf with little thanks. Our men and women in uniform are absolutely deserving of our respect and admiration and thanked for their service. But 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 places. Absolutely. Again, thank you. The other decision that puzzled me a little bit after turning down funding for the Global Engagement center that focuses on antieau ganda efforts, the seconds transferred it for the dod. I dont want to get involved, the state department deserves to get its own funding. Can you tell me why the state department is relying on dod funding . Certainly, congressman meeks. Let me clarify that. There is an appropriations for our center and we are spending it. The statute authorized them to seek from the department of defense an additional amount of money defense could transfer to us. Thats the 40 million that we sought. We have our own money and we sought and additional 40 million from the Defense Department. Thats because the way congress wrote the law we had to ask the Defense Department for the money and its been transferred to us. Thank you for your service. Thank you. We go to mr. Mark meadows of north carolina. I dont think hes with us. Mr. Kissinger. Thank you for being here and your service to your country. Its very much appreciated. I think state and u. S. Military are the unsung hero and we never see because of the lack of war and hard to quantify. The global disengagement, i want to drill into that. You mentioned the 49 million of dod. You are accepting the 80 million written in the statute and that would be 120 million in essence, is that what youre saying . We have requested and received from the Defense Department frowrbt million. We 40 million. We have our own appropriate funds we are applying to the Global Engagement mission. That is happening. If you look at your own design, where does the state department figure into your redesigned plans . Where do you see this going and benefits of pushing back against propaganda of eastern friends i guess or nonfriends or competitors . The Global Engagement center figures prominently in our global diplomacy in countering the maligned activities of terrorist organizations, whether isis, al qaeda, their affiliates. That has been the mission traditionally of the Global Engagement center since it was created by congress. The new aspect of the 40 million from the Defense Department is to counter state efforts at propaganda. Russia, china, iran, north korea, a different form of mission. The gec was originally focused on terrorist organizations and now focused on state efforts at propaganda. Both are important and will figure prominently in our Public Diplomacy going forward. Maybe you can respond to this i think the focus of the 80 million was to counter the propaganda efforts of russia. We see from our friends in Eastern Europe they are the victims of this and we have seen the victims of that on our own shores. I think thats essential. I mentioned the state department are Unsung Heroes in conflict mitigation. Instead of handicapping them we need to help them in conflict zones to work to provide hope and opportunity to 7 and 8 yearolds we see right now in refuge camps. I call it the next generational war on terror. It could either lead to guns and bombs or frankly a regeneration that rises up to reject terror within their own communities. I think thats how you will win this. I think bombs and guns are okay in the current fight but we have to prepare for the next generation. I think it will be in the rest of my life. How does increasing state and the u. S. s 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 of syria and burma and bangladesh, those enormous refuge 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. For example in burma, we spent 32 million now to start to address the refuge crisis there. Our ambassador is looking to get to the border in the next two days. Were doing all we can to address that problem there. Weve spent large sums of money to address the refuge crisis generated by the rise of isis in iraq and syria. With partners and allies and the help of the jordanian government which has done a heroic amount of work, were doing all we can to address that problem. As you know, this is a generational problem and one that will face us for years to come. Thank you. Since my time is running out i wont ask the question but will make the statement, since you are looking at diplomatic outposts to shut down, its important to remember we didnt have a diplomatic post in afghanistan pre9 11. A lot of places around the world were looking to do this, i know youre thinking of this, mr. Secretary, not a conflict today but potential tomorrow and benefit of having a presence there for conflict mitigation which we cant quantify how many we stopped with state and cid. I want to thank you for the hard work of the American People. I yield back. The Ranking Member in the western hemisphere. Thank you for all that you do an and all the people that work for you. They are professional and working hard everyday. Quite frankly, some of them are in real dangerous situations. Im concerned. I want to thank you for the coincidence answering our questions this morning. We submitted about three months ago the questions. I get concerned. Go ahead, sir. Theres nothing like a congressional hearing to focus the constitution. Coincidence, right . Just an observation. I get concerned when we throw numbers like 30 we will have a cut in the state department. You can imagine what it does to the people that work for you and you can imagine what it does for the countries that we deal with. One of the things that really concerns me is this higher freeze and how it impacts the family members that work for these people. Some people cant work and hard enough for employees with the salary they get to make ends meet in some of these places. You have a situation where the family members cannot be employed if we implement this 30 . Can you talk 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 only the monetary support it provides to the families but the support they provide to the embassies. We had a higher in freeze that was Administration Higher freeze and the department has continued that higher freeze until we get a better handle on our redesign. There are a lot of exceptions, though to 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 in come back from post 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. You know, thats what we hear also when 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 incident that happened 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 of its obligation under the Geneva Convention to protect our embassy employees and their families down there. Weve been trying to get a briefing scheduled, and we cant seem to get it 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 we can 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 a there was a diplomatic accomplishment by the United States and our allies at that meeting where we got over 20 countries 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 just wondering if some of these cuts, do you think these will impact our ability to do Something Like this in the future . Absolutely not. We will not this countrys all i dont want to interrupt i mean, theyre all frightened, discussing whats going to take place, and were not going to be as active as weve been in the western hemisphere, which i work with. Yes, no, 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, has really 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. Thank you, mr. Sullivan. For your testimony and being with us today. And thank you, mr. Sires. We now go to mr. Dan donovan of new york. