Good to have you. I want to associate myself with the remarks about the chairman and Ranking Member regarding state department budget. I do believe a cut of this magnitude diminished our influence overseas and our capacity to accomplish our goals. I make it all for creative reforms where the goal is a better operating Department Rather than hitting an arbitrary budget number provided to the state department by omb and others. There is a big difference between those two things. I want to talk about russia and legislation that is taken up regarding russian sanctions. You previously stated the Intelligence Agency has concluded there was russian interference in our elections. Is that the case . I am not here to debate whether it was a decisive intervention but they interfered and you would agree they are attempting to interfere in the elections of many major allies, the netherlands or france. It certainly appears that way. Would you also agree that russia would prefer a weaker nato to a stronger nato . In all likelihood they would. My question is do you agree with senator graham and senator mccain that the majority of us on this committee on a bipartisan basis, it is important to take additional actions and sanction russia to let them know that you cannot interfere in our elections and just get away with it, the United States is not going to walk away from that kind of attack on our democracy. Isnt that important . It certainly is important and one of the challenges is how to structure these sanctions to achieve the desired result. In the case of the current sanctions that are in place, in response to russias invasion of ukraines taking of crimea blues russia understands what has to be done to achieve sanctions relief on current sanctions. The issue and outrageous response they should receive for their cyber meddling around elections, we can put sanctions in place, what do we want from the russians in order for them to earn sanctions . Not suggesting we shouldnt do it, from a diplomats perspective some of the challenges. I do think i have read the amendment to the iran sanctions bill which is where the russian sanctions are being considered and there are a few problem areas within those that i would hope would allow the diplomatic efforts to attempt to make some progress. If we cannot make progress and i have told others in the senate i had conversations with them i may very well be calling you and saying the time has come now to do this, to motivate some movement on their part. I understand and support having that kind of ability. The question is given where we are, we dont know yet whether these efforts we have in place are going to bear fruit ultimately it will take a little time but as i said earlier i think it is important that we address the situation in relationship we have today, in the interest of the United States, the interest of stability in the world and we could deteriorate it further or try to stabilize and improve it. Right now this is an effort that is in progress. I understand, mister secretary. All of us would like to see the russians take actions that indicate to us that they want to be constructive International Player but as you know the first challenge when you tackle a problem is to get the other side to admit that they have engaged in this kind of activity and have they indicated to you in any of these conversations they admitted they interfered in our elections in your conversations . Their position and explanation of it is pretty public and i have heard nothing different. Now we are in a position where they havent even admitted, you have Vladimir Putin talking about private citizens in russia played hankypanky, we know that is not true. It was a concerted effort. We see it in the United States and our nato allies. To be talking about providing access to the compound on the Eastern Shore of maryland, my state or others, instead of leaning forward and saying here is what we are going to do unless number one you admit what you did and number 2 you are going to provide verifiable assurances it wont happen again it seems to me we have got to lean in on that issue. Let me ask you a budget related question with respect to the verification of the iran agreement, we will be discussing legislation related to that agreement because april 18th the Administration Certified to congress that iran was in compliance of the current agreement. That is correct. You would agree it is in our National Security interests to make sure we have in place the ability to verify compliance . Yes it is but i would also tell you under that agreement it is lobar. I beg to differ but the i a ea which monitors that agreement should have the resources to do it, do you agree . Certainly. Part of your budget calls for 27 reduction to the contributions to International Organizations, those mandatory contributions go to fund the iaea which is indicated that they need those resources to verify uranian compliance with the nuclear agreement. Can you tell us today the United States will ensure we provide our share of funds necessary to make sure they can verify compliance . Cuts to the International Organizations budget which you mentioned touches on a number of organizations. How we would distribute those is under continued discussion with the bureaus and those agencies so that we have as best and understanding as to how that would affect them but it is our intention that the iaea have all the resources it needs to carry out its responsibilities on the compliance side. That is an important purpose. Thank you, secretary tillerson, for your service and a chance to be with you again today. I am struck at the list the chairman put up, the detailed and thorough presentation he put up about the unsettled and dangerous and difficult