Segment 4 Of 6 Previous Hearing Segment(3) Next Hearing Segment(5)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 249 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
REINVIGORATING U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2001
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:34 p.m. in Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. We apologize for the delay. The Floor votes are among the many things over which we have no control, so thank you, General, for your patience.
Without objection, the Subcommittee assignments, which the Members have before them, are adopted.
We are genuinely honored today to have before us the new Secretary of State, Colin Powell, for the first of what we hope will be many appearances before our Committee. Mr. Secretary, I know I speak for all Members in extending to you our congratulations on your appointment and our wishes for your success.
All of us are very eager to hear from you, but before recognizing you I will exercise my prerogative as Chairman to offer a few thoughts. I will then recognize the distinguished Ranking Democratic Member, Mr. Lantos, to offer some remarks of his own, and then we will get to you, Mr. Secretary.
Page 250 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
As a new century opens, the United States finds itself at a unique moment not only in its own history, but in that of the world as well. We stand at the pinnacle of power in virtually every area—military, economic, technological, cultural, political. We enjoy a primacy that is unprecedented and virtually unchallenged. Our potential at times seems unlimited, to some perhaps even permanent.
When I ponder the world and America's role in it, there is indeed much to be thankful for, many accomplishments to take pride in and much that inspires hope. But as pleasant as these thoughts may be, I confess that I also see much that concerns me.
The source of that concern is not the long list of problems we daily confront around the globe, nor even the possibility of some larger challenge in the future that we cannot handle. These possibilities, of course, must command the attention of anyone who seriously contemplates America's place in the world, but I am confident that our resources are sufficient to handle the likely obstacles and dangers.
The concern I speak of is of the longer term, specifically how well we will use the enormous power we currently possess to secure the future for our country and the generations to come. The wealth of opportunities we currently possess are not permanent. The luxury of choice may be a passing one.
To believe that we shall always be above the fray, untouched and untouchable by the forces of destruction still at work in this world is a dangerous illusion. Our current summer may yet prove fleeting. The principal problem, the one that concerns me the most, is that we have no long-term strategy, no practical plan for shaping the future.
Page 251 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Nearly a decade has passed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and without question the world is a vastly better place because of it, but the fall of that empire took with it the central organizing principle of our foreign policy for the last half century.
Now, I have read and heard many learned discourses and debates on what the new U.S. agenda should be, but I confess that I have yet to see a compelling path identified that shows us how we should use the power we currently possess to bring into being the world we want.
Instead of a firm course, I see drift. Instead of shaping the evolution of events in pursuit of long-term objectives, we have been busy responding to problems as they arise, guided by an agenda that has been more thrust upon us by circumstance than one we have ourselves constructed for our own purposes.
That is not to say that many remarkable things have not been accomplished in the past decade—the dismantling of the Soviet empire, the liberation of the eastern half of Europe, the expansion of NATO, the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the continued spread of democracy, the resolute defense of our allies and the containment of our enemies around the world.
But these and other successes are no substitute for a long-term vision. Not only do we risk leaving the future to chance. We gamble with what we have come to take for granted. Let me illustrate my point with a couple of examples.
I believe we are watching the beginnings of an unraveling of the Atlantic relationship. By the Atlantic relationship, I mean something more than just NATO. I mean the entire complex of connections between North America and Europe, the close identity of interests that we and our allies have constructed out of the ashes of World War II.
Page 252 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
This relationship is the very foundation of the post-war international system, the irreplaceable center on which the stability of the globe depends. It is from this core that the democratic and economic revolution now transforming the world has spread.
That relationship is fraying. Slowly, quietly, it is being hollowed out even as the responsible officials reaffirm their commitment. There is no crisis to compel action, but I fear that should a crisis come it may be too late.
Closer to home, there is Mexico. Our two countries have kept each other at arm's length for virtually our entire histories, and both countries are the poorer for it, but we cannot escape the fate that geography has decreed for us. There is no other country on the planet which has the potential to affect us so broadly, so immediately.
We are in the process of transforming each other. Mexico is currently undergoing the most hopeful revolution in its long history, the success or failure of which will have a profound impact on the United States. They cannot be allowed to fail.
Now, the President is to be congratulated for his understanding and recognition of Mexico's importance, signified by his use of the term ''a special relationship'' to characterize our ties, a designation hitherto reserved only for our closest allies. When I look more closely at how we actually intend to assist Mexico's entry into the ranks of the developed world, I have trouble identifying any guiding strategy on our part.
As for Asia, that giant continent veers between great hope and great chaos. China's rise to a world status commensurate with the immense resources of its people is a certainty. That rise, and the aspirations which must accompany it, cannot but impact the system we and our allies have brought forth and maintained in East Asia since World War II.
Page 253 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Our hope is that democracy will, in time, tame this potential challenge, but there is no guarantee that we will win that race, and we may be faced with difficult decisions much more quickly than our planners have assumed.
In Asia, one can point to many areas of progress and many areas of concern, and I have no doubt that your attention will be sorely taxed by the current and future problems that region will unfailingly produce, but again I ask. What is our long-term strategy toward this region? How do our goals there fit into our global objectives?
A similar inquiry can be constructed for every region—the Middle East, south Asia, Latin America, Africa. There are a long list of other concerns—terrorism, the many assaults on human rights, the stability of the international financial system, the trade in weapons and narcotics and on and on and on, as many as one would care to list. There are far more than enough to overwhelm our attention and keep us and our successors busy indefinitely.
So again I say what concerns me most is that in the crush of the present there is little or no evidence of the development of a long-term strategy, no identification of a clear destination toward which we should be headed.
Instead, for all of our undoubted power we often seem to be at the mercy of the currents, carried downstream toward an uncertain destination instead of moving toward one of our own choosing. While our attention is transfixed on the latest crisis that CNN has decided must be dealt with, the underlying structures are shifting and historic opportunities fading.
Page 254 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Despite our power, we must resist the temptation of believing we can fix every problem, indulge in every wish. Part of our strategy must be to decide what we cannot do, what we choose not to do and to ensure that others take up their responsibilities.
I raise this issue not because I have a ready solution to offer, but because I fear no one else does either. A practical, long-term vision is sorely needed. It is a prerequisite that we dare not postpone until some more convenient time.
I say this not as a Republican. Indeed, there is no hope for success unless it is broadly bipartisan. We need consensus in this body and in this city, as well as the support of the American people.
So even as we revel in our good fortune, my great hope is that we will use this gift of time to plan for the future, unhurried, uncoerced, but mindful of the task at hand, aware that our opportunity to do so is a mortal one. Our choice is clear. We can endeavor to shape the future or simply allow it to shape us.
A century ago, Britain stood majestically at the height of her power. Within 40 years, the knife was at her throat. She survived because the United States was there to rescue her.
Mr. Secretary, as you are well aware, there is no one to rescue us. That is why we must think long and hard about how we can use the opportunity that providence and the labor of two centuries have provided us to so shape the world that the need for rescue never occurs.
Page 255 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Despite this concern, I greet the future with soaring hope; a hope born of the qualities of mind and spirit our new President and our new Secretary of State bring to the great enterprise of strengthening the cause of peace and freedom in the world.
Thank you for indulging me.
Mr. Lantos?
[The prepared statement of Chairman Hyde follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
We are genuinely honored today to have before us our new Secretary of State, Colin Powell, for the first of what we hope will be many appearances before our Committee. Mr. Secretary, I know I speak for all Members in extending to you our congratulations on your appointment and our wishes for your success. All of us are very eager to hear from you, but before recognizing you, I would like to exercise my prerogative as Chairman to offer a few thoughts. I will then recognize the distinguished Ranking Democratic Member, Mr. Lantos, to offer some remarks of his own.
As a new century opens, the United States finds itself at a unique moment, not only in its own history, but in that of the world as well. We stand at the pinnacle of power: in virtually every area—military, economic, technological, cultural, political—we enjoy a primacy that is unprecedented and virtually unchallenged. Our potential at times seems unlimited, to some perhaps even permanent.
Page 256 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
When I ponder the world and America's role in it, there is indeed much to be thankful for, many accomplishments to take pride in, and much that inspires hope. But as pleasant as these thoughts may be, I confess that I also see much that concerns me. The source of that concern is not the long list of problems we daily confront around the globe nor even the possibility of some larger challenge in the near future that we cannot handle. These possibilities, of course, must command the attention of anyone who seriously contemplates America's place in the world, but I am confident that our resources are sufficient to handle the likely obstacles and dangers.
The concern I speak of is of the longer-term, specifically how well we will use the enormous power we currently possess to secure the future for our country and the generations to come. The wealth of opportunities we currently possess are not permanent; the luxury of choice may be a passing one. To believe that we shall always be above the fray, untouched and untouchable by the forces of destruction still at work in this world, is a dangerous illusion. Our current summer may yet prove fleeting.
The principal problem, the one that concerns me the most, is that we have no long-term strategy, no practical plan for shaping the future.
Nearly a decade has passed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and without question the world is a vastly better place because of it. But the fall of that empire took with it the central organizing principle of our foreign policy for the last half-century. Now I have read and heard many learned discourses and debates on what the new U.S. agenda should be, but I confess that I have yet to see a compelling path identified that shows us how we should use the power we currently possess to bring into being the world we want.
Page 257 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Instead of a firm course, I see drift. Instead of shaping the evolution of events in pursuit of long-term objectives, we have been busy responding to problems as they arise, guided by an agenda that has been more thrust upon us by circumstances than one we have ourselves constructed for our own purposes.
That is not to say that many remarkable things have not been accomplished in the past decade—the dismantling of the Soviet empire and the liberation of the eastern half of Europe; the expansion of NATO; the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement; the continued spread of democracy; the resolute defense of our allies and the containment of our enemies around the world.
But these and other successes are no substitute for a long-term vision. Not only do we risk leaving the future to chance, we gamble with what we have come to take for granted. Let me illustrate my point with a couple of examples.
I believe we are watching the beginnings of an unraveling of the Atlantic relationship. By the Atlantic relationship, I mean something more than just NATO. I mean the entire complex of connections between North America and Europe, the close identity of interests, that we and our allies have constructed out of the ashes of World War II. This relationship is the very foundation of the post-war international system, the irreplaceable center on which the stability of the globe depends. It is from this core that the democratic and economic revolution now transforming the world has spread.
That relationship is fraying. Slowly, quietly, it is being hollowed out, even as the responsible officials solemnly reaffirm their commitment. There is no crisis to compel action, but I fear that should a crisis come, it will be too late.
Page 258 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Closer to home, there is Mexico. Our two countries have kept each other at arm's length for virtually our entire histories, and both countries are the poorer for it. But we cannot escape the fate that geography has decreed for us; there is no other country on the planet which has the potential to affect us so broadly, so immediately. We are in the process of transforming each other. Mexico is currently undergoing the most hopeful revolution in its long history, the success or failure of which will have a profound impact on the United States. They cannot be allowed to fail.
Now, the President is to be congratulated for his understanding and recognition of Mexico's importance, signified by his use of the term ''a special relationship'' to characterize our ties, a designation hitherto reserved only for our closest allies. But when I look more closely at how we actually intend to assist Mexico's entry into the ranks of the developed world, I have trouble identifying any guiding strategy on our part.
As for Asia, that giant continent veers between great hope and great chaos. China's rise to a world status commensurate with the immense resources of its people is a certainty. That rise, and the aspirations which must accompany it, cannot but impact the system we and our allies have brought forth and maintained in East Asia since World War II. Our hope is that democracy will, in time, tame this potential challenge, but there is no guarantee that we will win that race, and we may be faced with difficult decisions much more quickly than our planners have assumed. In Asia, one can point to many areas of progress, and many areas of concern, and I have no doubt that your attention will be sorely taxed by the current and future problems that region will unfailingly produce. But again I ask: what is our long-term strategy toward this region? How do our goals there fit into our global objectives?
Page 259 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
A similar inquiry can be constructed for every region: the Middle East, South Asia, Latin America, Africa. And there are a long list of other concerns: terrorism, the many assaults on human rights, the stability of the international financial system, the trade in weapons and narcotics and on and on, as many as one would care to list. There are far more than enough to overwhelm our attention and to keep us and our successors busy indefinitely. So I say again: what concerns me most is that, in the crush of the present, there is little or no evidence of the development of a long-term strategy, no identification of a clear destination toward which we should be heading. Instead, for all of our undoubted power, we often seem to be at the mercy of the currents, carried downstream toward an uncertain destination instead of moving toward one of our own choosing. And while our attention is transfixed on the latest crisis that CNN has decided must be dealt with, the underlying structures are shifting, and historic opportunities fading.
Despite our power, we must resist the temptation of believing we can fix every problem, indulge in every wish. Part of our strategy must be to decide what we cannot do, what we choose not to do, and to ensure that others take up their responsibilities.
I raise this issue not because I have a ready solution to offer, but because I fear that no one else does, either. But a practical, long-term vision is sorely needed; it is a prerequisite that we dare not postpone until some more convenient time. I say this not as a Republican; indeed, there is no hope of success unless it is broadly bipartisan. We need consensus in this body and in this city, as well as the support of the American people.
So, even as we revel in our good fortune, my great hope is that we will use this gift of time to plan for the future, unhurried, uncoerced, but mindful of the task at hand, aware that our opportunity to do so is a mortal one. Our choice is clear: We can endeavor to shape the future or simply allow it to shape us.
Page 260 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
A century ago, Britain stood majestically at the height of her power; within forty years, the knife was at her throat, and she survived only because the United States was there to rescue her. But, Mr. Secretary, as you are well aware, there is no one to rescue us. That is why we must think long and hard about how we can use the opportunities that Providence and the labors of two centuries have provided us to so shape the world that the need for rescue never occurs.
Despite this concern, I greet the future with soaring hope. I believe our new president and secretary of state bring qualities of leadership to this critical endeavor, and I have confidence that we will prevail.
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me first commend you for a very thoughtful and eloquent statement, much of which I agree with.
It is clear, as Secretary Powell's distinguished predecessor Larry Eagleberger once observed, that during the period of the Soviet-U.S. confrontation the issues were much simpler. A bipolar world offers the simplicity that this moment of unipolarity denies us. Your raising the issue, I think, is an appropriate way to begin our work.