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, 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 with respect to our redesign effort. Just to give you an example, we have 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 effect change. So we will be coming to this committee with changes that we seek 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 interest of the United States National Security, our Homeland Security, and thats the other committee 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 a. I. D. Into the state department. So we have a number of proposals that were considering with input from senior a. I. D. Officials to make a. I. D. More efficient to align our Development Policy with our Foreign Policy as we go forward, but we are not considering at this point merging a. I. D. Into the state department. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Mr. Chairman, i yield the balance of my time. Thank you. We go now to mr. Ted deutch from florida. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Deputy secretary sullivan, thank you for being here and thank you for your service. Secretary tillerson told our committee in june that throughout this redesign process, he said we will work as a team and with congress. And with all due respect, this has not felt like a team effort. Modernizing the state department so that it can be as effective as possible in advancing National Security and promoting u. S. Interests abroad is a shared goal, but many of us, as youve heard today, are worried that this whole process is simply a downgrading of our diplomacy by another name. President trumps proposed 30 cut of the state department is particularly dangerous at a time when we need defendant diplomacy and skilled statesmen to address the threats from iran and north korea to promote peace in the middle east, to push back against russian aggression both in the 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. First in the middle east. We saw a 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 israeli civilians as bargaining chips. Earlier this month, i met with the parents of lieutenant hadar golden who was killed by Hamas Terrorists using an underground terror tunnel during a ceasefire in 2014. Ive also met with the family of a sergeant also killed by hamas in 2014. Hamas refusal to return the bodies of these soldiers 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 currently in israel continuing the administrations push towards peace, but for many of us, were still in the dark about what that looks like. Mr. Greenblatt said last week that it is no secret our approach to these discussions departs from some of the usual orthodoxy, for after years of wellmeaning attempts to negotiate an end to the conflict, we have all learned some valuable lessons. So, id ask you, deputy secretary sullivan, is what are those lessons that have been learned . 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 note, 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 committed 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 the president visited israel in june. All of which were aware of. Can you tell us whether its the president s intention, the administrations intention to present its own peace plan . I would have to defer to the white house on that, sir. Okay. Next, moving on to iran. The vice chairman of the joint chiefs said in july that it appears iran is in compliance with the rules laid out in the jcpoa. There are many flaws in that, including the sunset provisions. However, in order to lead an International Effort against irans ongoing support for terrorism, their support of the hezbollah militias in syria, the development of their missile program, all of which are outside the terms of the jcpoa, were going to need the support of the International Community and our allies and partners in europe. Wouldnt a decision not to certify compliance because of factors that are outside the jcpoa risk isolating us from our allies and making the job of combating alliancemaligned activities in the region even more difficult . Well, the secretary has said as late as last week that iran is in Technical Compliance with the jcpoa. He said as well, however, that iran is in violation of the spirit of the jcpoa for all the maligned activities that youve just described. Weve been in close consultation with our allies to address both those maligned activities and the flaws in the jcpoa, including the sunset provision. So, the president will have a decision in october on whether to certify or not, but our work on irans maligned activities and trying to improve the terms of the jcpoa will continue. And finally, mr. Chairman, just if i may, my last question. As you know, deputy secretary sullivan, Bob Levinsons now been held by iran for more than ten years. The levinsons were told that the u. N. General assembly would be used as an opportunity to push forward bobs case. Are you seeing any progress . And can you commit to us here that bringing bob and the other americans being unjustly and cruelly held by iran will remain a priority for this administration . The levetson case is a priority for this administration, as are all the other american hostages held worldwide. Just as a note, i have met and spoken with the levetson family on multiple occasions. I have a picture on my desk of bob levinson, reminds me every day that hes our longest serving, 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. You have my word on that. And im profoundly grateful for that. Thank you. Thank you. We go to lee zeldin of new york. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for being here today and for your service to our country. The rising tide of antisemitism both 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 hearing. I cant tell you off the top of my head, congressman. 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 beingere are we in that process . How imminent is this . Yes, there are candidates being vetted. Unfortunately, because 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 assistant secretary positions are there at the state department . Is it about 30 . There are six undersecretaries. Assistant secretaries, there are more than 30, i believe. Yeah. Do you know how many of those positions are filled as of right now . Filled with confirmed officeholders, i cant give you a precise number. 