world in which we currently operate and the gap with your written presentation and spoken presentation. I see here russian aggression and conflict in ukraine relatively prominent and i did not see that in your written testimony or spoken testimony and im concerned about that happen. In the context of a narrow win, we know russia from the very highest levels intentionally interfered in our last president ial election and in my view that is only going to stop when we stop it. We may have a different approach to how to engage Vladimir Putin in russia and i have a concern about the message we are sending are vital allies. I am haunted by a question asked of me by an Eastern European diplomat in the security form not long after the inauguration when he said how can we count on you to defend our democracy when we dont see you defending your own democracy . In your confirmation hearing you acknowledge russias ongoing efforts to divide europe from the United States and to divide nato and the eu and we discussed how you would lead the resources of the state department to counter russian propaganda through tools like Radio Free Europe and how you would invest in strengthening our vital allies in the region whether nato or as his been mentioned country like georgia and ukraine that are not nato members. If i understand right, your fy 18 request for europe and eurasia is cut in half from fy 16 x 400 50 million. What is the strategy behind decreasing support for our partners and allies in the region in the face of a clear and growing russian threat to their democracy and ours . Let me position the situation with russia for you so you understand what i am hearing. From allies, partners, large and small. This is without exception, i have yet to have a bilateral one on one poolside with a single counterpart in any country, in europe, the middle east, even southeast asia, that has not said to me please address your relationship with russia, it has to be improved. They believe worsening this relationship will ultimately worsen their situation. So we have been, people have been imploring me to engage and try to improve the situation. That was our approach anyway, but the feedback i am getting is please engage and see if you can improve the situation. With respect to the tools available to us, we do maintain particular emphasis on the countries that we see in europe that are most at risk of russian interference in Eastern Europe. We would like to do more in the baltics and the balkans. If we had more we would do more but we have not walked away from those and we want to continue to perfect more sophisticated approaches as to how to push messages into Russian Society through social media, broadcast, all the tools available to us and we are going to continue to maintain that effort to ensure we are in the conversation among young people and others inside russia, but i understand other countries are concerned about russia. They should be. I hear about it when i talk to them about how they feel a direct threat whether they are in the baltics or the balkans or georgia or other parts of the world as well. They expressed that to me but when we talk about what should be done, they want us to solve it through engagement. They dont want it to get worse because if it gets worse they fear it will be worse for them. I appreciate hearing that perspective. We had many of the same conversations with a different end point. Southeast asia, Eastern Europe, the North Atlantic Alliance i hear grave concerns the signals we are sending our signals of retreat and disengagement. Partly this is from countries as mentioned by the chairman, like jordan, the critically depends on us for support as they bear the burden and cost within a great number of refugees. In other places it is where china is being ascended or aggressive, South China Sea or the face of north korea or Eastern Europe as you mentioned. In terms of an overall budget that is trying to defend American Interest and advance American Values i dont see how it makes sense in an increasingly contested world to unilaterally withdraw support from vital allies who have shown us and our values and our size and a contest of ideas with russia, china and others. Let me mention two other things before i run out of time. We have people to People Programs like fulbright scholarships that have had a big positive impact, read africa is a very young continent, very large continent, china is omnipresent, the Young African leaders initiatives is a relatively modest in Scope Program that has had a big impact. I thought it was not the choice i would have made to cut all the educational and Cultural Exchange programs in half and this would be one of them. I hope you will reconsider that because i think these are powerful programs that connect us to parts of the world where we benefit from a positive relationship and from as you said that next generation of leadership. Hour africa is something that we on a bipartisan basis authorize, a way for us to bring deployment of privatesector capital and american expertise to subsaharan africa. The Budget Proposal allocates an 84 cut from the fy see an active levels to this. There are another few programs i could talk about that i think reduce the visibility and scope and reach of our investment through diplomacy and development, those are two i wanted to elevate in our conversation today. Let me close by quoting an editorial that made an important point. The senator said in this editorial to view foreignpolicy is transactional is more dangerous than its proponents realize, depriving the oppressed of a beacon of hope could lose as the world we built and thrived in. This is by senator mccain on may 8th. I ask unanimous consent that it be submitted to the record. I am concerned