I would be a bit more optimistic than you appear to be, Mr. Chairman, in saying that we do have an agenda, and the agenda is the enlargement of the arena of free and democratic societies. This is to be implemented in differing ways, in different places, but that clearly is our long-term objective. That is our vision. There is no doubt in my mind that our Committee and the Secretary are equally committed to that vision.
Page 261 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Secretary, on behalf of all the Democratic Members I want to extend to you a most warm welcome. We greet you in a spirit of bipartisan friendship, and we wish you great success as our new Secretary of State. If you succeed, Mr. Secretary, the United States succeeds in its mission of creating a peaceful, civilized world where governments are democratic and human rights are respected.
I know I speak for all Members of this Committee in suggesting that you visit us as often as your schedule allows. We are convinced that our frequent and candid dialogue advances U.S. national interests, which is the goal of the department you head, and it certainly is the goal of this Committee.
It is my hope, Mr. Chairman, that we can soon schedule a second meeting with the Secretary so the Members of the Committee who will not get a chance today to ask him questions will be able to do so, and my recommendation would be that when the Secretary returns we begin with the Members who will not have had a chance to ask a question today.
Mr. Secretary, you bring to this most important job in our governmental firmament a proud record of distinguished publish service and extraordinary qualities of leadership, charisma, expertise and authority. There is no doubt in my mind that you will go down in the history books as one of our great Secretaries of State.
Since assuming this post, you spoke eloquently and repeatedly of the protracted starving of our diplomatic and other international activities over a long period of time during both Democratic and Republic Administrations and Congresses, and you could not be more correct.
Page 262 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In constant dollars, the International Affairs budget has decreased by over 41 percent in the last decade and a half. The International Affairs budget of our Government is less than 1 percent of our total budget. Foreign assistance as a percentage of our gross domestic product is less than 1/10 of 1 percent.
To put this in perspective, this puts us last among the industrialized nations in the world. On a per capita basis, little Denmark devotes ten times as much to foreign assistance than we do.
I want to commend you for being forthright and candid in acknowledging the inadequacy of the resources at your disposal to do your job. If I may quote you, ''We need more money, we need better people, we need better facilities, and we need better management practices.'' You told your State Department colleagues, Mr. Secretary, ''I will fight to get you what you need to be successful, to serve the American people proudly.''
I want to publicly commend you, Mr. Secretary, for doing your best to get adequate funding for our international responsibilities both publicly and, as I understand it, behind the scenes. Despite your best efforts, the budget we have before us is a profound disappointment. It shortchanges the State Department and undermines diplomatic readiness.
In real terms, the $23 billion allocated for foreign affairs represents a minimal increase over last year and less than the amount Congress appropriated in fiscal year 2000. Incredibly, the Administration's budget before us proposes to spend less money 5 years from now than we spent last year. Mr. Chairman, this is no way to reinvigorate our foreign policy.
Page 263 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I want to assure you, Mr. Secretary, that we on our side will do everything in our power to help you get the resources you need. You are in a unique position to fund our international programs adequately because of your high standing both within the Administration and the Congress, and with the American people. We on our side will do our best to help you in this endeavor.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Lantos.
The other Members, if they have an opening statement, without objection it may be received and made a part of the record at this point in the record.
Today we welcome as our witness Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was sworn in as the 65th Secretary of State on January 20, 2001. Secretary Powell is known to us all from his leadership of the forces in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. He rose to the rank of four star General during his military career, which culminated as the twelfth Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
He has been awarded numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations, and his many civilian awards include two Presidential Medals of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal.
Since his retirement from the military, Secretary Powell has been active in many important endeavors, including the Alliance for Youth, a national non-profit organization devoted to the building of character and competence of America's young people.
Page 264 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We welcome your appearance today before the Committee on International Relations, Mr. Secretary. Please proceed with a summary of your statement. Of course, your full statement will be made a part of the record. Thanks for your patience.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE COLIN L. POWELL, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE
Secretary POWELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Lantos, for your very, very cogent and to the point opening statements. It is a great pleasure to be before the Committee for the first time, and I look forward to working with all the Members, and I will be back here as often as you invite me or as much as you can stand me, whichever may be the case.
I am very pleased to be here to present the President's budget submission for function 150, the State Department and our aid programs. It represents a 5-percent increase that is, I think, a down payment on further increases that I will be fighting for, and the President has given me every indication he will try to do more for the Department in the years ahead. Thus, this is just a beginning, if I may say, Mr. Lantos, of a process that will be continuing.
As I learn more about the Department, as I discover more problems that have to be dealt with, as I discover new challenges that have to be funded, you can be sure that I will be up here after I have been through the halls of the Office of Management and Budget and the Oval Office and gotten my final instructions. I will be up here to fight for what I believe we need.
Page 265 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I can assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that in that fight I will always try to do it in a bipartisan fashion. I know so many of you from the old days. We have had some interesting days when I was National Security Advisor or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and I assure you that I will always approach this in a bipartisan way representing my President and representing our Administration, but always trying to bring this bipartisan spirit to what we are doing because at the end of the day we are doing it for the American people.
President Bush was elected to represent the foreign policy interests of the American people and, in order to do that in the best way, bipartisanship, I think, is key so that the American people can see we understand the kinds of challenges we face.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to put my whole statement in the record at this point. The statement is a little different from previous years in that it reflects the needs of the Department as opposed to a tour de horizon of the world. You will see inside my statement that I am talking about the need for security funding, infrastructure funding, etc.
You will see some of the ideas I have to improve the manner in which we build Embassies, for example, the Foreign Buildings Office, which many of you are quite familiar with. I am going to move it out of its current location. I am going to put a retired Army Corps of Engineers General in charge of it who knows how to build things. He built the Dulles greenway. He built Fort Drum, New York. His name is Major General Chuck Williams.
We are putting people in places in the Department who know how to get the job done and who do not just ignore the studies of the past, but take studies like the Catin study to help us figure out where we ought to be going in the future. To that end, I will be coming to you with a number of organizational ideas in the future.
Page 266 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I will be doing things to improve the morale and the training and the recruitment of our Foreign Service officers, of our civil servants and of our Foreign Service Nationals as well. They are in the forefront of diplomacy. Presidents have summit meetings, Secretaries travel around the world, but it is those men and women day in and day out within the State Department family that get the foreign policy job done for the American people.
Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time I would like to take just a few minutes to respond to your comments and Mr. Lantos' comments and then leave the bulk of our limited time today for questions.
Mr. Chairman, my heart soars, as does yours, when I reflect upon the world that is in front of us with all of its opportunities and all the many risks and challenges that you mentioned. The reason my heart soars is that when I look at all of these challenges, and now they are all coming to my office all day long—whether it is Iraq, whether it is the Middle East, whether it is weapons of mass destruction, whether it is trafficking in women, whether it is human rights—I am seeing them all now.
What gives me the strength every day to deal with them and what gives me hope and what allows my heart to soar is the certain knowledge that we have a system that works. It is our system of freedom. It is our system of democracy. It is our system of the free enterprise nature of our economic model. It is our system that believes in the individual rights of men and women.
If we hold true to the principles of our system and if we keep advocating that system around the world, we are going to continue to reshape this world in a way that will benefit all mankind. I think this is a time of great opportunity for us.
Page 267 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
There is no other ideology out there that can truly compete with what we can offer to the world. We know it works. It defeated the Soviet Union. It is changing China, and we are not unmindful of the challenges that are still there, but it is changing China.
What we have to do is build on our successes and not be afraid of the challenges and the risks and to use the power we have—our political power, our diplomatic power, our military power, but especially the power of our ideas to remain engaged in the world, and that is exactly what President Bush and his national security team intend to do.
How? First, as you heard from President Bush, start with our own hemisphere. It was no accident that his first meetings were with Prime Minister Chretien of Canada, and then President Fox of Mexico. (He visited him.) We understand Mexico's importance to us now, that it is our second largest trading partner after Canada.
We have begun work with President Fox to start a new way of approaching these problems. I will be chairing committees that were formed at that summit to deal with the problems of integration. NAFTA is the great engine that can help break down barriers and give opportunities to Mexico, to provide jobs in Mexico for Mexicans and deal with the immigration problem that we all face, so I am hopeful of what we can do in our own hemisphere.
It is for that reason we are going to be committed to an Andean plan going beyond Plan Colombia in order to make sure that we deal with the drug supply problem in that part of the world. It is the same reason that we are looking forward to the Summit of the Americas next month in Quebec where all of the democratic loving nations of this hemisphere will come together to talk about democracy and education.
Page 268 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Those are the two principal agenda items. Then we will talk about trade, and then we will talk about a free trade agreement of the Americas so that we can link from the top of our hemisphere to the bottom, with trade barriers going down, for the purpose of all the nations of this hemisphere getting access to information and technology and the wealth creating potential of the free enterprise/free trade system.
We are not unmindful that we have our great alliances outside of this hemisphere, and that is why on my first trip overseas I not only went to the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, but I came back through Brussels to meet with my NATO colleagues and to meet with my new EU partners.
It is a different NATO. It is a different Europe than the Europe I knew so well as a soldier during the Cold War when I stood aside the Fulda Gap waiting for the Soviet Guards Army to come at me. It is gone. The Fulda Gap is now a tourist trap. They are selling postcards and giving out trinkets. The post that I occupied for all those years is now a college for German university students.
That is wonderful, but we have to remember that that alliance is still vital, and the message I gave to them is the United States will remain engaged in this alliance and in the European Union as well, and we can build it up. It is not going away. It is not going to fall apart.
They may want to look at things like the European security and defense identity. We have made the case that it has to be an essential part of our NATO efforts as well, and we think they understand that. NATO is still alive and well, and that is why nine more countries are standing there waiting to see if they can join this great alliance.
Page 269 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Why do they want to join? Is it to become a partner with their other European friends? Yes, but the real reason is they want to join so that they can have that connection with the bastion of freedom, and that is represented here in North America by the United States and Canada. That is why they want to be part of NATO, and that is why we have to keep letting this alliance grow.
I think we have the potential to cause NATO to be that in the future what it was in the past, the bulwark of security, peace and freedom on the Eurasian land mass and something that Russia will have to deal with. Russia's future is to their west because they need the technology, the information, and the economic know-how that comes from the west. That is what brought Gorbachev to the west those years ago that we so well remember, I think, and it will happen again.
I look to Asia. I have made the point and the President has made the point repeatedly that we are going to begin our engagement in Asia by looking at our great alliances there; our alliance with Japan, our alliance with South Korea. And the South Korean President, as you know, is in town today. I just had a breakfast with him, and then meetings with him and the President and then lunch with him. From that base of strength with our allies, we can engage countries like China who are trying to find their way.
We have no illusions. It is a communist nation. It holds in disregard the rights of its citizens, but at the same time it is a nation that is not the nation it was 20 years ago. We have to have some hope and encouragement for such a nation.
Page 270 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The same thing with Vietnam, and the same thing especially with the country that was the subject of such discussion earlier today with President Kim Dae-jung, and that country is North Korea.
Let me use the Korean peninsula as just an example of the way in which I think the world will move with all of the dangers and challenges. In due course I know you will want to talk about Iraq and the Middle East, but because I am so fresh from this meeting with Kim Dae-jung let me use it as a little example.
We have two countries on this peninsula. One country thriving, led by a freely elected man 75 years old who spent 16 years in jail, who spent most of his adult life struggling to make sure that his country remained embedded in the topsoil of freedom. He has been successful. They are thriving. They are our great partner. They are people who enjoy a level of wealth that they could never have dreamed of just a few years ago.
There to the north is this despotic, broken regime that has only one source of power, a single man with no representational activities on the part of anybody else in the country. Their economy is failing. They cannot keep going. Desperately they open the door just a little bit to see what is out there that can help them.
Now they are starting to realize that they have got to figure out a way to get access to the food that will come in from the west, how to get access to the information, unless they are willing to die. They do not want to die as a regime. He wants to hold onto power. We understand that. We have no illusions about that regime.
Page 271 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
As the two Presidents spoke today, they realized that in working together from a position of strength we can start to see what is possible with that regime and make sure that they understand this position of strength, that when our concerns are satisfied about what they are doing with weapons of mass destruction, what they are doing with large armies on the border of their neighbor, what they are doing to suppress their people, what they are doing against human rights.
All of that is unacceptable to the kind of nation that is going to be successful in the future. When they come to that realization. If they come to that realization, good things are waiting for them.
It is just a comparison between what is and what can be, what we see the power of democracy and the free enterprise system can do and what it has not done in North Korea. Hopefully the day will come, and when they are ready to engage, if they are serious and they want to let us in so we can monitor and verify what they are doing, then we will find a time and place of our choosing to engage as well.
I find these times very, very troubling and dangerous. The Middle East is a cauldron at the moment. We have challenges with Iraq, and I can talk about that in a few moments, but at the same time I am full of optimism and hope. I am full of optimism and hope because of the nature of the system we have, because of the power of our ideas and because I have seen what the power of these ideas did to win the Cold War.
It is the ideology that works, and I think the rest of the world will slowly, surely realize that if they want to be successful in this 21st century they had better figure out how to get a part of this ideology, how to use it.
Page 272 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
What we have to do is not be afraid, but remain strong. Not be arrogant, but be humble. Be willing to engage those who wish to be engaged with and be willing to press back and to fight and deter those who will not be a part of this new world.
With all the problems, and I assure you, Mr. Chairman, I see them just as you do, I remain optimistic. We are going to continue winning.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Powell follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE COLIN L. POWELL,
U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am pleased to have this opportunity to testify before you for the first time as Secretary of State, in support of President Bush's budget request for FY 2002.
I know many of you quite well—some from my days as National Security Advisor, others from my time as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
And some of you are not only new to me but new to the Congress—and I welcome you and look forward to working with you, as I look forward to working with all of you on this committee and with this 107th Congress.
I know that it is traditional for Secretaries of State to come before this committee at this time of the year and to devote most of their presentation to outlining the Administration's foreign policy—a sort of around-the-world perspective.