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 septemb september, and this first year for secretary 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 . Well, as i mentioned earlier in the hearing, we have 30 nominees that are pending now before the 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 were behind the curve. We should be ahead of the curve. And were doing all we can to catch up. Thank you for that. I very much appreciate the administrations efforts, the state departments efforts, ambassador haleys efforts at the United Nations as it relates to north korea. I know that its a very challenging situation. The timeline keeps shrinking of how quickly north korea can get to that point where they have the capability to deliver a Nuclear War Head to the United States and that the state department is working hard on getting multilateral diplomacy, ramping up economic pressure, 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 what the administration has pulled off at the United Nations in getting a unanimous vote, including russia and china, 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 to 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 victories with regards to bringing china and russia on board, i just want you know on behalf of myself and my constituents, im grateful for your achievement so far and i wish you much success, because its certainly far from over. I yield back. Thank you. Thank you. We go to mr. Gerry connolly of virginia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, mr. Sullivan. You said that this is an employeeled effort, vacationry document with no predetermined outcomes. How can you say that when the president s budget already recommended a 32 cut to our state Department Budget and usaid budget, estimated to slash 5 billion to 10 billion over the next five years . Well, i distinguished was that a bottomup recommendation . No, thats the president s budget. You need to speak into the mike. Thats the president s budget. Right. 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 appropriated 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 im sorry, i only have five minutes. I take your point. But candidly, youre going to have a bottomup, you know, reorg for the state department in a. I. D. , and they already know theres going to be a third cut, you know, 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 bottomup 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, though, isnt it . It is an important one, as is our and it sends a message, doesnt it . The budget what kind of message does that send to the budget the bottomup process to those employees in terms of the value of their work . The message . Yeah. The secretary has sent to those employees is 75,000 men and women of the department of state, is 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 that would cut a third of their budget, and that doesnt seem like a real high value being put on their work. Would you argue in the course of this process morales high in the state department and 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 employeeled, 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 youve 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. No, it is not an open question. As i testified earlier today, there is no intention to merge a. I. D. Into the state department. Do you believe that a. I. D. Should be, in fact, enhanced, the role of the a. I. D. Enhanced as the lead officer of the United States government . I believe that the role of a. I. D. Should be enhanced, 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 it, that would do just that. Id be happy 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, you know, hivaids, whether it be africa, whether it be other special programs to help certain midtoadvanced countries, and what its done is dispersed the focus of u. S. Development assistance. And it seems to me that thats not a very Good Management model. So 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 well, let me ask this question. We have a famine going on in africa right now. Do you believe that a. I. D. And the state department are currently well equipped to respond to that famine . 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. Ann 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 that we can balance state departments checkbook while promoting American Leadership and strength. And i trust you and secretary tillerson to make those difficult calls. One of my longtime 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. And 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 interests in the asiapacific . Yes, absolutely, congresswoman wagner. Thats one of the priorities of the redesign is to rebalance our footprint. The chairman raised the issue of closing posts. Its not so much closing posts as rebalancing rebalancing, correct. Exactly. Whats our time frame, sir . 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 is ongoing and 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 to be having, thanks to the leadership of chairman yoho, a hearing on that this week. How is the state department actively responding to the ethnic cleansing of rowinga 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. Weve 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 state department doing to address violence committed by russia in syria . Weve established a militarytomilitary chain of communication, the u. S. Department of defense from the chairman on down has been in contact with their equivalents 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, that we are addressing immediately in person with our militarys russian counterparts. Good. Well, i thank you in that. And i will yield back my time and will the gentle lady yield for yes, i will. I just want to say that 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 my time. Look forward to hearing them. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate the ambassador, mrs. Wagner yielding. The question she brought up about the rohinga issue is one that i raised with you yesterday and raised with secretary of state, and that is, we have to figure out a way to get across to the military government in burma that they have to pull the 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, and 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 rekind state who have faced this ethnic cleansing, and also requires the press being on the ground. So again, i just 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. Now, that election is a month away, so let me just 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 the president of liberia, takes place . We can, but its a huge challenge for us. Ill give you an example. The recent elections in kenya. A huge logistical undertaking by the department of state. Were going to have to go through this again when the new elections occur. Were going to have to do this in liberia. Its a logistical challenge for us. We need more flexibility and authorities to do that, and its part of, when we talk about let us know precisely now. We understand how long the wait is going to be here and the omb is going to review. Let us know this aspect of it now so that i and the Ranking Member and 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, id like to ask you three quick questions. One, i 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. So specifically, i wanted to ask you about the rangel fellows and the payne fellows. And i wanted to ask, and i dont want to assume, but that those fellowships will be continued. 