in a world that is increasingly and theres a clear contest between authoritarian capitalism and real capitalism, democracy that is a capitalist society that we need to step up our game. To do it without sustaining or increasing our investments in diplomacy and development is ill considered and i hope we Work Together to advance human rights, advanced diplomacy and advanced development through this budget. Thank you. Secretary tillerson, thank you for your service to our country, thank you for coming before this committee today. Two months ago, i let a bicameral congressional delegation to china and japan, just after oppression, she was in florida. Heading over to china that sunday. We were underscoring the concerns about our threat the threat of north korea knowing the us, quote, era of strategic patience is over as was articulated by mike pence and john mccain the week after we were there. Despite International Efforts to pressure pyongyang to continue to conduct missile tests, nearly a dozen already this year, some of these tests have failed, i am concerned north korea is learning from these failures. An old saying when you attend college you learn a lot more from the test you fail from the test you ace. Meanwhile south korea has delayed part of that. My question is how the latest develop and impact the state departments engagement with south korea, japan to protect against north korean aggression. The new south korean government is put in place, they have not named dollar cabinet positions yet, but been in conversations with the representatives who have come to washington and maintaining a close dialogue with japanese counterpart so our intention, South Koreans are committed to the strong Trilateral Partnership that we have that confronts north korea first and foremost, then ultimately at some point at the appropriate point engage with others but the Pressure Campaign underway for a few weeks which involves requirement the china in particular participate in a meaningful way is beginning to have some affect, it is difficult to judge precisely because we do not have great transparency and visibility in the regime in north korea but this is a campaign that has a forward map how we continue to implement and increase pressure on the North Koreans until we receive a clear signal, to engage with a different mindset about the way forward. You could interpret the level of missile testing, quite disturbing to us, whether that is a sign they are trying to give us that it is not working or whether it is a sign that it is working is difficult to tell but we are monitoring all of those tests carefully in terms of the nature of the test and we have good alignment between ourselves and china regarding the objective it denuclearization, a good understanding between us of what actions if north korea went too far cause us to be completely aligned. We have further highlevel dialogue with chinese coming up this week, secretary matus and myself, we want to work this at the diplomatic level but also the mill to the level that is important that we manage this quite carefully with full and open channels of communication with the chinese. I want to commend you and the administration in the leadership i lived in china for six years for proctor and gamble. And signing the deal in 1994 we see what happened since then. I was struck by as you mentioned the change in the engagement approach to the chinese, we met with premier as they stated changing their engagement strategy with north korea and i want to thank you for your leadership in that regard. An important issue. From the leadership in japan, our relationship with japan has never been better in some time and the media doesnt report these this kind of news but i saw it first hand and i thank you for your leadership in this important area. Last week there was pressure that russian trade in north korea increased by 70 in the first two months of this year is can you provide Additional Details in this development, what impact on our north korea strategy . We need russias cooperation and participation, we have spoken directly to them, i spoke to latimer boudin on the need for them to join us in china, and the Pressure Campaign on north korea. We do see and monitor russian movements, Petroleum Products opening a new transport system between vladivostok and north korea which is troubling. Continuing the dialogue with them making some progress, if you notice in the Security Council resolution that was passed with unanimous approval, the russians supported the resolution which imposed more sanctions on individuals, in years past we would never have hoped they would vote for it. They mightve abstained. I think the russians too understand the threat north korea poses to them. If theres a problem regionally they will feel the effects of that. They are beginning to recalculate their posture towards north korea. Speaking of russians threat i will go to the other side of the world. A few weeks ago in norway we were at hammer fest, norway, i was with chairman michalski, senator cornyn and senator i camp, i toward one of the most efficient liquefied natural gas facilities, onsite Carbon Capture capability. Many European Countries are from russia, struck by the fact that there are 13 European Countries in russia for 75 of annual lng imports. The only one in europe combines with exports that can be important to use its Energy Policy to intimidate europe. Which state department doing and what can we do as part of a whole government approach to help europe become less dependent on russia for their energy needs. To clarify europe receive 70 of its natural gas supply by way of pipeline to europe, and the historic pipelines have been there for decades. Pursuing the expansion of the pipeline called lord