Page 273 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I would like to break that mold if you don't mind and instead concentrate on a subject very dear to me and, I know very dear to you—the dollars for State Department operations particularly and for Function 150 in general.
I will be pleased to discuss with you my recent trip to the Middle East and to Europe, and to answer any questions you might have with respect to President Bush's foreign policy, and I am sure you will want to ask such questions.
But the resources challenge for the Department has become such a grave one, such a serious impediment to the conduct of America's foreign policy, that I feel I must focus on that challenge in my opening statement. I would be doing a disservice to you, the authorizers of our foreign affairs budget, if I did not do so.
Mr. Chairman, in January at my confirmation hearing I told the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that I was very concerned about the State Department's budget.
At that time, I did not have the required information to make a reasoned statement about what was needed to alleviate my concern, I just knew I had deep concern. When an agency or a department is under-resourced for as long as the State Department has been, you can feel it in your bones.
Now I have the required information and I'm ready to talk.
Page 274 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
But let me briefly put what I'm going to say in context.
In January, at that same hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I said that President Bush would be a leader who faithfully represents to the world the ideas of freedom and justice and open markets.
The President has many ways he can do this, many different methods through which he can show the world the values of America and the prosperity and peace those values can generate.
His recent personal visit to Mexico to talk with President Fox is one of those methods.
Working out the means of cooperation and trade with a neighbor such as Mexico, however complex and difficult some of the underlying issues may be, is an undertaking full of promise for the future. President Bush knows how important such foreign policy efforts are and that is why we went to see President Fox.
And, as you know, I returned just last week from visits to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the West Bank, as well as to Brussels on my way home to participate in a meeting of the North Atlantic Council and to talk with some of my counterparts in Europe.
As you also may know, I was able to have a talk with Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov as well, while I was in Cairo.
Page 275 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Such trips by his Secretary of State are another of the methods the President has at his disposal to represent American values and interests in the councils of state around the world.
But the most important method by which the President presents America to the world, the most important method by far, is through the thousands of people who labor away at such representation every day of the week in almost every country in the world.
I am of course speaking of our front line troops in the State Department, as well as those here in America who support them.
I am talking about the Foreign Service officers, the Civil Service employees, and the Foreign Service nationals who make up the Department of State.
Theirs is the daily drudgery of foreign policy, punctuated by the thrill and excitement of diplomatic success ranging from the minor to the sublime, from the courteous handling of a visa application to the inking of a treaty limiting conventional arms in Europe.
Mr. Chairman, there are no finer people chipping away at tyranny, loosening the bonds of poverty, pushing the cause of freedom and peace, on the US government payroll.
And it is a mystery to me how they have continued to do it over the years with so little resources.
Page 276 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Many of you have visited Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo where our GIs are stationed. It is a superb, first-class facility put in overnight to make sure that our troops are taken care of. But if you visited some of our dilapidated embassies and other facilities in the region, you would wonder whether the same government was taking care of them. The same bald eagle is clutching the arrows and the olive branch, but in many of State's buildings that American eagle is very ill-housed.
Also at Camp Bondsteel there are excellent capabilities with respect to information technology, including the capability to send unclassified e-mails. In many of State's facilities there were no such capabilities.
Now since the time that construction was begun on Camp Bondsteel, with the help of this committee and of the Congress as a whole, and with the good work of former Secretary Albright and her dedicated people, we have made great strides in our unclassified information technology at State.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and all the members on this committee, for what you have done to get this ball rolling.
Many of you were active in steering the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Act—our authorizing legislation and an important counterpart to the later appropriations bill—through this committee and ultimately to floor passage.
In that regard, I want to single out Representative Chris Smith, the bill's House sponsor, and Representatives Cynthia McKinney and Ben Gilman, its co-sponsors, for their very active involvement.
Page 277 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I know you will be shepherding similar authorizing legislation through this committee soon, and we at the State Department look forward to working with you on it.
And I want to thank all the Members of this committee for the attention you have shown to our foreign policies and for your active encouragement of many of your other colleagues to support the resources needed by State Department programs and people.
My hope is that, in the first year of the Bush Administration, you will work with us to continue this good progress we have made, and to see that our operations and our foreign affairs are put back in balance with everything else we do in the world.
For example, now that we have made such strides in our unclassified information technology, we have to continue those strides by gaining broad-based Internet access. At the same time, we have to begin work to create classified Local Area Network capabilities, to include classified e-mail and word-processing.
Mr. Chairman, as you well know, some of our embassies in addition to lacking up-to-date information technology are not as secure as they should be—and so we have people who are not as secure as they should be. But again thanks to the House and Senate's attention to this matter, we are beginning to get a handle on it.
I understand that when the FY 99 emergency supplemental was being put together, we did not have the sort of robust buildings program that was needed to meet security needs. We had to prove that we could ramp up to such a program and then manage it.
Page 278 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Let me just say that in the two and a half years since the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, we are well on the way to doing just that.
We provided an immediate stand-up of facilities in Dar Es Salaam and Nairobi and within twelve months replaced each with more secure interim facilities that will be in place until the new replacement facilities are finished.
We broke ground on those permanent facilities in August.
Likewise, we just completed construction in Kampala, Uganda and our people have moved in just 15 months after construction began.
We will also move into a new embassy in Doha, Qatar in early June of this year.
Other new construction projects where we have broken ground include Zagreb, Istanbul, and Tunis.
Ground-breaking for Abu Dhabi will occur this spring.
In addition, we've funded over 1200 individual perimeter security upgrades with over 50 percent now completed.
But we are still not moving quickly enough nor efficiently enough.
Page 279 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
And I want to work with you and the other members of Congress to gain your confidence so that we can move faster and eliminate some of the barriers that cost money to overcome.
In that regard, we are carefully studying construction costs.
I know that we can do better in adapting the best practices of industry and smart engineering techniques and technologies to embassy construction.
The hundred-foot set-back, for example, can sometimes be overcome by better and smarter construction.
Blast protection remains the same but the dollar costs are significantly lower because acquisition of land is exorbitantly expensive. If we can provide the same degree of security through a better built wall that has only, say, a fifty-foot set-back, then that's what we are going to do.
And we believe better overall management is also achievable so that construction delays don't eat up precious more dollars.
Better overall management includes bringing on board an experienced operations executive to manage the Overseas Facilities Program, as recommended by the Overseas Presence Advisory Panel. It also includes realigning the Foreign Buildings Office from within the Bureau of Administration to a stand-alone organization reporting directly to the Undersecretary for Management—requiring, of course, consultation with the Congress. And I hope I'll have your support on that.
Page 280 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The combination of strong leadership, realignment of the function, and an industry panel to assist with identifying best practices from the private sector, along with implementation of other OPAP recommendations, will greatly improve the management of the overseas buildings program.
I have asked one of the Army's finest engineers, retired Major General Charles Williams, to head this effort. He is an expert at reducing costs while delivering high quality and I've no doubt he will offer us new ways to execute and to manage our embassy construction.
As a result, we may be able to reduce that hundred-million-dollar price tag on new embassy construction. I am committed to working with you and the appropriators on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, in the past we have not in all cases done the best we could to see that our overseas personnel were as secure as they should be—but together, you and I can change that. Together, we can continue this very positive effort we have begun to pull the State Department into the Twenty-First Century.
And that is what we are after in the President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2002—to continue this very positive forward momentum.
The President's request of about $23.9 billion—a five-percent increase over this year—will do just that.
Page 281 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We are providing increased funding, for example, toward our steadfast commitment to the safety of our men and women serving overseas.
These dollars will allow us to continue to address our infrastructure needs including the construction of new, secure facilities and the continuing refurbishment of existing ones.
These dollars also provide the means to improve security operations—including the hiring of additional security officers who are essential to the prevention and deterrence of terrorist attacks against our embassies, such as those that occurred in Nairobi and in Dar Es Salaam.
We will not be deterred by such attacks from doing our job in the world—but we will take measures to protect our people.
The President's Budget also provides funds for modernizing—and in some cases acquiring for the first time—the required information technology for the conduct of foreign affairs.
These dollars will allow us to modernize our secure Local Area Network capability, including e-mail and word-processing. Likewise, they will allow us open access channels to the Internet so that our people can take full advantage of this enormously important new means of communication and research. This access will also increase communications and information sharing within the foreign affairs community.
Page 282 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Chairman, this development alone has the potential to revolutionize the way we do business.
Take for example the great products turned out by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service, or ''FBIS'' as we call it.
No longer will an ambassador or political or economic officer in one of our embassies have to wait for the bound copies to arrive by courier or mail at his desk or office, often delaying the hottest, most recent news.
Switching on the computer, accessing the Internet, and clicking on the FBIS account puts the latest news from in-country and regional newspapers and periodicals at your fingertips almost instantly.
Similarly, clicking onto your e-mail account allows you to query any subject matter expert in the system as swiftly and securely as modern technology permits.
When I arrived in the Transition Office at State in December of last year, the first thing I put on the table behind my desk was my computer with access to my e-mail account.
I didn't want to be out of touch for an instant.
We are talking of course about unclassified communications. But unclassified communications are a considerable part of our everyday routine.
Page 283 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
As you know, we need secure methods of communications also. And with the President's Budget we will continue installing these secure methods everywhere we need them.
The Department of State intends to exploit fully the ongoing technology and information revolutions. Our long-term investment strategy and ongoing acquisition of new technology will continue to address the many information needs of our foreign policy professionals.
I have personally committed to this transformation and the President's Budget for 2002 is the next step toward fulfilling that commitment.
I have also personally committed to reinvigorating the Foreign Service—an arm of our professional public service apparatus every bit as important as the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Coast Guard.
To do this, we need to hire more of America's brightest and most talented young people who are committed to service.
And we will only be successful if we change how we recruit, assess, and hire Foreign Service Officers. And we are doing that. We also need to be smarter about how we market the State Department if we are to win the fight for talent.
Funding alone will not solve our human resource challenges. We must create a place of work that can compete with our higher paying private sector competitors for the very best young people America has to offer.
Page 284 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
And I assure you we will, by providing a career that rewards innovation, recognizes achievement, and demands accountability and excellence. With your help we will win the fight for talent and that victory will be reflected every day in America's foreign policy.
The President's Budget provides the dollars to hire a significant number of new foreign service officers so we can establish a training float—a group of FSOs that will begin to relieve some of the terrible pressures put on the conduct of America's foreign policy by the considerable shortage of FSOs we are currently experiencing.
Mr. Chairman, there are other areas of the President's Budget that I want to highlight in addition to embassy security, construction and refurbishment; information technology; and hiring of new people for the Foreign Service.
There are the program areas that must be funded to advance America's foreign policy interests overseas—the backbone of our foreign affairs.
These are programs aimed at restoring peace, building democracy and civil societies, safeguarding human rights, tackling non-proliferation and counter-terrorism challenges, addressing global health and environment issues, responding to disasters, and promoting economic reform.
For example, the Budget expands counterdrug, alternative development, and government reform programs in the Andean region.
Page 285 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The Budget provides for military assistance to Israel to help meet cash flow needs for procurement of U.S. defense systems, and to demonstrate our solid commitment to Israel's security.
The Budget fully funds all 2002 scheduled payments to the Multilateral Development Banks and the U.S. commitment to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries debt reduction initiative.
The Budget increases funding for Migration and Refugee Assistance—to give crucial and life-sustaining support to refugees and victims of conflict throughout the world.
The Budget reflects the Bush administration's leadership in promoting the protection of human rights, for example, in combating impunity for crimes against humanity in Sierra Leone.
The Budget increases resources for combating global HIV/AIDS and trafficking in women and children, and for basic education for children.
With respect to HIV/AIDS and other global infectious diseases, I want to thank Representatives Sherman and Gilman, as well as Representatives Leach and Lee, for your attention last year to the plus-up of funds for HIV/AIDS.
I will also point out that when the plus-ups were made for HIV/AIDS, the billpayers were important accounts such as Foreign Military Financing. What we really needed was an overall increase.
Page 286 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
And when Members went to conference on the bill that is what we got—an overall plus-up with FMF funding restored. That development is worth thanking all of you for again—because that action helped provide the full resources that are vital to these programs.
The President's Budget for 2002 also provides money to support peacekeeping operations around the world, such as those in Bosnia and in Kosovo.
The Budget also supports political and economic transitions in Africa, with emphasis on those countries, such as Nigeria and South Africa, that have a direct bearing on our national security and on those countries that have demonstrated progress in economic reform and in building democracy.
Building democracy and civil societies remains a top priority of this administration, so our Budget also supports short- and long-term programs to support democratic elements in countries where alternative voices are silenced. Toward this end, the Budget increases funding for U.S. international broadcasting to support the free flow of information by providing accurate information on world and local events to audiences abroad.
It also sustains our efforts to remove landmines in former war-ravaged countries—landmines that kill and maim children and innocent civilians.
The Budget supports our efforts to reduce risks posed by international terrorism, and to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction by supporting stronger international safeguards on civilian nuclear activity and by helping other countries to improve their controls on exports of potentially dangerous technology.
Page 287 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The Budget also provides increased funding for the Peace Corps, another group of bright and talented individuals committed to service. The Peace Corps has more than 7000 currently serving volunteers addressing a variety of problems in the areas of agriculture, education, the environment, small business, and health matters.
Mr. Chairman, before I conclude my prepared statement, let me call your attention to several areas upon which I want to place special emphasis.
In addition to what I have already highlighted with respect to the money for the Andean region, you know that much of that money is directed at Plan Colombia.
We are asking for money to continue and expand programs begun with the $1.3 billion emergency supplemental in FY 2000.
Colombia is the source or transit point of 90 per cent of the cocaine and over 50 percent of the heroin that arrives in America. Those percentages are increasing, by the way.
Neighboring countries, such as Bolivia and Peru, have conducted effective coca eradication programs, but maintaining their successes will require vigilance and U.S. support.
The Bush administration believes strongly that any successful counterdrug strategy in the region must include funding to bring greater economic and political stability to the region and a peaceful resolution to Colombia's internal conflict.
Page 288 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We must capitalize on the ground work of programs funded thus far, including the expansion of Andean eradication and interdiction programs, sustained alternative development programs, and continued attention to justice and government reform initiatives.