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 a letter to several members of congress effectively stating that the assistant secretary, the abcting assistant secretary for the Africa Bureau already fulfills the responsibilities previously performed by the u. S. Special envoy to sudan and south sudan. And i know one of my colleagues asked you a question about special envoys earlier, but i wanted to specifically ask if that is going to be the case, if the special envoy will be eliminated for sudan, and in particular, south sudan, considering the instability in that nation . Well, thank you, congresswoman bass. I believe thats one of the special envoy positions for which we would need a statutory change. Oh. So we will need to come to this i could be wrong about that, and ill have to get back to you to confirm, because im just relying so, that means as of now you cant change it . We have to seek if we were to make changes to that office okay. I believe we would require a change to the statute. Good. Well follow up on that as well. And then a few moments ago, when my colleague was asking you about the famine, you said that we could be doing more. Yes. And i was wondering what your opinions were. We did authorize in the cr a couple of months ago close to 1 billion. And i went to the region with mr. Smith, and i was wondering, one, has all of that money been allocated, and is it on the ground . We were concerned that some of it would be used as carryover, 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. Okay. But i will confirm that for you. I would appreciate that. Id like the figures and id like to know where. Of course. Considering it was spread over four countries. And then also, a minute ago you were referencing the special, or the election, rather, in kenya. Yes. I was there as an observer, and you mentioned that 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. Yes. We provided Diplomatic Security . Yes. I know you did for me. The 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 as 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 we needed to protect. And mr. Chair, if you dont mind, when you were referring to support needed in liberia, were you referring to Diplomatic Security or were you referring to what were you referring to . Well, because the election on 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 were going to try to have ndi and iri on the ground. All of that requires a tremendous amount of you and i have both been involved, i think in the past. Ive been involved in these elections where you come in, you spend, you know, a week, and you try to engage in making certain that everythings in place for what is going to be a tremendously complicated undertaking. And to the extent that youve got the staff there from the u. S. Embassy to assist, its very important. So, whats at risk here is being able to get the ability, the discretion on the part of the secretary of state to move personnel. And 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 wartorn results where were trying postconflict to, you know, 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. Well, thank you very much. And ill await your responses about the famine. Thank you. Yield back. We go now to ted yoho of texas. Or Francis Rooney of florida. Ambassador rooneys here. Okay, thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Im glad to read that youre going to upgrade i. T. I think when i was serving in rome, we had like windows minus one. [ laughter ] did i mix it up . Ted, you go ahead. No, you go okay. You have the time. Okay. Just one quick question. Theres been some discussion about the counselor activities maybe going to Homeland Security. And you know, we have 40 of the illegal the people in this country illegally overstay visas. And 700,000 people overstayed their visas last year. So, the question i have is, you know, 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 conspiraunselor affairs the role at the embassy in screening visa applicants and so forth is an important function of the department of state, so there is no plan to transfer Counselor Affairs to dhs, but there is definitely an overstay problem. Okay, thank you. Thats all i was going to ask. Thank you. We go now to 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. And heres a question i have. We had a question earlier on by one of our members about respecting culture, and 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 comment, is this a change in our Foreign Policy . Because my understanding has always been that 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 for minorities in those cultures. Now, is that a change, frankly . Is there the president s remarks, as well as maybe the thoughts behind the question, 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 going to be something thats factored in when were aligning foreign assistance to these countries . Yes, congressman keating, our American Values are for us at the state department and for me as an american, theyre imutable. And were committed to them. And its a difficult line we walk in dealing with foreign governments that have different institutions and cultures, and we walk a fine line. But let me give you an example to support my contention that were not we dont have a change in policy. With, for example, our foreign military, fmf program with egypt. The secretary has withheld 195 milli million. Its been notified, its been 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 an issue we confront every day, and we have to walk a fine line, but we never deviate from our values. We protect americans National Security, promote our prosperity, but never undermine our values. Thank you for reaffirming that. And 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 collaboration with ngos, the nongovernmental organizations on the ground because of the hiring freeze or reorganization . We will still be able to support a very robust engagement with these ngos when they reflect these American Values. Do you see that, these changes and 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 implement u. N. s Foreign Policy, particularly development assistant, as necessary through ngos. And the women peace and security act just passed the senate, passed the house and is on its way to the president s desk right now. And that makes sure women are meaningful participants at all levels of policymaking and implementation and requires commitment and resources to do that. With that reaching the president s desk, is that something, again, that 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 Adviser to the president , ivanka trump, would strongly reaffirm that thats the policy of this administration, as the president would. Were committed to that at the department of state. One thing id note for you, congressman, is that one thing thats astounded me is in talking about diversity at the state department, the number of women we have in the Foreign Service and the Civil Service has actually decreased, particularly at the senior levels, over the last eight years or so. Weve got to do a better job on 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. And thank you for your presence, and i look forward to working with you in the future. Thank you. Thank you. I yield back. Representative ted yoho of florida, with the Asian Pacific subcommitt subcommittee. Good morning. Thank you for being here, deputy secretary sullivan. I was at a meeting with a year ago when there were a lot of current and retired generals there talking about a major tectonic shift in world powers we havent seen. And with the state department being around since 1789 as the first cabinet agency, with you in the position youre in now, youre able to step back, look at the state department as a whole, probably that its never been looked at before in reform. And i would have to ask, when is the last time theres been a major transformation or reform at the state department . There have been efforts of reform that have not been as successful as they should have been. Right. Including in the mid90s. I would contrast that with efforts to reform at the department of defense where ive also served that have been more successful in about the same time period. So, i think the Defense Department has done a better job of reorganizing so, this is an unprecedented moment in time. And i look forward to working through this to reform it and find out