stream that would connect to germany, we encouraged European Countries in the eu, to subject that pipeline to the full rigors of their regulatory process and suggested to them it is not in their longterm Energy Security interest to become more dependent on russian natural gas and point out the us has an abundance of natural gas and facilities now to ship lng to europe so we are promoting the notion europe needs to think about its total Energy Balance and Energy Security, how dependent they remain on russia. We have those kind of dialogue with them. Thank you. I know it has been a long day. Thank you for sticking with us in both committee processes, earlier today a small portion of the proposed arms sales in saudi arabia, a close vote close in parts, there is a worry that while there is a military strategy, assisting saudis in their Bombing Campaign inside yemen but there is not a political component in the strategy. Putting pressure on the saudis, humanitarian, and you might speak more in depth by a political process. Secretary carrie was personally engaged in trying to bring them back together with the saudi backed regime, he was unsuccessful but got close. The sense is that this administration does not engage that the medical process, not actively trying to get the two sides, part of the worry is the strategy is to escalate the military conflict as a means of trying to bring the who the o houthis to the table which might effectively the military conflict. Explain to me. I would love for you to talk to the committee about your views on how disengages the political process. You are right on the issue. Let me dispel the notion we are not engaged. I lived in yemen for 21 2 years so i know a number of people well. We are engaged with the marathas, the saudis and ourselves with omanis participating too and the un. We had a few meetings to talk about the way forward including discussions with the un representative in this. We are pursuing the political situation but this involves more than the saudis and the houthis. It is more complicated than that and past efforts might have failed, not a recognition of the equities that were involved inside of yemen. I want to be careful about going too far because of this, a sensitive stage, not talking about it but we are working diligently with those parties to put together a way forward to advance political solutions. The focus on the data is critical because it is the port of entry where we can deliver massive amounts of humanitarian assistance. It is controlled by the houthis, the aid that has been send in, most is not made to the people it was supposed to make it to, we have been working with the un secretarygeneral, we are working with the saudis to gain agreement, how we might gain control of that port. We believe we can gain control of the port under some third authorities and the next step is we have got to put in place safe passage to make it all the way to other parts of the country where suffering is greatest and the safe passage piece we are working on right now. If we can stabilize the humanitarian situation and if we can disrupt the elements of the conflict itself, it is conditions for a political process to begin. Are you talking about retake that port, you are talking military campaign to retake support . The houthis would turn that over to a third authority, not the saudis, and we would gain access in the next step, how to create the safe passage to connect aid to the people that need it. How do you gain political reconciliation if you are not talking to the iranians. The iranians are part of the problem. Again i want to be cautious about how far i go given the sensitive nature of how we are trying to put this together quietly. We do not believe they have earned a seat at the table. We would like iranians to end their flow of weapons to the houthis, in particular flow of sophisticated missiles to the houthis. We need them to stop supplying that and we are working with others as to how we could get the agreement to do that. This is an extraordinarily difficult, complicated, two or three countries people think are involved and it is a very difficult country in which to reach even a political settlement having been through two civil wars now. We want to take this in a manner that will be durable if we can take it to that place. Part of the struggle is figuring out who earns a seat at the table and who doesnt. The russians have earned a seat at the table with respect to the future of syria despite the slaughter they have allowed to happen but the iranians dont earn a seat at the table inside yemen. You have to talk to people we disagree with, people who are our adversaries, if you want to make peace in places like that. How do we distinguish in that way as to why the iranians dont get a seat at the table but we give the russians a seat at the table . They are willing to play that role from this point forward and working with us to stabilize, to create conditions for political discussions. In the case of syria, we have a discussion and a process underway with the russians to achieve some stability and create conditions for the political process to unfold in geneva where neither russians nor we have a seat at the table and the geneva process but we can be there. In the case of yemen, we dont have any construct that suggests the iranians have any interest whatsoever in deescalating the conflict in yemen. I hope you will talk to folks, im sure you have, who were subject to the negotiations last year. They were very close to an agreement. I dont think you can ever categorize the iranians as being constructive but we were not far away. I think it is worthwhile to engage in direct negotiation. I dont think there is any way around it if you want to bring political