In addition, the President's Budget requests funding for Ecuador, Brazil, Venezuela, and Panama, to strengthen their efforts to control drug production and the drug trade. Our efforts must be regional in scope and this money keeps them so.
Mr. Chairman, I also want to emphasize our efforts to de-layer the bureaucracy at State to promote a more effective and efficient organization for the conduct of our foreign policy.
We have begun an initiative to empower line officers—the true experts in most areas—and use their expertise to streamline decision-making and increase accountability.
The current organization sometimes complicates lines of authority within the Department and hinders the development and presentation of a coherent foreign policy, and thus mars its effectiveness.
I ask your help on this serious matter. When I want to carve out needless and even hurtful pieces of the current organization, I will need your support. I won't do it unless I am certain it is necessary, but when I do it I will look for your assistance and backing.
Page 289 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I feel very strongly about this effort. Throughout the last four years I have seen up close and personal how American business has streamlined itself. This streamlining is sometimes ruthless; it is sometimes hard; it is almost always necessary. We need to do the same thing at the State Department.
Mr. Chairman, consistent with the effort to reduce subsidies that primarily benefit corporations rather than individuals, our Budget for international affairs will include savings in credit subsidy funding for the Export-Import Bank.
As you know, the Export-Import Bank provides export credits, in the forms of direct loans or loan guarantees, to U.S. exporters who meet basic eligibility requirements and who request the Bank's help.
The President's Budget proposes savings of about 25 per cent in the Bank's credit subsidy requirements through policy changes that focus the Bank on U.S. exporters who truly cannot access private financing, as well as through lower estimates of international risk for 2002.
These changes could include a combination of increased risk-sharing with the private sector, higher user fees, and more stringent value-added tests.
These efforts at redirection anticipate that the role of the Export-Import Bank will become more focused on correcting market imperfections as the private sector's ability to bear emerging market risks becomes larger, more sophisticated, and more efficient.
Page 290 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Chairman, there is one more issue I want to highlight here.
I want to stress the urgency of releasing $582 million in arrears payments to the United Nations and lifting the cap on peacekeeping payments so we can pay at the rate we agreed at the UN after more than a year of negotiation.
If we do not deliver on our end of this commitment, we will halt the momentum for UN reform and accumulate new arrears.
I also want to work with you to allow payment of the third and final tranche of arrears. This includes de-linking the agencies and organizations involved so that bad performers have only themselves to blame and those agencies and organizations not affected by benchmarks can receive their arrears now.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I believe we have an historic opportunity with this Budget to continue—and even to speed up a little—the refurbishment of our foreign policy organization and, ultimately, of our foreign policy itself.
I believe this is as it should be for what we are doing, finally, is redressing the imbalance that resulted from the long duration—and necessary diversion of funds—of the Cold War.
For over half a century we found it absolutely imperative that we look to our participation in that titanic struggle for ideological leadership in the world as the first and foremost requirement of our foreign policy and our national security.
Page 291 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Now, the Cold War is over. Now, as all of you have recognized, we are involved in spreading the fruits of our ideological triumph in that war. Now, we have need of a more sophisticated, a more efficient, a more effective foreign policy. Indeed too, a more traditional foreign policy—with the exception that there is nothing traditional about the information and technology revolutions nor about the speed with which they are bringing the potential for a wider and more prosperous freedom to the entire world.
Now is the time to provide to the principal practitioners of that foreign policy the resources they need to conduct it.
Thank you, and now I welcome your questions.
Chairman HYDE. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I have been listening to testimony for this is my 27th year in Congress, and I cannot say I have ever been excited by testimony, but you have done it.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. It is very exciting and challenging.
We are going to go to questions now. I would ask the Members, and I am imposing on you to be brief so that as many of us can get an opportunity to question the Secretary, whose time is limited.
Page 292 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I will ask just one rather short question, Mr. Secretary, regarding Iraq. What is our policy, to contain Saddam Hussein or to remove him?
Secretary POWELL. There are several policies really, and let me answer your question by describing three baskets of things we do.
First, we work within the UN system to make sure he does not develop and put into his inventory weapons of mass destruction. That is a result of the resolutions he had reached with the end of the Gulf War. That has nothing to do with regime overthrow. That is not a UN objective and is not part of the oil for food program or the sanctions program.
The United States, working with some of its allies, principally the United Kingdom, also has a no fly zone which is used to protect the Kurds in the northern part of the country and also to provide warning and protection in the southern part of Iraq, and we have been flying in those no fly zones for some time.
The third part of U.S. policy does deal with regime changes. It has been part of the Government's policy for a number of years now to advocate that the country would be better off without this regime, and to that end and with the support of the Congress we have been supporting organizations that are committed to that proposition. The principal one known well to this Committee is the Iraqi National Congress.
As part of the new Administration's look, we are reviewing all three of those baskets. When we took office on the 20th of January and I stepped into the cockpit to see what was going on, especially with respect to the sanctions basket as it is called—the UN effort—what I found was a plane that was descending, and it was on the way to a crash.
Page 293 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The sanctions were starting to fall apart. Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime had successfully put the burden on us as denying the wherewithal for civilians and children in Iraq to live and to get the nutrition and the health care they needed. That was not true, but we had gotten that burden.
I found that our allies wanted the sanctions to go. Some of our allies did. I found weakening throughout the Gulf region with respect to the sanctions. I found the Russians wanting to make a serious change, the Syrians wanting to make a serious change, the UN wondering if this regime, this sanctions regime, can continue.
Mr. Chairman, what I discovered was something that was collapsing, and what we have been trying to do for the last 6 weeks now is to see how we could stabilize this collapsing situation and find some basis of stabilization that would bring the coalition back together—the UN, our permanent five colleagues in the UN, and the moderate Arab nations, and all others who are concerned about the Iraqi regime.
One model we are looking at, the model I am discussing with all of my colleagues and I discuss in other lands and discuss with you today, begins with this proposition. First, let's stop talking about what we are doing to the Iraqi children. It is not us. It is him.
Let's start talking about exactly what the sanctions exist for in the first place, and that is to keep them from developing weapons of mass destruction. It is not to hurt a civilian population. That was never the purpose of it. The oil for food program was put in place to take care of the civilian needs, but to make sure he did not get weapons and he did not get materials that could develop weapons of mass destruction.
Page 294 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
If that was the goal, let's take a look at how we are applying the sanctions and make sure the sanctions apply to that goal and take a hard look at any other things we are doing within the sanctions regime that might be denying civilian goods to his population and get that off our shoulders as a burden. Everybody is pointing to us as being responsible for the problems of the civilian population.
If we do that, I think we are in a much stronger position with all of the coalition members together again and are making it clear in a way that cannot be denied by Saddam Hussein or by any other Arab leaders—make it perfectly clear that the sanctions are directed at weapons of mass destruction.
I would not call it easing the sanctions. What has been happening is not only an easing of sanctions. It verges on a collapse of sanctions. This gives us a new floor that all can agree to.
As I took this idea around the Gulf region, and as I talked to my NATO and United Nations colleagues about it, I found pretty good support. In fact, in Syria when I discussed it with President Assad, who has been calling for the end of sanctions, he saw some merit in this because he, too, is concerned about weapons of mass destruction. He even suggested that if we can move in this direction he is willing to put the flow of oil through that pipeline under UN control, which it is now not under.
Another piece of this policy is to get those front line states like Syria back under UN sanction control. This policy also involves making sure we understand that at the end of the day the only way to get out of this money controlling regime is for us to be satisfied that no such weapons exist or are being developed.
Page 295 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The inspectors have to go back in. My judgement is we should not plead with the Iraqi government to let them in. We have put these tougher sanctions in at a level we all can support. We start closing down some of these outlets that exist from the front line states, and then we let him know this is the way it is going to be, and we are going to keep control of your money until our inspectors have satisfied themselves, so you let us know when you are ready to let the inspectors in.
We also reserve the right under this policy, that if and when we find facilities or other activities going on in Iraq that we believe are inconsistent with their obligations, to take military action against such facilities and will do so. That is the UN piece.
On the no fly zone piece, it is essentially between us and the United Kingdom. Secretary Rumfeld and his associates in the United Kingdom are reviewing how we are conducting those no fly zone operations to see if we are doing them in the best possible way to achieve the objective.
With respect to the third basket, which is regime change and opposition activities, last week I released more money for the Iraqi National Congress so they can step up the level of their activity, and the Administration is also undertaking a fuller review of other things that can be done to support opposition activities against the regime.
That is the approach we are taking, Mr. Chairman. We are still in a consultative stage. It is something that the United Nations will have to consider.
Page 296 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
There is an Arab summit coming up, and we will have to see what their judgement is, but I think the characterization that I have sometimes seen that we are easing up or giving up is quite incorrect. We discovered a collapsing situation. We are trying to fix that collapsing situation with respect to the sanctions.
Chairman HYDE. Thank you very much.
Mr. Lantos?
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I take it you mentioned Kim Dae-jung's age because you wanted to indicate there is room for young people in South Korea?
Secretary POWELL. Yes, sir.
Mr. LANTOS. I also have one question, but I would like to put it in some kind of perspective. My question relates to the current violence in Israel and the area surrounding Israel.
Over the past 8 years, the outgoing Administration and the President directly worked diligently, as you know, Mr. Secretary, to help broker a peace between Israel and her neighbors. The Barak government offered breathtaking concessions to both Syria and the Palestinians in hopes of securing agreements with both of them.
Page 297 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The net result has been not only a complete rejection of those concessions by both Syria and the Palestinians, but a return to violence by the Palestinians that has yet to be curtailed. While we all have hoped that a comprehensive peace could be achieved, it now seems clear that the Palestinians are not yet ready for a peace agreement.
The Palestinian campaign of violence and terrorism continues unabated. We have not seen any effort by the Palestinian Authority, its institutions and its leadership to end that violence. In fact, what we have seen is the Palestinian Authority's military units participate in that violence and acts of terrorism.
Recent reports by a Palestinian Authority official revealed that this violence was organized and planned long before Mr. Sharon's visit to the Mount. There are daily reports of suicide bombers, drive by shootings with the intent of terrorizing Israel's civilian population.
Now, the United States opened a dialogue with the PLO, which we all supported, because they made a commitment to end their policy of terror and to support sincerely a negotiating process. It becomes now clear with every day that those commitments are clearly not valid.
It is time for us, I believe, to let Yasir Arafat know that we will no longer tolerate terrorism instead of diplomacy. It is time to publicly place the blame where it belongs. It is time to tell Mr. Arafat that if his policies continue the U.S. will no longer deal with him as a political leader, but we will deal with him once again as a terrorist.
Page 298 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Now, during the campaign, Mr. Secretary, President Bush stated the following:
''I recognize the importance of the peace process and the key role that the United States can play, but my support for its role is not conditional on the outcome of the peace process. America's special relationship with Israel precedes the peace process, and Israel's adversaries should know that in my Administration the special relationship will continue even if the Arabs cannot bring themselves to make true peace with Israel.''
Would you care to tell us whether this is currently the policy of the Administration?
Secretary POWELL. It certainly is, Mr. Lantos. Our support for Israel is unchanged. For 50 years now we have supported this democratic nation, which has such close ties to the United States, and in fact we can take some credit for the existence of the State of Israel in the support that President Truman gave.
You can be sure that whatever might be happening with the peace process, whatever might be happening in any other process that is underway in the area, the United States support for the security independence of Israel will always be there. President Bush reaffirms that in every one of our conversations on the Middle East situation.
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I still have a few moments. I would like to follow up with an item. The Israeli-Egyptian peace makes it mandatory for the two countries to maintain a resident Ambassador in each other's capitols.
Page 299 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Now, Mr. Mubarak has withdrawn the Egyptian Ambassador many months ago, and I am wondering what steps, if any, we are taking to insure that Egypt lives up to its contractual obligation under the peace treaty.
Secretary POWELL. We have made the point to Egypt that we think it would be in the best interest of the stability in the region, and in light of agreements, for their Ambassador to return to Israel. They have chosen not to do so at this point.
I hope that if we can start to get this spiral of violence turned around, and the kind of points you made a moment ago, sir, I made to Yasir Arafat just about 10 days ago. Unless the violence goes down, you cannot expect to see economic activity pick up. You cannot expect to see the siege lifted.
We have to get this spiral of violence going in the other direction. Until I think the violence starts to subside and some stability is restored and some confidence building measures take place, perhaps at that time President Mubarak might choose to change his mind and send the Ambassador back.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Gilman?
Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I join in welcoming you to our Committee. We thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. We look forward to the opportunity to meet with you and hope we will share many more days ahead. We look forward to your distinguished contributions in your new post.
Page 300 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
With regard to the resources that you have indicated your department needs, on my watch as Chairman of our Committee total resources available for the State Department in real dollars, according to the Congressional Research Service, rose to a level significantly higher than ever before.
In constant dollars, spending on State Department activities by predecessor agencies was $2.1 billion in 1981, and it is now $4.3 billion, in the year 2001. State Department funding has nearly doubled. Indeed, you may need even more.
We hope you will take a look at the 150 account, which you have already discussed as being a 5-percent increase. It may need even more than that in the days ahead, and I for one will be pleased to support that.
Permit me to ask you to consider several questions. With regard to Iraq, it is gratifying to hear your thoughts about Iraq. I have been concerned, as many of us have been, with regard to some of those statements to the effect that the sanctions against Iraq have been hurting the Iraqi people.
It should be obvious to all of us that Saddam Hussein's bank accounts are pretty heavy right now; that it is Saddam who is hurting his people, not the sanctions. Saddam certainly has more than enough money available to provide all the food and medicine that his people need. He simply refuses to do so and is using it to purchase more weapons.
Loosening the sanctions against Iraq could provide Saddam Hussein with a greater ability to increase his weapon account, and we would be depending on sensitive help from nations that have not provided dependable help in the past. I am pleased to hear you say you will try and stabilize the cooperation with our allies in that direction.