what works well and what doesnt work well and get rid of those things that dont, unless, 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 . And keep in mind, and this builds on what Gregory Meeks brought up about the geopolitical knowledge. Weve seen how it failed in robert gates book duty, how we didnt take the geopolitical, the customs of the area, the tribal culture in afghanistan and iraq, and we 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 policy so that we get more favorable results in a timely manner. Where do you see we need to focus more on that we havent . Well, i think as a starting point, wed want to 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 that 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 youve raised, whether were dealing with a conflict in syria, in south asia, in mindanao in the philippines. Right. Very different areas. It really is. And i mean, were seeing the escalation in radical groups showing up. You had brought up, and i want to, just for the record, reiterate this. The amount of people you said youre 50 staffed or understaffed, i guess, but 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 weve got 30 nominees pending. Thats all right, the house they havent been pending for six months. Some of them have only been pending for a relatively short period of time, but theyve all come out of the pipeline and theyre now sitting before the Foreign Relations committee. Okay. And then burma had come up. And you talked about the 32 million to start to address the rohingya situation in burma. I would hope as we move forward, as youre redirecting this, that weve known about this escalating over probably the last five years, and weve seen it build up. So 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 enflamed that we do a better job on the front end so that maybe we can deescalate this. What are your thoughts on that . Yeah, youre absolutely right. This is not a problem that just arose over the summer, this month. Right. And thats so true on so many of the conflicts we have around the world, that thats where i hope that with your leadership and secretary tillersons, that we can look at that and say, these are hotspots. We need to get in here now so that we dont have 400,000 refugees in the last couple months and over a million displaced. That will be the next hotspot that we need to do now. What are your thoughts where we really need to focus . Well, right now, even though we should have anticipated this, were now stuck with the problem we have with the hundreds of thousands of refugees, so weve got to 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. Weve got to get other countries and the u. N. Involved as well. And i would hope, you know im going to 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 . And i thank you for your time and i yield back. Thank you. And i concur with the gentlemen. 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 on an ongoing basis. But i think one of the things that sort of troubles me a little bit about this process is that the secretary of state sent out a memorandum and then an email indicating that this redesign would generate, and i quote, a minimum dliferl eliver 10 , relative to current spending over the next five years with an aspirational general target up to 10 , 20 billion. So my question is, where do those figures come from, the 10 billion . What data did you rely on to 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 the 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 dont want to interrupt. I guess my question is where did the amounts come from at beginning of the process . Youre talking about i. T. As one of the strategies. Who came up with the 10 billion and 5 billion cuts . Were they pulled out of the air . Those arent cuts. Those are efficiencies we expect from the process. Were not saying up front were going to cut 5 billion. 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 hoped to achieve. Were not setting out with a 5 billion cut. Thank you. Members of the administration have given mixed messages when it comes to the role of democracy, human rights and our Foreign Policy. My colleague and i sent a letter to secretary tillerson raising concerns about 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 cornerstone 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. My second question. Support for democracy matters but you also have to view it in the context were currently operating, the president of the United States that continues to express admiration for thug vladimir putin, erdogan, invited did y duarte to the philippines. Is somebody in the state department speaking to the president about the consequence of that kind of mixed message . Its important to recognize not promotion of democracy and human rights for the sake of it but important for the stability of the world, american fwiss to invest and all the other consequences of that democracy. For all the reasons you state, congressman, 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 you point out, for example, that our businesses have open, stable 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 who directly undermines that message . We have to deal with the governments that are undemocratic. Dealing with them and praising them are two different things. Our commitment to democracy at the state department on behalf of the secretary is unwavering. If i could get in one last question. As you know, u. S. Foreign assistance programs are critical to advancing the stability and growing economy of developing countries which are vital to u. S. National security and can help us avoid costly or conflict. Robert gates noted. Contributes to stability, contributes to better governance. If youre able to do those things, youre able to do them in a focused and sustainable way, then it may be unnecessary for us to send soldiers. Do you share secretary gates that robust and diplomacy budgets are necessary for u. S. Leadership in the world . If you do, how do you square that with the proposal to cut 32 of the state budget by President Trump. The answer to the first question is emphatically yes. The second is its on us to manage in a more efficient way, spend the money the president asked for but Congress Appropriates and spend the budget weve got in an effective and efficient way. Promote that, implement 245 diplomacy to promote our National Security and economy. You dont think you can do that with a 32 cut in the budget . Do you, mr. Secretary . Im sorry. You dont believe you can do that with a 32 cut in your budget, do you . I believe we can. I believe we can. Thank you i yield back. We go to florida. Good morning or afternoon. In mei when the president signed the waiver under jerusalem act forestalling moving our embassy to jerusalem, he said well, in fact, move it. Its 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 when to move it is a strategic and tactical decision 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 thats the president s policy. Obviously he has to pull the trigger. But your agency will facilitate that move when it happens, correct . We work for the president. Number two, were talking about the Palestinian Authority. They will take money. Some of it comes 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 act . Im familiar with the bill. 