resolution to that. People had their own assessments at the time. I appreciate you coming to the committee. We have some requests pending to the state department if you can give an answer reasonably soon, we appreciate it. We have sex outside witnesses testimony we would like to make part of the record. Letter from the gao, a few letters from family, lost a loved one in mali, admiral mullen, sri lankan ambassador about the cuts to his budget. Just wrap it up. You have been generous with your time. I am excited about your review of the state department, your listening and taking action to make it a more efficient place, not just throwing money at a problem is never going to solid, your business background is unique, tell us about your engagement, you have done business, i think you will be a good representative, im excited about that. An arbitrary number, it is a result it is the shooting budget. Looking forward to your review but we can make more sense of it then shooting and aiming later. Threat base is the way to go. It is not about the money we spent but a threat based budget and reform is absolutely essential. On the defense side, you are for retirement and were tough. It is going to save money and be fair to the soldiers and military members but real reform. They have been replaced by contracts, it will save money for taking people out of the headquarters unit in the mountain field, we have done all that and still going to increase by 10 because after you did those reforms, for the last few years, you need more soldiers out there, the modern equipment, they need to deter war and win the war, soft power. As i understand the need for increased power, i do not understand how you can cut 29 , looking forward to reforming the state department but i dont believe 29 reduction is ever going to make sense given the threats we face. I think this budget will cost influence, lose influence, it will put lives at risk and it will be seen as a retreat. That is why i cant support it that i will support you in your efforts to bring about a new modern state department, how we can do better with our allies. I dont mind asking people for more money. I really dont. Count me in in filling those gaps but given a role in the world i think the cuts we are talking about are sacrificing influence at a time we need more. We are turning back on programs that work pretty well at a time when more would put us over the finish line. The last eight years before you got to town were pretty tough. Nobody trusted us. Everybody thought we were taking a backseat and good luck. Leading from behind does not work. I come in you in the president for getting out and about, increasing military spending, handson approach to almost every conflict in the world and i left out one of them. Any secretary of state having to deal with 3 or 4 of these problems would have a load. Here is my goal to lighten the load, find out a way to save money but also achieve the purpose of soft power which is protect america and i look forward to working with you. You will find a better friend in this committee to reform the state department but we cannot sit on the sidelines and watch the state department retreating at a time when we need more soft dollar, not less. The subcommittee stands in recess. [inaudible conversations] secretary of state Rex Tillerson returns to capitol hill for another hearing on the state department budget. Live coverage of the House Foreign Affairs committee begins at 9 00 eastern on cspan3 and cspan. Org or listen live with the cspan radio apps. This weekend booktv on cspan2 features a Panel Discussion on race in america on saturday at 5 15 p. M. Eastern moderated by april ryan, Washington Bureau chief for American Urban Radio Networks and author of at mamas knee and the presidency in black and white. I remember being a young lady watching when we didnt have voices and let us know that we match at a time many of us are not at the table. What did Charlie Chisholm say . If you dont have a seat at the table. Mary frances berry, author of 5 and a pork chop sandwich, davis jones weaver, author of how exceptional black women lead. Wesley lowery, author of they cant kill us all. Julian malvo, author of arent we better off. On sunday at 1 15 p. M. Eastern, pulitzer prizewinning historian David Mccullough speaks to Charles Gibson about the collection of speeches on american principles. Great president s down the years who have been avid readers of history, any of them wrote history including john kennedy, even those who didnt have the benefit, read history all their lives. And realized it is essential to the role of a leader, leadership of any kind, not cause and effect. History matters. Go to booktv. Org for the complete weekend schedule. Sunday on qa day. Very deeply committed to presenting his story. Part one of our interview with pulitzer prizewinning biographer David Garreau who talks about his book rising star, the making of barack obama which covers president obamas life up to his winning the presidency. I think baracks political aspirations and sense of destiny lead him to push Sheila Yeager aside. During that time there was a wellknown figure hugely respected man, anyone in black chicago believed couldnt go higher because he was married to a white woman so in the political tradition of black chicago in the late 1980s, the early 1990s, the black man to aspire to represent black chicago is necessary to have a black spouse. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q and a. Yesterday the senate in a 5347 vote blocked the resolution that would have prevented the sale of 500 million worth of precision munitions to saudi arabia. In yemens civil war. And senator rand paul of kentucky. Pursuant to the arms export control act of 1976 i moved to