Page 301 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Secretary, we applaud you for doing more to disrupt Saddam's sanction-busting efforts. Why, I ask you, do we permit oil to be exported by way of Syria, evading the United Nations? Why do we allow the airport in Baghdad to remain open if it is being used to bust our sanctions?
A further question. With regard to Haiti, before returning to power in Haiti Mr. Aristide made a number of promises to former President Clinton, including his commitment to resolve Haiti's ongoing crisis through dialogue and through compromise.
France's Ambassador to Haiti publicly asked why Mr. Aristide precipitously installed a government and a new electoral college when his priority should have been a dialogue with Haiti's civil society. Clearly all parties, including the opposition, must be committed to that dialogue for it to work.
That being said, it is obvious that Aristide is not keeping his promises, but is presenting us with a fait accompli. Have we made it clear or are we going to make it clear to Mr. Aristide after having spent billions of dollars to try to help that country that our priority toward his government will be determined by constructive action on his part rather than mere promises?
One final question. With regard to Jerusalem, through the years we have authorized resources for moving the American Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. While President Clinton did not sign the Jerusalem Embassy Act—he refused to either sign or veto it—it became law as adopted by the Congress.
Page 302 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
President Bush—and I appreciate what he said—said he would ''immediately begin the process'' of moving the Embassy there. Can you tell us when that can be accomplished, and is there any activity in that direction? I will welcome your response.
Secretary POWELL. I will be very brief.
Mr. GILMAN. Thank you.
Secretary POWELL. On sanctions, if we modify the policy in the direction that I described, no more money goes to Saddam Hussein. It merely gives him more civilian goods he can choose to buy or not to buy. It does not give him any access to weapons that he does not have now.
In fact, the weapons sanction piece of this has worked rather well. His army is one-third original size, and there is no glaring evidence of a capability that we have to worry about at the moment, but we are sure he has something and he is working on something.
Second, with respect to the Syrian pipeline, as I noted earlier you are quite correct. They say they were just testing the pipeline. We think there was more use to it than just testing it, and that is why I was pleased that President Assad said he would be willing to put it back under UN control.
With respect to the airports, I will have to take a look at that. At the moment it is not clear that the manner in which the airport is being used is violative of any particular aspects of the sanction regime.
Page 303 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
On the Haiti situation, the previous Administration negotiated an eight point plan that Mr. Aristide was to abide by before we would start any financing of any of his activities or releasing aid. We are monitoring that eight point plan, and we reserve the right to add other points to that plan if we think it is necessary.
What I would like to do, Mr. Gilman, is rather than just go off the top of my head, the last report I had on it about 2 weeks ago said that there had been some compliance toward those points and some non-compliance, and so I will put something in the record on that.
[The information referred to follows:]
Question:
Have we made it clear or are we going to make it clear to Mr. Aristide after having spent billions of dollars to try to help that country that our priority toward his government will be determined by constructive action on his part rather than mere promises?
Written response:
President Bush wrote to President Aristide on February 13 and, noting that Aristide has pledged to resolve the controversies that impede Haiti's progress, expressed our conviction that Aristide's December eight-point commitment to rectify election problems and address other serious issues is a starting point for realigning the relationship between our two countries.
Page 304 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We have further informed President Aristide, through our Ambassador to Haiti, that a national accord resolving the electoral impasse is a minimal prerequisite for our consideration of much-needed bilateral assistance and a potentially favorable U.S. view on renewed lending from the international financial institutions.
Secretary POWELL. On Jerusalem, President Bush is committed to moving our Embassy to Jerusalem. The process is ongoing. We have not started any actions yet, and in light of the very difficult situation that exists right now we will continue to examine how that process should start; but it does remain his commitment to move the capitol—excuse me, the Embassy—to the capitol of Israel, which is Jerusalem.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, if I might just submit some additional questions in writing to the Secretary in order to save time?
Chairman HYDE. Without objection.
Mr. GILMAN. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Berman of California?
Mr. BERMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, it is great to have you here. In your rather breathtaking testimony you spoke of the power of ideas, and for some other time at some future date I would be curious about how the ability of Americans to spread the power of their ideas in order to promote democracy, freedom and pluralism——
Page 305 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secretary POWELL. I would love to do that.
Mr. BERMAN [continuing]. Is consistent with our sort of a relic of American foreign policy. There are legal constraints on the ability of Americans to travel to certain countries simply as one of the tools of foreign policy, a tool which I think ends up undermining the goals of the foreign policy you spoke so eloquently about; but that is for another time.
I would like to talk a little bit about the budget and, if I have any time, about Iraq. I actually saw the 5 percent increase and I said you must have waged a heck of a fight at a time when for a lot of different reasons, some of which I like and some of which I do not like, there were tremendous pressures to constrain the Administration's budget proposal. Here—my guess is this was not a result of a grassroots outpouring of the American people—the 150 function goes up by 5 percent.
Then I looked at the out years, and I said whoa. My assumption is that somewhere there was a conversation, and you said, I will worry about the out years in the out years, and that is not a flight path that we should assume is the last word on this subject.
We are appropriating this year. Those out years are intolerable. They go back to the kinds of things that were being done in 1995 and 1996 and 1997 around here.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, Mr. Berman. My concern was this first year, and that is what I fought for, recognizing that there were limitations as to what we could do in the out years at this time. From my Pentagon experience, I realized that out years always come around again.
Page 306 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. BERMAN. Yes, they do.
Secretary POWELL. I will be back.
Mr. BERMAN. Okay. Secondly, you talked a lot about operations, and there are critical issues there. That is probably our first obligation; to make sure that the operations of the Department are efficient and are well funded and are well staffed.
There are questions between the balance of Washington and the outposts and whether we are too heavy in Washington and too light in our Embassies and consulates around the world. There is also tension that this is only a 5-percent increase. There are programmatic needs crying to be filled that have in many places been cut quite seriously.
When Mr. Gilman talked about 1980 and 2000 he was talking about the State Department budget. If you take the entire International Relations budget since 1985, it is way below, and the program is where the huge costs—that is, where the blood has been sucked out of the turnip.
I would hope as you get specific on these items that the programmatic issues of aid—aid to Africa, specific kinds of programs that are critical to what we want to see happen in the rest of the world—also get the attention in this budget.
Secretary POWELL. I will, Mr. Berman. It is those kind of programs that achieve the kinds of objectives that I was talking about of democracy and economic development and giving people access to the world that is out there, helping to spread the Internet, doing something about HIV AIDS because it is a catastrophe in subsaharan African.
Page 307 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We have an obligation, if we believe in democracy and freedom, to stop this catastrophe from destroying whole economies and families and societies and cultures and nations, and so thank you for that support.
I will also argue as we go forward, with all due respect. There are some constraints that are placed in such accounts by earmarking them. I hope at some point we can have a discussion on earmarking.
Mr. BERMAN. The Senate also should hear your comments.
Secretary POWELL. You did say yes, did you not, Mr. Berman?
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Leach of Iowa?
Mr. LEACH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, first on resources. As a young Foreign Service officer 30 years ago, I served in the bowels of your department. I have been very concerned about the way resources have been allocated over the past several decades, and I am pleased with your commitment in this direction.
It struck me the bigger problem is management, and one of the reasons that I think your selection is extraordinary is not simply your background, but that you seem to have a natural instinct possibly because of your Pentagon experience to work within institutions.
Page 308 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Your first weeks, in which you have brought the Department together and brought the President of the United States to the Department, I must say are exceptionally impressive. I know of no change around in attitudes in any institution of governance that has been more remarkable in a shorter period of time than that which has occurred at the Department of State. We want to express our appreciation for you for that.
From the Asia Subcommittee's point of view, I want to raise an issue that relates to what I think is going to be as difficult outside of the Middle East issue as there will be in the next 2 years, and that is symbolized by events this week with the announcement of a 17 percent increase in Chinese funding for defense.
It strikes me that we are potentially in an action/ reaction cycle where in China there is a huge misunderstanding of American policy. Whether it be the 19th century where we stood for the open door or in the last 30 years where we have been very consistent with a policy based on the three communiques in the Taiwan Relations Act, we have argued for and stand for one China. By the same token, there should be no change in the status of Taiwan based on use of force or coercion.
What I would like for you to comment on if you could, sir, is whether you are concerned about what appears to be a Chinese misunderstanding and whether you could affirm that the policy of the United States is one of consistency, as well as one of wanting to bring China into the world forthcomingly rather than to isolate it, which the Chinese apparently think is an emerging trend in this Administration.
Page 309 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secretary POWELL. We have tried to communicate to the Chinese and will do so more effectively toward the end of the month when the Vice-Premiere comes here for a visit, that we do not view them as an enemy. We do not wish to make them an enemy.
At the same time, we have to be realistic about the relationship. They are not a strategic partner. They are a trading partner. They are regional competitors. We sometimes have very different interests in the region. We do not like how they treat their people. We do not like the fact that they export arms and missiles and other things. They have gotten a little better lately, but we have reservations about some of the things they have been doing.
So the approach that the Administration wants to make to China is that we understand they have interests. We have interests. Let's talk about our interests. Where they are common we can move forward. Where they diverge, where we disagree, let's talk about that disagreement.
I think what we have to show to the PRC leadership is coherence and consistency over time, and we ought to talk about human rights and proliferation and arms control. Why are you increasing your budget 17 percent? Give us some transparency in what you are doing, the kind of transparency you can see in our budget, if you really want us to build a solid relationship with each other.
We are going forward with national missile defense. Here is why it is not a threat to you. Let's talk about it. If you think it is a threat, let's hear your arguments. We do not think it is. We think we have the better argument. All of these things we should discuss.
Page 310 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
It will all be within the context of the Taiwan Relations Act and the three communiques. We recognize the one China principle, and we strongly believe that Taiwan is a thriving democracy that is doing exactly the kinds of things I described in my opening statement, and under no circumstances will we ever tolerate anything that changes the status of Taiwan unless it is being changed as a result of open, free, balanced negotiations between the two parties, which is what was anticipated by the original Taiwan Relations Act and the three communiques in President Nixon's opening back in 1972.
Mr. LEACH. Thank you, sir.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Faleomavaega?
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I, too, would like to express the sentiments echoed earlier by the leadership and the Members of this Committee to welcome you, Mr. Secretary.
I will not be asking you about C-rations and MREs, Mr. Secretary, but I will submit to my colleagues and the Committee that in all the years I have served on this Committee, I know of no Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who took the time literally to help a Member resolve somewhere, somehow, in some part of the world a corporal in the Army's needs and to show that this man cares about the soldiers and airmen and to show that he truly is a soldier's soldier.
Mr. Secretary, I will never forget the experience in working with you in that.
Page 311 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, sir.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Secretary, I know the time is running. I will have one question.
There is a growing consensus that global climate change is occurring and that nations must engage in a good faith process to find solutions. Even the initial skepticism over global warming expressed by many U.S. businesses has been replaced by an acknowledgement of the problem. Major auto and oil companies such as Ford and Amoco have declared reduction of carbon dioxide to be a top priority.
The United States has 4 percent of the world's population, but is responsible for almost 25 percent of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere, the main cause of global warming. As the world's per capita leader in fossil fuel emissions, polls have shown that Americans see climate change as a serious threat and want our Government to take measures.
Mr. Secretary, given these concerns, what are you plans to move forward? The Keogh report calls for the upcoming UN climate summit to be held this year in Germany in May.
Secretary POWELL. We have asked for that conference to be pushed back until the end of July in order to give us adequate time within the new Administration to formulate our position.
Page 312 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We certainly agree that global warming is a problem. The extent of the problem and nature of the problem and the solutions one should take toward that problem, whether it is emissions controls or how best to use the natural sinks that exist—we need some time to formulate a position between State Department, Treasury Department, EPA and a number of the new leaders who have come into the Administration. I have asked for that additional time to make sure that we go to that conference armed with a solid position that reflects the best that science has to offer and tries to deal with the problem in a way that is balanced, so that all nations will have to make a contribution to the solution to the problem in a way that is sensitive to our economic concerns and interests. We are hard at work on it, sir.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I have other questions I will submit for the record in the interest of time to have other Members ask questions.
Chairman HYDE. Thank you. You are very thoughtful.
Doug Bereuter of Nebraska?
Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and the Ranking Member for the eloquence and cogency of your initial introductory statements.
Mr. Secretary, welcome to this Committee. I think you can sense that this is a Committee that is very much interested in working cooperatively with you and advancing our mutual concerns and goals.
Page 313 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I am very much concerned with what has happened on the Macedonian border and in Macedonia in the last 10 days, and I think that the Kosovar inspired violence there is something that we need to take note of and counteract as quickly as possible.
Some Americans may in fact be aiding it—well intentioned, but ill advised. I would hope that you could look at Lord Robertson's proposals and accept them, build upon them, endorse them, improve them, and make sure that we stop this violence.
I recall my first term on the Intelligence Committee when, with the possibility Yugoslavia would disintegrate, we were warned very clearly, in very great detail, what would happen if Croatian and Serbian violence began and then spread to Bosnia and Kosovo and ultimately to Macedonia. That would be very much contrary to the interest of NATO and, therefore, our vital national interest. I am concerned about that. I hope you will do what you can immediately to try to reduce that problem.
I know that the presentation you made is on budget function 150, and I want to go right to the nuts and bolts or, maybe more accurately, steel and concrete. I like your focus on trying to reform the Foreign Building Office (FBO). Your proposals there are certainly a major step in the right direction, and I share, based on your recommendations and the experience with Major General Charles Williams, that your trust is in him to change things there.
As you know, Mr. Secretary, from our previous conversations, OPAP (Overseas Presence Advisory Panel) or the Kaden report and the Carlucci report propose a more fundamental reform creating an overseas facility as an authority to replace the FBO. These reports propose that such a corporation should have the ability to use the full range of financial tools and receive funds from rents, appropriations, asset sales, forward funding commitments, Treasury loans and retain service fee functions.
Page 314 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
They would also have the authority to engage in cost effective financing alternatives such as the lease purchase and sales lease back arrangements. We have an impossible building backlog for new construction for consulates and Embassies and retrofitting for security reasons. It is going to take longer all the time to complete these projects despite our best efforts, so I am wondering if what is being proposed by you for the new initiative is the first step.