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 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 the iranians may have gone over the line but they came back down. They have buried that. What about the operating more advanced nuclear centrifuges. That has happened as well. Ill defer to the experts on that. Heres the issue. You guys in terms of the state Department Given to the president. The 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 right now. Very difficult situation. Five, ten years into the future, if this deal continues as is, its going to be the same thing, maybe more in tract i believe at that point. To recertify as being in our National Security interest i think would be a mistake. The muslim brotherhood, theres a lot of nefarious influence. 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 would get back to me, i would appreciate it. I will get back to you. Cuba, we see these 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. Isnt it reasonable to say either cuba was directly responsible for this, or they, at least, knew or know who is responsible for it . 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 government 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 in their families down there, to make sure they are protected and cared for. Second, we have our policy with respect to the government of cuba. Our expectation for them to comply with the Geneva Convention. If they are 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 supplying the security resolutions. Were going to do all we can to give diplomacy a chance to resolve this problem. We have a meeting with the south Korean Foreign minister at 12 30. Well get to everyone here. Well keep it to five minutes. Thank you, secretary. I appreciate your candor actually. And thinking about where we are right now thinking about some of the comments of some of 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 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 time, those findings suggest many of the employees dont feel the support of the president and the 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 moral isnt high, theres uncertainty. That causes uncertainty leaves people unsettled, and we need to address that. We could surmise that you work for a department and youre told were going to cut your budget 30 , that you dont feel support. Youve referenced outdated i. T. , redundancies, duplicative processes. So were all for trying to improve efficiency. But again, widely reported surveys wall street journal. Others suggest many of the employees of the department dont feel that support from the white house. Mr. Kinzinger asked a question. 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. Rourkebacker asked and suggested that nearly 50 countries currently dont have an appointed or confirmed ambassador . Im not certain about that statistic. Id have to get back to you. If they dont, they have a confirmed ambassador, they have someone who does the duties and functions. Theres an urgency to get those ambassador positions filled. Ill be the first to acknowledge we need to fill the positions as quickly as possible. Do we have a south korea ambassador . We do not. Do you have a nomination . We have an individual in the vetting process but it has not 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 now. I thought the question was this is one of the closest allies. Its stressed by 1 1 2 to 2 million refugees. We have to do everything we can to support jordan. Do we have an ambassador to curtr . No. Do we have an ambassador to saudi arabia . For all the rons you suggest, we need to have those 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 the Foreign Service officers who are standing up and doing their jobs are filling in either as acting or other. Our work is being done. I dont want to dispurge our state Department Employees around the world. Theyre doing a phenomenal job under trying circumstances. They are representing the value 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 the positions filled. What can we do to push the urgency of now . 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, that would be lets get the positions filled. Right. Chairman of the Homeland Security committee. 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 spinks coming out of cyber nation states, warfare. Right now there are no rules of the road. There are really no treaties or other things agreed to by nation states. Would nato lie in the event of a cyber attack. There are questions raised about cyber. I think the state department, as cyber becomes a bigger and bigger issue, the state is going to have quite a role in this arena. I want to ask you about what you envision the future state state to be on that issue . I know theres an office of coordination for cyber issues downplayed with another office. I want to thank chairman royce and engel. Ranking member for introducing cyber depp lombacy act of 2017, which would essentially codify into law an office of cyber issues headed by an ambassador reporting directly to 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. He we have had a number of conversations about the need to elevate this issue within the state department, cyber broadly defined. Not only our Cyber Defense but kiesch diplomacy interaction with department of defense on cyber issues. My expectation is 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 beaurocracy. But our commitment is to elevate and provide the appropriate resources for leadership on this essential issue. I think thats excellent. This is no longer just a fbi homeland, nsa issue. Its state department issue. Im very pleased to hear that. Secondly, as i look at hot spots, particularly in africa. These fragile states out of destabilization rises insurgencies, terrorists, safe havens and vacuums. Can you tell me what the state department will be doing with u. S. Aid to help with foreign assistance programs, to help stabilize this destabilization . It seems to me it would be a very good use of our money rather than having to deal with the terrorism insurgencies after the fact. Ill give you a current example about our planning for a post isis syria. As we defeat isis and raqqa, as we move further east in syria, state department usaid our partners need to fill in and provide 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 necessities 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, usaid and partners need to step up. Defense department and our allies and partners are defeating isis. We have to be prepared to step in after that battle is won and take the ball from there. Very good to hear that. Thats an excellent approach. Last ill make a quick statement. My time is running out. The Global Development lab i have been a strong supporter 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. Thank you. Deputy secretary, thank you for your long service to our nation and indulges us here today in this hearing, and your candor in your answers. Were here talking about this restructuring and restructuring s i think everyone agree any time pursue those and pursue those aggressively. Restructuring whether in business or in this case the state department, should follow a strategic structure. A strategy should follow from the 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 secretary vision of how to go about doing that in the context of 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 and syria. Al qaeda the taliban. The net work 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 has been raised elsewhere in the hearing where we want to be active to make sure that were on the lookout for that next iraq and syria. That next 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. Interest 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 it specifically fit within the goals underlying the strategy that you laid out . So a lot of when we talk about efficiency and effectiveness, much of it part of it is budget and cost savings. Part of it is also empowering our men and women in the Foreign Service in the Civil Service. For redundant bureaucratic processes or bureaucratic processes that dont serve the people well. I have heard complaints since the day i arrived, transfer from post to post. How their bills are processed. How they do it. Making their lives easier as they should be in their service to the country is one of the things when we talk about effectiveness and cost savings and eliminating redundancies. We describe vs a Diplomatic Co core. Development 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 work force is empower them, give them autonomy, allow them to master their skills and let them operate with a clear purpose. Im not sure i see this from here. Thats one of my concerns. We touched on the morale issue. 