Do you need additional assistance? Do you need more time to think about a more dramatic change? I am convinced that moderate tinkering around with the FBO without privatization of this process, at least in part in selective locations, will not ever get us to the point we are addressing our building needs.
Mr. Secretary, I am with you all the way so far, but are we going to go further?
Secretary POWELL. I think it is a first step. I wanted to stabilize the situation. I brought General Williams in to make an assessment of the office, see what the immediate problems were. A lot of money has not been allocated. We are not quite sure what is happening in a number of the places where the money was allocated, how it is going, so I wanted to bring him in and stabilize it.
The first thing I gave him to read was the Kaden report. We may well be back in due course to take you to a second and third step that gets us there, but I am not prepared to take that step all at once.
Page 315 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In order for General Williams to do his work, I may need some expedited authorities from Congress. I will be talking to this Committee, as well as the appropriators, on such expedited authority. I have received some warm comments back so far that that might be possible.
Sir, with respect to Macedonia, I share your concern. Lord Robertson is waiting in my office right after this meeting for us to discuss the situation. I have been in constant touch with him. I was with him in Brussels last week.
As you know, U.S. forces have been doing more patrolling on the border, and we had U.S. forces in action earlier this morning against some of the Albanian terrorists. In fact, the action was continuing this afternoon. We have them holed up in a house. We are trying to get some of them out. A couple of the Kosovars were wounded. We are doing what we can short of becoming one of the major belligerants in the contest.
We think the ultimate solution first is to find a way on a conditioned basis to let the Yugoslav armed forces back into that ground safety zone and then begin the process of dialogue between the opposing sides with us reserving the right to go back into the zone if things do not turn out well; or, if we have to—also reserving the right to order the Yugoslav army back out, so the phasing of that and the conditionality of that I will be discussing with George Robertson this afternoon.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Payne of New Jersey?
Page 316 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much.
It is good to see you, Mr. Secretary. If time permitted I would have asked a question regarding the process of the peace prospect in northern Ireland and how it was going.
I would have asked probably about the Cyprus situation and whether negotiations there between the Greek cypriots and the Turkish are moving forward so that occupied territory can be relinquished again, but since time is short I will ask the question that is, of course, central to my Subcommittee and my interest for many years.
As you may know, we were able to move the Clinton Administration into somewhat of a focus on Africa. We were pleased that he took the 12 day, six country tour in his second term and second trip, as you know, to Nigeria and Tanzania.
In addition to that, many of his Cabinet people from the Secretary of State and Secretary of Transportation and on and on, Sergeant General, Secretary of the Treasury, went and started to become engaged in trying to assist countries in Africa, and also the African Growth and Opportunity Act came up.
Let me ask specifically in the 2 minutes we have left. What is the view of Africa in general? I know there has not been an Assistant Secretary appointed yet, but just in a nutshell how do you view the problem in the Congo, with Sudan still being a prior government. I know that the Administration does not like sanctions, but I strongly think sanctions should be on Sudan.
Page 317 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In a thumbnail, I also appreciate the fact that you did have several meetings I think with the Africa Bureau, and if I understand, perhaps your first meeting as the Secretary. That certainly is a great indication.
Would you be able to just bring me up to date on where you are?
Secretary POWELL. Just in a nutshell, Mr. Payne.
Mr. PAYNE. Yes.
Secretary POWELL. Yes, I did meet with Dr. Susan Rice and her whole team as my first meeting when I started transitioning into the State Department because I wanted to have a good understanding of what had gone before. Those were helpful meetings.
I also wanted to make a statement that Africa would be a priority for President Bush and for me; not necessarily a military or national security priority, but just a priority in the sense that this is a continent of 800,000,000 people who have great needs, and those needs can be satisfied in many ways by United States action and United States effort.
In the first 5 weeks that I have been in office, I have met with President Kabila. I have met with President Kagame. We have talked about what to do in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to get things moving. Things are now moving a little bit there.
We are going to be engaged. The biggest challenge of all is perhaps HIV/AIDS, and I will not belabor that because it is well known to the Committee. I thank the Congress for the funding that has been increased to help with that crisis.
Page 318 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Also, we are going to be looking at those countries in Africa that are moving in the right direction and invest in them, understanding that it is democracy and privatization and free enterprise activities within their economy that will move in the right direction, and we will encourage that and support it with our efforts.
For those nations that still live under regimes that are totalitarian, the Cold War is over. We do not have to support you any longer. We are going to put pressure on you to get on the right track, or you are going to discover that there is not a lot waiting for you here.
We will do what we can to help your people. We are not going to do what we can to help the regime unless the regime starts to follow in the direction that we think is the proper direction for their people. We will be engaged. Africa will be a priority.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Smith of New Jersey?
Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, welcome to the Committee. It is great to see you. I do appreciate your kind words in your written testimony for me, Cynthia and Ben. I would just add that Sam Gejdenson also worked very hard on the Embassy Security Act. As you know, it provides $5.9 billion for Embassy—over 5 years—for Embassy protection.
It also has a number of other disparate measures to it that I hope you and your staff will look very carefully at. One of them was an authorization for $750 million for refugee protection. We have had numerous hearings, and many of us have traveled all over the world to refugee camps. The need is absolutely compelling.
Page 319 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We know that Africa is being shortchanged in terms of a per capita basis for refugee protection monies, and I do hope that we can do all that we can to not only meet the $750 million in the appropriation, but hopefully to exceed it.
There is also language in there dealing with human rights in northern Ireland. I know this Administration will be very robust in promoting peace at the core of that and in the minds of many of us. I have held six hearings on this and I have gone over there. It does not make me an expert, but I am very concerned, like many others, about the policing reforms particularly with regards to the RUC.
I do have a very specific question. You have expressed interest in streamlining the State Department, and I think many of us would all like to see streamlining and constantly redoing and making better that which exists. A few of the specific posts, though, have been created by specific legislation.
As you know, last year we passed the sweeping landmark legislation on trafficking, which is an abomination. Fifty thousand women, mostly women and children, are brought to the United States every year, many for forced prostitution. Some of them are 13 and 15 years old. You know the issue.
We now have the tools to protect those women and young girls, so we can go after the perpetrators. It does create an Office of Trafficking, and we hope that that office will report to you directly, or minimally to the Under Secretary for Global Affairs. I hope that that could be the case.
Page 320 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
On the issue of religious freedom, this Congress took a yeoman's step in a bipartisan way to establish the International Religious Freedom Act, and that created an Ambassador at Large, which you know so well. That Ambassador at Large has done a great job in highlighting the importance of religious freedom, and we have heard, and I do not know if it is true, that there is some talk of double hatting. I certainly hope that does not happen. There is enough on the plate really to keep this very separate from some other hat like democracy leader, Assistant Secretary in Human Rights.
Finally, the Tibetan coordinator. That may be double hatted. We just hope it would be a senior diplomat of real stature to carry that message forward. On those three issues, though, I do hope you will be helpful.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I appreciate the $750 million for refugee protection, and I will take a look at the allocation on human rights and especially the policing aspect of it in northern Ireland. I will also watch closely human rights in general.
In the 5 1/2 weeks I have met with roughly 32 foreign ministers and Presidents—a lot of them. In every meeting where there was a need we talked about human rights. We are not shrinking away from it.
On trafficking, religious freedom, the offices you described, I discovered there were 55 special envoys and other things that were sort of in crustations around the Department. I looked at them, and I said which ones do we really need? Seven are in law. I could not touch those. I am not a fool. They are fine. Do not worry about them, Mr. Smith.
Page 321 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I found about 23 or so that I did not need any more, and I just wrote them off the books. If I need something new later I will put them back. The other 20 odd or so were serving legitimate purposes and functions and I kept them for the time being; some of them for 6 months. Then I will see whether I will sunset them. The ones you mentioned are fine.
I will carefully look at the organizational arrangement to make sure that, if they are not directly under me, I will have visibility of their activities on a regular basis.
With respect to religious freedom, as you know, it is vacant at the moment. I am looking for somebody to fill that position.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Menendez of New Jersey?
Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your past and present service to our country.
We were pleased to see that the President announced additional assistance for earthquake relief for El Salvador, but many of us believe that the amount is not nearly enough.
We are even more concerned that this assistance is coming at the expense of other important programs in El Salvador and in Latin America at a time when the region has been suffering from a state of natural disasters, which have strained the economies of the affected countries and almost reversed much of the progress we made over the last two decades. We spent billions during the 1980's to promote democracy in these countries. Now is the time to help them move forward.
Page 322 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In light of the fact that the President has declared our relationships in the western hemisphere to be a foreign policy priority, what real commitment in terms of economic and development assistance do you intend to put toward this region?
Secondly, the Clinton Administration took a lot of criticism for waiving provisions of Helms Burton and not sufficiently enforcing others. Will the Bush Administration continue to waive, or allow enforcement of, title 3 of Helms Burton, which allows U.S. citizens to sue foreign corporations for taking illegally confiscated property?
Will the Administration vigorously enforce title 4 of that act, and will the Administration change the wet foot/dry foot policy that repatriates Cubans to Castro's tyranny, which I personally believe is a violation of our human rights principles?
I look forward to your answers.
Secretary POWELL. On the relief effort in El Salvador, we were able to provide $18 million right away, and there is another $110 million, $52 million in the first year, $58 million in the second year. I think it is a fairly substantial contribution.
When a need like that comes along, you generally have to find offsets for it and find sources for it unless you are able to get new sources of money. That may be necessary in our later actions with the Congress with respect to supplementals. We had a good discussion with President Flores about it when he was here visiting President Bush.
Page 323 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
On the Helms Burton, both titles 3 and 4, I do not have a single answer for you. We will be as faithful to the law as the law requires, using or considering waiver authority only when we believe there are serious and great overriding national interests for which waiver authority is provided, but we will use it in a limited way and only when we are absolutely sure that there is a national interest to be served that would require us to use that authority.
Let's see. I missed one. Forgive me, Mr. Menendez.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Wet foot/dry foot policy.
Secretary POWELL. I will have to review that, sir, and see whether or not we are planning to make changes to current policy on that.
Mr. MENENDEZ. You are clearly not making a commitment here today that you are not going to waive title 3?
Secretary POWELL. No. I cannot at this time.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Nor are you making a commitment——
Secretary POWELL. I would be taking away——
Mr. MENENDEZ [continuing]. To vigorously enforce title 4?
Secretary POWELL. I think it would be inappropriate for me at this point without having a specific case in front of me to say I am giving away the President's authority under the legislation.
Page 324 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Menendez.
The Chair recognizes the Chair of the International Operations and Human Rights Subcommittee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Smith.
Mr. Secretary, it is always a pleasure to see you. Following up on my colleague's question regarding Cuba, I will also ask you about that, but I also have two written statements on which I would appreciate your getting back to me regarding the repression and corruption in Kazakhstan and on children's survival issues.
As you know, the State Department recently released its annual reports on human rights abuses, and it provides ample evidence of systematic, ongoing, and in fact escalating human rights violations by Cuba's totalitarian regime. I wanted to know, Mr. Secretary, is passage of a resolution condemning the human rights violations in Cuba a priority for the Department at the upcoming session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights?
What is your view concerning the unfortunate efforts to include in that positive resolution anti sanctions language which would certainly derail our efforts?
You had mentioned in your statement regime changes as part of the U.S. policy and strategy toward Iraq. Would you then agree that an integral component of U.S.-Cuba policy needs to be support for dissidents, for democracy advocates, for opposition to bring about a regime change in Cuba and a transition to this democratic movement?
Page 325 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
What directives have you or will you issue regarding assistance to independent groups, dissidents, and political opposition groups not only in Cuba, but in all non-democratic authoritarian or totalitarian regimes? Will we take a proactive approach to helping these individuals?
Secretary POWELL. With respect to your first point, the Cuba resolution at the Geneva human rights conference will be a priority, and we have indicated such. We are now gathering our forces together. It is going to be a very, very tough fight, as you know.
We are having difficulty with the actual resolution at this point because of the anti-sanctions additions that have been placed on it, and we are making it clear to its proponents that this is a very serious problem and will make it difficult for us to line up behind such a resolution.
We are also working very hard to figure out how to get around that, and we are also pulling together our public delegation, the public members of our delegation who will attend that conference, and also designating an Ambassador at Large who will attend the conference, so we are on top of that.
With respect to regime change in Cuba and any other totalitarian state, I think we have a history that will continue into the future of doing what we can to support dissidents in ways that sometimes may be overt, sometimes may not be overt, assisting people who are fighting for their freedom and wish to cause changes in regimes that are of a totalitarian nature.
Page 326 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Muchas gracias.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE [presiding]. Mr. Sherrod Brown of Ohio.
Mr. BROWN. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining us. I have two questions.
Today in your testimony and in your confirmation before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee you spoke about ''the tragedy of AIDS and tuberculosis and other scourges that are facing mankind.'' Many of us are concerned with U.S. Trade Rep. policy of pressuring developing nations to forsake compulsory licensing and parallel importing.
These mechanisms used by our Government, the USTR, these mechanisms of parallel importing and compulsory licensing are permitted under international trade agreements and allow poor nations to secure lower priced drugs for TB, malaria, HIV/AIDS and for other killer diseases.
To his credit, President Bush plans to uphold the announced Executive Order 13155 which prevents the USTR from intervening in this questionable manner on access to AIDS drugs, narrowly constructed access to AIDs drugs, when subsaharan African is at stake.
Page 327 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Contrary to the goal of conquering infectious diseases, however, our overall trade policy with prescription drugs, and those over zealous trade pressures effectively have spread, have contributed to the spread of these diseases in many areas around the world. Your international stature and influence I think can have a great deal of influence on the international HIV/AIDS crisis and other infectious diseases around the world.
My first question to you is, would you recommend to the President that he place humanitarian relief above any drug industry pressure, as he thankfully did in Africa, but also extend that African trade policy to other countries devastated by AIDS such as Thailand, and eventually India when it joins the WTO?
My second question concerns Taiwan. During the 106th Congress, this Congress passed legislation to support Taiwan's eventual entry into the World Health Organization. Many of us were disappointed in spite of these Congressional efforts that the President and the former Administration did nothing, and in fact, acted against what we in Congress wanted in terms of WHO admission for Taiwan or at least for observer status.
Forty-one colleagues from both sides of the aisle have joined me in sponsoring legislation already this year for the Secretary of State to initiate a plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at WHO meetings. In its 1994 Taiwan policy review, U.S. declared its intention to support Taiwan's participation in appropriate international organizations.
My second question is could you elaborate on how this Administration, especially State, will support Taiwan's participation in appropriate international organizations, especially the World Health Organization?
Page 328 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The first question was, as I said, would you recommend to the President that he place humanitarian relief above drug industry pressure as he did in Africa and extend that narrowly constructed Africa AIDS policy to other countries devastated by AIDS and other infectious diseases?
Secretary POWELL. I will deal with the problem you described first.
I cannot quite bite on your second question that I would say to the President you must always place humanitarian considerations over drug pressure, drug company pressure. It may be other factors other than drug company pressure. There may be legitimate interests and concerns that have been raised.
I think the President would always go into such a discussion with me or the trade reps or with humanitarian reps or with drug company reps with a desire to do everything possible to get drugs at prices that are affordable in the hands and in the bodies of people who need them the most. I think that would always be his predisposition.
Whether he also has to take into account other interests, I have to give him the option to do so. If I am in the room I would always do the same thing; try to see if we can make it work so people get what they need, but I cannot say that under no set of circumstances could there be an alternative argument that might be persuasive on a particular case on a particular day.
Page 329 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
With respect to the World Health Organization, as you all know, we have been working hard in past Administrations. I have not done a policy review of this yet in this Administration, but the past policy has been, which seems to have served the nation well, to find ways for Taiwan to participate without belonging to these international organizations. This is because under the agreements we have, the Taiwan Relations Act and the other communiques in our relationship with the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, membership in such international bodies should be reserved for the People's Republic of China.
We believe there are ways—and I have to review this—but the Administration, the Government's position over the years has been there should be ways for Taiwan to enjoy the full benefit of participation without being a member.
Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We do need your support even for observer status, which we have not been able to do yet.
Secretary POWELL. Yes.
Mr. BROWN. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from California, Mr. Royce?
Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I thank you, Mr. Secretary. I will start by saying that I am very supportive of your efforts to revive the State Department. It is an important mission, and I think we all wish you well.
Page 330 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I serve as Chairman of the Africa Subcommittee, and I have been very pleased with the attention the Administration has placed on Africa to date. I had the privilege of co-leading with you an election observation delegation about 2 years ago, so I am well aware of your understanding of the importance of Africa to America. There is no doubt that U.S. policy can positively alter the course of events on the continent, and it is in our interest to do so.
I noticed at your confirmation hearing your reference to the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and you said, ''It is one of the most important measures that Congress considered last year.'' I could not agree more. This was bipartisan legislation that is critical to the goal of bringing Africa into the world economy.
Now as I see it we have two challenges ahead. First, implementing this legislation in a way that maximizes its benefits, and this means avoiding the bureaucratic blocking that threatens the flow of goods between U.S. and Africa. It also means holding the U.S.-Africa economic forum that the legislation establishes.
Second, I think we should be looking at enhancing this legislation primarily by expanding or ideally eliminating the caps that were imposed on duty-free African textile imports. With the poverty and all the other challenges we are confronting in Africa, I find it very objectionable that we were forced to cap the benefits of this bill.
The Africa trade bill is paying real dividends, I believe, but we need to do more, and it is time for us as a nation to follow our enlightened self interest when it comes to trade with Africa. The bill did expand our exports into Africa considerably, and I was wondering what thoughts you had on these issues.
Page 331 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Lastly, I recently returned from a trip to India. We visited Bhuj and witnessed the massive devastation there at the epicenter. I also observed the fine American effort with relief and reconstruction that is underway, and I would like to hear your thoughts about how we are going to help our friends in this increasingly important country.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Royce. If I may, I would like to congratulate you on the efforts you put into the Growth and Opportunity Act. It was your leadership I think that helped carry it over the top.
I remember fondly our days together in Nigeria supervising that election, and I think we can be proud now as to the start that President Obasanjo has made putting his country back on the right path.
With respect to implementation of the act, as you know a number of countries have now gone over the first hurdle to get ready for the benefits of the act, and we are working on this forum that is required by the act. I do not have any details with me today, but I would be more than happy to provide those details for the record.
[The information referred to follows:]
Written response:
Page 332 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Thirty-five countries have been designated eligible for AGOA benefits and 1,835 additional products have been added to the Generalized System of Preferences list for duty-free import under AGOA. Five countries so far have met the requirements and been certified for textile benefits, and we expect several more will be shortly. We are working with nine countries now to help them implement the textile visa systems and meet all the legislative requirements.
We look forward to the first annual Forum meeting and are coordinating with the other Cabinet agencies involved. Shortly we will consult with the Congress and our African partners on scheduling and an agenda.
Secretary POWELL. Similarly, let me examine the policy change—I guess it will have to be a legislative change—we suggest with respect to eliminating the cap and get back to you on what an Administration position would be since it would affect other departments other than State Department.
I, too, am proud of what we were able to do to help the Indians and especially around the City of Bhuj, and we will within our limited assets continue to try to assist them. They have been very appreciative of the help that we have given to them, and it was a terrible tragedy. I do not have any specific additional numbers that I can provide to you at this time, however.
Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady from Georgia, Ms. McKinney?
Page 333 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I have three issues I would like to address with you. One is Afro-Latinos, the second one is the International Arms Trade Code of Conduct, and the third one is your human rights vision.
Let me just frame this issue of Afro-Latinos. There were 150,000,000 people of African descent living in Latin America, and they constitute as much as 40 percent of the region's poor. However, multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF have almost no representation by Afro-Latinos, and there are few development projects designed to assist them.
Afro-Latinos have been hardest hit in Colombia where they compromise 70 percent of the country's 2,000,000 internally displaced people. Afro Colombian leaders have been murdered, kidnapped, and forced into exile.
A friend and colleague of mine, Senator Piedad Cordoba, was President of the Human Rights Committee for the Colombian Senate and has been mentioned as a possible presidential candidate. Ms. Cordoba was outspoken against the violence in Colombia and a harsh critic of the armed actors who got their funds through drug trafficking and kidnapping.
As a result, Carlos Castano, head of the Colombian paramilitary forces, the AUC, had her phone tapped, made threats on her life and attempted to kidnap her children. To protect herself and her family, Ms. Cordoba posted armed guards outside her home 24 hours a day. Unfortunately, her guards were assassinated in a drive by shooting.
Page 334 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Finally, on May 21, 1999, Ms. Cordoba was kidnapped by Castano's forces and was held for 16 days. After her release she fled with her family to Canada, where she now lives. Later, Carlos Castano appeared on Colombian television and referred to her as ''la insulinta negrita,'' the insolent little black woman. This is how powerful Afro-Colombian leaders are treated in Colombia, and, sadly, her story is not unique.
My question to you is, how can you, Mr. Secretary, assure that Afro-Latinos in particular will not see their leadership targeted in this way for elimination and silencing?
On the other two issues of the International Arms Trade Code of Conduct, which was signed into law in 1999, I have to say that I was sad to see that the State Department's human rights reports fail to include the reporting criteria on the International Arms Trade Code of Conduct. I am hoping that will not be the situation in next year's human rights reports.
Finally, Amnesty International reported this morning that it did a search in preparation for the human rights hearing that we had this morning. Unfortunately, they were not able to find one quote of yours where you outlined your human rights vision. Could you provide us now with your human rights vision in this setting?
Secretary POWELL. I believe in the dignity of man and woman. I believe that God put each of us on earth in order to pursue the talents that God has given to us, and it is the purpose of government to provide that opportunity. It comes right from our founding documents. I believe in it deeply, and I will always work to that extent.
Page 335 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Perhaps Amnesty International should have called me instead of doing a Lexis-Nexis search.
With respect to the human rights report and International Arms Trade Code of Conduct, allow me to look at that and see what we will do for next year. There is a concern that the report is starting to capture so many things, and so many other issues are being placed on it, that we do not want to make it so big and burdensome that it does not serve its original intended purpose.
On Afro-Latinos, I deplore what happened to Ms. Cordoba and to her family. I wish I could say yes, I am going to make it all better tomorrow. I cannot, but I will be sensitive to the plight of Afro-Latinos as I go about my business in the hemisphere.
Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Peter King of New York?
Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, it is a pleasure to welcome you. Like the other Members of the Committee, I certainly look forward to working with you. It is especially reassuring to have a New Yorker in your position.
I would like to touch on two issues, if I may. You mentioned that there were nine countries that were considering or requesting admission to NATO. If you could give us some idea what priority the U.S. would give each of those nine countries?
Page 336 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secondly, on the issue of the northern Ireland peace process, I am reassured that the Administration has said that it will continue the current policy. I would just note, though, that at his press conference with Prime Minister Blair the President said that he would become involved if he were requested by the British Prime Minister.
I hope he would be equally receptive if he were asked by the Irish Prime Minister, because this has become an international issue with the adoption of the Good Friday Agreement.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you very much, Mr. King. I am proud to be a New Yorker. A Virginian now, but I am still proud of my New York roots. I have to be careful here.
I would not like to give you a prioritization of the nine countries at this time. One of the challenges that NATO is going to have over this spring and summer is to come to some judgement within the alliance as to the standards we want those nine countries to meet before we consider admitting them into NATO.
As you know, with three of those countries in particular there is a unique set of sensitivity—the Baltic states and our relationship with Russia, but Russia will never be given a veto as to whether they come in or not.
Page 337 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
The decision on accession will be made at the NATO summit in the fall of 2002 in Prague, and the basis upon membership will ultimately rest on whether they have met the standards, if they can contribute to the alliance, are we able to defend them under the provisions of the alliance, and especially do they meet the standards of democracy and economic reform and stability.
You can be sure that this will be a high priority for us. There are some who suggest to do all nine. The big bang theory it is called. There are others who suggest we have probably gone as far as we should, and let's just push it off for a while.
There are others who argue no, we really do have to bring in some. These people want to be part of this alliance, and we should not fear adding to the size of the alliance. All of these things will have to be discussed, and we will start discussing them in the upcoming NATO meetings this spring.
With respect to northern Ireland, the President will be engaged as requested, and I am sure he will say the same thing to Mr. Hearn. In the State Department I have made sure that we are following things closely, and I have designated one of the new members of my team to be my personal representative to monitoring the situation and getting involved if necessary.
Mr. KING. Mr. Secretary, will the Irish issue be in the State Department or the NSC?
Secretary POWELL. I am sorry?
Page 338 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. KING. Will the Irish issue be in the State Department or the NSC?
Secretary POWELL. Dr. Rice and I have not had a full discussion of this, but my expectation is that it will for the most part be driven out of the State Department with whatever we need to do to make sure that the NSC is fully involved, participating, coordinating with us and representing the views of the President.
Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Engel of New York?
Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. Secretary. I am going to get more specific than Mr. King. You are from the Bronx, and so am I. The Bronx is very proud of you.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you.
Mr. ENGEL. I want to reiterate the two points that Mr. Lantos made in his opening statement. One is about funding. During the past decade, U.S. foreign aid spending on diplomatic priorities has dropped substantially, and I believe very strongly, and I know that you do, too, that now that we have won the Cold War we must not lose the peace by under funding critical diplomatic programs.
Page 339 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I also want to second what Mr. Lantos said about the violence in the Middle East. I get very nervous when I hear people saying that we need to stop the violence on both sides. I think it is very clear that the violence is really coming from one side, the Palestinian side, and that Mr. Arafat is using violence and terrorism as a negotiating tool. We cannot let him do that.
I have two questions. One is on the Balkans, and one is on the Middle East. I first of all want to express my appreciation to the Administration for not hastily withdrawing or reducing the number of U.S. troops in Kosovo. The United States has made a commitment to the security of the region, and we must not undermine everything for which America's armed forces worked so hard.
As you know, Mr. Secretary, there are reports that national elections in Kosovo may not be held until the end of this year or even until early next year. Meanwhile, some of our European allies are advocating that the UN create a national government in Kosovo that has very little authority. I think that would be a tragic mistake.
If we want the Kosovars to take responsibility for reducing violence in the country, building democratic institutions and rebuilding their society, we have to give them the authority and ability to get the job done, and we have to do it, in my opinion, this year with national elections in Kosovo.
Can you please tell me what the Administration's position is on the question of when a national election takes place and whether we support creating a real government with real responsibilities in Kosovo?
Page 340 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secretary POWELL. I discussed this last week in my meetings in Brussels, and there is a difference of opinion. The opinion we are taking, and I have not discussed this directly with the President, but the position we are advocating is having national elections this year deciding this quickly so that we can launch the OSCE and give them the time they need to organize such elections.
Mr. ENGEL. Well, I am very happy to hear that. I believe very strongly that the Kosovars need to run their own affairs, and I believe that when they do have that kind of a government we will see a lot more responsibility. I think it is very, very important.
The second question is on the Middle East. Last year Israel withdrew its small number of troops from the former security zone in Lebanon. The UN has confirmed Israel's complete withdrawal, and the Secretary General praised Israel's action.
Meanwhile, while Israel is taking steps for peace the militant Hezbollah organization, with support from Iran and Syria, continues its terrorist campaign against Israel's northern border. At the same time, Syria occupies much of Lebanon with 35,000 military and intelligence personnel and controls much of Lebanon's government. During and since the last Lebanese elections, however, a multi-religious opposition movement has taken route, which is standing against Syria's continued occupation of Lebanon.
My questions are, what is the United States doing to halt Hezbollah's terrorist attacks on Israel? Are we pressing the Lebanese to deploy their army to the south and take control of the region? Is it still the policy of the United States that all Syrian forces should withdraw from Lebanon, and what are we doing to press Syria to withdraw?
Page 341 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In conjunction with this, will Syria remain on the State Department list of terrorist nations, and what is our country doing to encourage the new democratic opposition movement in Lebanon?