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 seeing is this is an emphasis of Cost Reduction and slashing than it is on pursuing and protecting and promoting interest 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 are the president s tweets. Specifically as it relates to Foreign Affairs, specifically as it relates of recent moments to north korea. How is it state department managing that . What can we do to make sure we dont get ourselves into an unintended situation with north korea . Both secretary tillerson and secretary mattis have made it clear that 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 looking to cross the 38th parallel. Diplomacy is our principle means of addressing this problem. General mcmaster and secretary mattis, for that matter, have also said that this is a regime that has weapons that can threaten the United States. We need to be prepared with a military response. Thats not our first resort. Our first and principle objective is to use american diplomacy, american pressure through our allies, our partners, in countries like china and russia to bring this to a rational conclusion and denuclearize this korean peninsula, which is everyones goal aptd purpose of the Security Council resolutions. Thank you. I agree with you diplomacy has to be the front of that to make sure we have a good solution to this crisis. I yield back. We thank mr. Snyder for going on our delegation to south korea last month. We go to 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 i would submit for your comment, quickly, is that diplomatic efforts have a greater likelihood of success if theres some teeth to the possibility there might be efforts that are more kinetic in nature. Correct. General mcmaster and secretary mattis made it clear. I want to make sure its clear to anyone watching at home or pyongyang or anywhere else in the world. We want a diplomatic solution. While the lives of americans and our allies are threat pd, all options are on the table. That needs to be clear. Sorry for the soliloquy. Ive done a little bit of research on you, and i find that you, like myself, made sa mistake of pursuing a legal education. The only thing you might do that would be looked on with less esteem than a lawyer is being a member of this body. Im kidding. Maybe. I wonder if youre familiar with u. N. Council resolution with regards to iranian Ballistic Missile and Nuclear Activity . I am. Youre undoubtedly aware the wording of that resolution is iran shall not undertake i stress shall not because that has meaning to lawyers and diplomats, et cetera, the testing of Ballistic Missiles that might be married to a nuclear program. Is that correct . It is phrased in the imperative. They shall not. In 2015, Security Council resolution 2231 with regards to iran formed after jcpoa, referred to not to be cute but based on cold hearted opinion as the jcpos, which says iran is called upon not to under takes the these. Are you familiar with the wording . I believe. In 2015 shall not, 2010, called upon not to. You said earlier that the u. N. Had said that iran was in Technical Compliance with the jcpoa but violated the spirit of jcpoa. When the wording hammered out iran is called upon not to as opposed to shall not, does that make your job more difficult as it relates to creating a circumstance where iran doesnt enhance its Nuclear Capability and the ability to differ such weapons . It certainly undercuts the argument that iran is prescribed from the Ballistic Missile activity its engaged in. So i mean, i wonder, this is rhetorical, what sort of attorneys and diplomats hammered out language that was far more per missive than the precedent language and what the intent was or if it was complete incompetence. That was rhetorical. I want to take a moment moment to draw attention, if you grant me leave, to the ladies and gentlemen in the room wearing yellow coatings and thought no, sir wearing yellow coats emblazoned with free iran and perpetual presence of individuals in this committee to strapped for a free iranian nation where individuals are empowered to make decisions for themselves without fear of retribution of a regime through irgc and force thereof that is willing to make take the lives of their very brothers and sisters. I want to applaud them and ask them to continue in these efforts that one day, perhaps, well see the fruit of your diligence and your persistence. So i apologize for the aside. I think its important to recognize you all are always here, that it matters and that it matters to khairul roy, Ranking Member engel and members of this committee. I get frustrated as a member of this body that 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 and that flies in the face totalitarian objectives of radical human beings. Thank you. Finally i believe the application of appropriately spent funds on foreign aid might if properly done save money on things like bullets and bombs and rockets. I would ask if you concur foreign aid has a role in peace and stability throughout the world. I would johnny secretary mattis agreeing with that wholeheartedly. I appreciate that, because i think some of the rhetoric in questioning heretofore has indicated that money is the sole arbiter of our commitment to diplomacy and peaceful outcomes. I would ask you, is the intend of the reorganization simply to perform our job more efficiently and better stewards of tax dollars and not gut foreign aid that would meet with bipartisan resistan resistance. That is exactly the purpose, not to dput foreign aid. I thank you for your efforts and applaud you and look forward to working with you. Thank you. Lois frankel from florida. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your service. I have great admiration for those who serve in the state department and i think its a very important function of our government. Our government. And just my colleagues have done a good job my colleagues have done a good job covering a lot of issues. I just want to say ill start by saying i think reorganization is part of the pure cease. Every beaurocracy reorganizes as part of beaurocracy. 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. Im going to try to be diplomatic. Thats rare. Im going to try to be diplomatic. But listen, i believe that the actions 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 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 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 harmed women and girls. Now, i do have a question out of this. I know youre waiting for that. There is an office of global womens issues, and there is a proposal to downgrade it. I think its a downgrade. Youll have to tell me if it is. To downgrade the office of global womens issues from the Secretary Office to one that instead reports to the under secretary 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 those first. Sure. Yes. 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 mentioned. We believe that actually strengthens the office. Whats happened with the special envoys. There are almost 70 of them. They all report to the secretary. For the secretary to have 70 individuals 70 offices reporting to him, he doesnt have the time to dedicate to each and every one of them. All of them are 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 i can. There is 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 countries. Because when women cannot be in control of their own bodies, they dont work, they dont produce for the economy. With that i yield back. The l will the gentlelady yield . I have a question i have to ask. 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 special envoys. My expectation is that as the redesign goes forward, we will be coming as theyre ready with proposals to the 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. Mr. Tom garrett will be presiding as chairman and Ranking Member from here on out. Thank you. We recognize representative norma torrez of california for five minutes. Thank you. Deputy secretary, congratulations. You are now four months and two days into your position. Congratulations. Position. Congratulations. Modernization is a good thing. For any government agency. Wh modernization is a good thing. For any government agency. 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 cut. 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 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 pose a real danger to the political and Economic System when they seek to launder funds in u. S. Banks, lobby the government to advantages their own interest and even seek to interfere in our elections. This past week i traveled to guatemala as part of the House Democracy Partnership politica trying to protect themselves from u. S. Supported anticorruption drive. Im very worried that if the progress that 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 right. 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 serious problem. The ray of hope i see 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 triumph there. I cannot hang my hat, if i wore one, on hope, sir. 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 in guatemala in particular to address this problem. Weve made 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. I think were not fully informed or were being very evasive with our members at disclosing everything that is happening in the region. We are 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 and support the people there, and ensuring that this government in guatemala, the current government, understands that we will not stand for their elitist corruption behavior, we are 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. 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 monitoring and evaluating its programming. As you work to more closely align our Development Efforts with our Foreign Policy goals, how will you ensure that the gains of us aid made in this area are not diluted back. Maybe you can write back, or maybe answer 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 of new york. For five minutes. Thank you. Thank you so much for your patience. Long time and answering our questions. We really thankful for your patience. I want to find out, given the current storms that have hit the caribbean, what is the accident that us aid offer of disaster and assistance, what are they doing . What is currently in place in the small nations that have been barbuda, Dominican Republic that have been hard hit by Hurricane Irma and maria. In some cases. The dart teams at usaid are important tools for the u. S. Government, both with respect to the hurricanes that have hit the caribbean and the earthquakes in mexico. Thats correct. Aid is really stretched to the limit at this point innist capacity in dealing with all of these horrible natural disasters that have occurred simultaneously. Its a big challenge for us. Of course we have in our own puerto rico enormous problems we have to, as u. S. Government, address. Aid is working on this with all of its available resources. Its a big challenge. In terms of funding, have you allocated how much money has be been allocated in response to these natural disasters so far . Ill get you the exact figure. Ill undertake to do that after the hearing. You mention puerto rico. Obviously the island that has been hard hit the most is puerto rico. Its been termed caribbean katrina. Fema, just as you have, has been asking for help. They are really depleted. Their resources have been depleted. Is there any way that you can team up with fema to help puerto rico and the u. S. Territories . Yes. We have sent teams down over the weekend both to assist the u. S. Government effort and to assist our state Department Colleagues who work in puerto rico. So for puerto rico, though, unlike foreign countries, 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 in fema and dhs is coordinated by the white house. Either an enormous challenge, congressman, as you know as well as anyone. Having said that, having heard that from you, i know we often assist u. S. Citizens being evacuated from caribbean countries. But there are right now currently 20,000 Puerto Ricans 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. Yes. They are waiting to come either to the United States or other places in the world where they may have families or they may seek the help they need right now. Or people who have medical emergencies, for example, to get off the island. Correct. 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 the 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 assistance from the Pan American Health organization to puerto rico going electric . The second phase usually of these disasters is Health Issues. Seek 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 agency. Just as we did with the original hurricane that hit houston, state Department People went down, were mobilized part of the response. My expectation is we will do the same in puerto rico. As soon as were able to get them 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 new york. And the deputy secretary for his time. And the department for engaging with the 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 and better stewards. I think thats something youve heard a repeated call for. With that, we stand adjourned. Thank you. Today new america will host the discussion on whether the grolt of isis was inevitable and how different american policy choices might have prevented the rise of the islamic state. Live coverage at 12 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan 2, online cspan. Org or on the cspan rao app. Later discussion of new articles on the rise of isis. They argue with different policies, the u. S. Could have prevented the rise of isis. Live coverage starting at 6 00 p. M. Eastern. You can also watch live online at cspan. Org or listen live at the free cspan radio apple. Equifax ceo Richard Smith defendants about the