Secretary POWELL. We have expressed our regret that Hezbollah continues to take this action, and in my meeting with President Bashar Assad in Damascus about 10 days ago I made that point to him and requested that he do what he could to restrain Hezbollah activities in south Lebanon.
We believe that it would be for the benefit of all parties if eventually at some point, and I would like to see it tomorrow, but it is not going to happen tomorrow, for the Syrian army to leave Lebanon. With respect to Syria being on the terrorist list, they remain on the terrorist list.
With respect to, I think you said, supporting dissident elements in Lebanon, I do not have an answer for you on that one, sir. I will have to take a look at what programs may be going on that I am not yet aware of.
Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Chabot?
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Page 342 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Secretary, it is an honor to be with you here this afternoon. Although you may not be from my city, Cincinnati, I did have the good fortune to share the stage with you about 5 years ago, with Bob Dole and somebody with whom you always served on Council and are very familiar with, Ken Blackwell,——
Secretary POWELL. Yes.
Mr. CHABOT [continuing]. Who is now Secretary of State of Ohio.
Secretary POWELL. Yes.
Mr. CHABOT. It is certainly an honor. We appreciate your service to our country and wish you the best as the 65th Secretary in our nation's history. We really do appreciate your service.
I would like to use my time today to discuss with you an issue I believe needs to be dealt with at the highest levels of our Government. In the last few years I have been actively involved in the issue of international parental child abduction, along with my democratic colleague from Texas, Nick Lampson, who has also been a great leader, and many of the other Members of Congress have also been involved in this important issue.
I first became aware of the issue through a gentleman in Cincinnati named Tom Sylvester whose then baby daughter, Corina, was abducted by her mother in 1995 and taken to Austria, where she remains today. The Sylvester case remains unresolved not because of any lack of effort by Mr. Sylvester or by the Congress or by the State Department, but because of the intransigence of the Austrian government.
Page 343 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Officials in your department, Mr. Secretary, will no doubt tell you that Tom Sylvester has played by the rules. He has done everything asked of him, and he has been stonewalled at every turn. Despite a number of Court Orders in both the United States and Austria, including an Order by the Austrian Supreme Court, Corina has not been returned to her father.
Your predecessor, Secretary Albright, was quite helpful in this case. We asked for a personal meeting with her, and she obliged. We asked that she contact the Austrian chancellor and the foreign minister, and she did so.
Her personal involvement I believe helped to send a strong message to those offending nations who fail to honor their obligations under the Hague Convention. It was also an expression of solidarity to all those parents throughout the country who face the same painful ordeal that Tom Sylvester faces every day.
We need to bring our children home. You can be a great help to the cause, Mr. Secretary. We hope that, like Secretary Albright, you will be willing to meet with us to discuss the issue, and your involvement will bring continuity to the case and the many other cases.
It will send a powerful signal to those governments which stonewall the good faith efforts of left behind parents, and it will alert the international community that the United States Government is serious about insisting that all contracting parties to the Hague Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction comply fully with both the letter and the spirit of their international obligations under the convention, and I hope that you also agree to meet with us.
Page 344 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. Secretary, we look forward to your leadership. Stolen American children scattered across the globe are being kept from their custodial parents. The Sylvester case is particularly appalling, but there are many others, and those left behind parents in the United States and around the world face many of the same obstacles that Tom Sylvester faces.
Lady Catherine Meyer, for example, the wife of the British Ambassador to the United States, has detailed her own battle to be reunited with her two sons in an excellent book entitled, They Are My Children Too. I would recommend it to you and any of the folks within the State Department.
While she is a British citizen battling with an obstinate German government, her case rings familiar with that of many American families. These American parents and these American children need our help. It is time to bring our children home.
I thank you, Mr. Secretary. I look forward to working with you, and I hope we can count on you to make this issue a top priority during your stewardship. Let me also wish you the very best as you represent this great nation throughout the world. I greatly appreciate your thoughts on this important issue of international child abduction.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, Congressman. I will be involved and look forward to meeting with you and your colleagues. These are terrible tragedies, each and every one of them, and these nations are acting irresponsibly.
I was familiar with the Sylvester case, and Lady Meyer is a great, close friend of mine. I am very familiar with her case and her book and know the agony that she has gone through, so it will have my personal attention.
Page 345 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. We appreciate your personal commitment. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Gregory Meeks of New York?
Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I have joined my friends Peter King and Elliott Engel in that we are proud you are a New Yorker. Though we cannot claim you in Queens, we know that you still have some roots in Queens.
Secretary POWELL. I lived in Queens.
Mr. MEEKS. Right. We will take it.
Let me say this. You have indicated briefly and there was a hope that the end of the Cold War would result in a better, more peaceful world. Unfortunately, that has not fully been realized, particularly in Africa. Violent conflicts have resulted in massive displacement with civilians bearing the brunt of the suffering.
Based on past experiences, most notably the tragic loss of lives in Somalia back in 1991, we have been reluctant to send our troops to respond to African crises. Most of the wars in Africa, however, that are taking place today, for example, in the Congo and Sierre Leone have their roots in the weak political institutions inherited from the Colonial Period and/or regimes that we helped put in place or supported because of the Cold War.
Page 346 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I believe we have a duty to help the United Nations succeed in its efforts to address these complex African conflicts along with support for both UN and regional peace keeping efforts, including troop training and logistical support. There is a need to support concurrent UN strategy for peace. These strategies may include post conflict economic development, justice initiatives and demobilization of ex-combatants.
In addition, Nigeria has shown its commitment to confronting crises in west Africa by providing ECOMOG troops for peace keeping operations in Liberia, Sierre Leone and Guinea-Bissau. These troops' commitments have been costly in both human lives and financial resources.
My question is, Mr. Secretary, does the new Administration have specific plans to continue the support for the training of Nigerian troops for their role in regional peace keeping under an international military education training program, and how far does the Administration plan to go in demonstrating its support for the United Nations and regional peace keeping efforts in its overall political commitment to African issues?
Secretary POWELL. We do support continued training of the Nigerian battalions—I am not sure if it is under IMET or in kind training or other, whatever programs are supporting that training—and other battalions of other African nations as well.
The Administration will continue to help the UN efforts in the best way that it can. I think we help best when we provide true training, logistical support, and the kind of economic support that is required after a conflict is settled. We will continue to be very careful, as President Bush has said on more than one occasion, on the actual commitment of American troops to peace keeping operations. That will be rare rather than frequent, as the President has indicated.
Page 347 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
In fact, in many instances there are other troops who can do the job and perhaps do it better than U.S. troops could, such as the kinds of troops training in Nigeria and Ghana and other places. I think the focus of our effort will be to prepare units from the region who are better able to do the job and provide the kind of support that we can provide more effectively—training, logistics, and, in the case of the Nigerian battalions, the actual equipment that they need to go make their deployments.
Chairman HYDE. John Cooksey of Louisiana?
Mr. COOKSEY. I still want to call you General. I worked in east Africa. I spent 6 years in Kenya and Mozambique and was in Sierre Leone last year, and I have more than a passing interest.
Quite frankly, I feel that our foreign policy for the last whatever number of years, and even before 1992, neglected Africa. I feel like the last few years we have had sort of a ''photo op'' type foreign policy that cost the lives of some American soldiers in Somalia and thousands of people in Rwanda and Burundi and the Congo, and I just met the opposition leader from the Congo.
I know you have discussed this, but I would really like to get some idea that we will have an African foreign policy because those people are just as important as the people in the Middle East, Europe, the former Soviet Republics, and in Mexico.
If for no other reason, half of the infectious disease in the world is among those 800,000,000 people in Africa. I am a physician. Infectious diseases are important. Today you can get on an airplane in the Congo, be here 24 hours later, and be carrying ebola virus or some other condition or AIDS, or whatever.
Page 348 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I am anxious to see that this Administration will have a real African foreign policy that shows real interest because there are a lot of wonderful, kind, gentle people in Africa who just happen to tolerate bad politics and bad politicians. Of course, we do that in this country too sometimes——
Chairman HYDE. Not lately.
Mr. COOKSEY [continuing]. I was in the Air Force, not the Army, but I would hope that we use the military properly as an instrument of foreign policy in the future.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you, Dr. Cooksey. I, too, think that the military is a proper institution to be used for foreign policy objectives, but you will always hear me say we have to have a clear political objective that we are trying to achieve and an understandable purpose that can be explained to the American people, and we know how we are going to do it. We are going to put the resources to the task and get it done.
I can assure you that Africa will not be a photo op foreign policy matter for this Administration. I am in the process now of just completing my interviews, frankly, for the new head of the African Bureau of the State Department. It is going to be somebody who has lived there, who has been a business person there, who knows every country and will be a gifted advocate for our policy.
The President and I have discussed this on a number of occasions over the last 6 weeks, and you can be sure that he will be active. I am already looking at my first opportunity to visit. It will not be into my fourth year. It will be sometime in this first year, as early in the first year as I can make it. It will be active. It will not be photo op, Dr. Cooksey.
Page 349 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Mr. COOKSEY. Good. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. Barbara Lee of California?
Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hello, Secretary Powell. Good to see you. I want to thank you also for joining us today to actually help us understand and frame the Bush Administration's foreign policy.
While you were not able to meet with Congressman Leach and myself regarding the devastating HIV/AIDS pandemic, I want to just let you know that I am really encouraged by your comments thus far about the global AIDS crisis, particularly as this disease is devastating Africa, and do look forward to meeting with you soon to talk about it in more depth.
Secretary POWELL. Yes.
Ms. LEE. When the Congressional black caucus met with the President, of course, he also indicated that attacking the HIV/AIDS pandemic in subsaharan Africa was a priority of his Administration.
In the hearings during the last couple of years, we learned a couple of things. One, that AIDS is really a crucial priority and a national security threat, and, two, that the United States' response really has not gone far enough.
Page 350 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
As I reviewed President Bush's budget blue plan for fiscal 2001, there appears to be a commitment to increase bilateral spending efforts as a response to the AIDS crisis, but there was really not a funding request assigned to the African AIDS crisis where 75 percent of the infections are.
I wanted to ask you, with regard to funding, can we insure that any increase in funding for HIV and AIDS as it relates to subsaharan African or on a global basis does not actually come at the expense of other global health programs?
Also let me just ask you about our multilateral strategy. The World Bank AIDS Trust Fund was not included in the budget blueprint presented by the President. Congressman Leach and myself have written to you, the President, and our National Security Advisor, Dr. Rice, regarding the importance of this fund, and we look forward to your response on that.
Specifically, the Global AIDS and Tuberculosis Act of 2000 was passed and signed into law. It was passed on a bipartisan basis last year and authorized $150 million a year for the trust fund, which we anticipate leveraging up to $1 billion, so that is very significant in terms of a U.S. response to this pandemic.
Finally, let me just address our relationship with South Africa. The previous Administration established a binational commission between the United States and South Africa. It was established, of course, because South Africa is one of the United States' most strategic allies on the continent.
Page 351 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
It plays a crucial role in further developing and maintaining our relationship to South Africa, and so I was just wondering with regard to this commission, will the current Administration continue to support the commission's effort? What are your plans with regard to the commission?
Secretary POWELL. On the first question of whether or not an increase in HIV/AIDS, and how it is being spent with respect to different regions, I will examine it closely to make sure there is no short changing of the great need that exists in subsaharan African.
I will also examine the program again to see whether or not there is any competition or whether in any way it undercuts any of the other health programs that are so important. That would be foolhardy if it were doing that. If there is a way to avoid this, we certainly want to do that.
[The information referred to follows:]
Question:
In the President's Blue Print, there is not a funding request assigned to the AIDS crisis in Africa or globally. What level of funding should we expect from the Administration and the State Department? And how can we ensure that neither agencies, regions of the world, or other global health programs will be traded off for one another in the year-end negotiations?
Page 352 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Answer:
The President's FY 02 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations provides for $369 million for USAID in international assistance for HIV/AIDS programs around the world. Of this, the greatest part, $190 million, is specifically budgeted for African countries under the expanded response. Most of this money is contained in the Child Survival and Infectious Diseases budget category specifically designated to these programs. We would hope that the Administration's FY02 budget request is fully funded to obviate the need for trade-offs that would adversely affect other global health programs.
Question:
What will the State Department do to provide badly needed life saving AIDS drugs to desperately ill people?
Answer:
The U.S. is working with international partners to help make HIV/AIDS drugs more accessible to developing nations. In our programs, we will train health providers and strengthen health delivery systems in order to provide better care. We will also procure diagnostic tests, and drugs in order to fight the opportunistic infections associated with HIV, especially tuberculosis. This should prolong life and enhance the quality of life for the greatest majority of persons living with HIV/AIDS. We will provide the antiviral drug, nevirapine, to inhibit mother to-child transmission of HIV infection, to both mother and newborn. We will partner with governments and other health care providers to establish pilot projects to evaluate the feasibility of using antiretrovirals more extensively in low resource settings.
Page 353 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Question:
Why was the multilateral strategy, the World Bank AIDS Trust Fund, not included in the Budget Blue Print presented by the President for FY 01?
Answer:
The Budget Blueprint did not address specific program allocation levels. However, as part of the overall $369 million included in the President's Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, $20 million is included to support the HIV/AIDS Trust Fund.
Ms. LEE. Thank you.
Secretary POWELL. On the Global AIDS and TB Act funding, I will have to take the question and find out why there is no item in the budget that you have been able to detect.
With respect to the commission, I think you are referring to the Gore-Mbeki Commission.
Ms. LEE. Right.
Secretary POWELL. That leadership model will not be in this new Administration, but you can be sure that the kinds of things they discussed and the importance of those issues will not be shortchanged.
Page 354 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
We will find other fora and other organizations that we can create or other arrangements we can create, but we will not be having the number of Vice-Presidential level commissions that existed in the previous Administration. There are about six or eight of these.
The one thing we are trying to do is to regularize these kinds of interactions within the State Department and other cabinet positions so that it is not always a Vice-Presidential to Vice-Presidential or Vice-Presidential and Presidential level commission and summit meeting that gets all of the attention, but that the interaction is regularized so the existing institutions of both nations can be working together on a more regular basis.
Ms. LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. We look forward to your response on the AIDS.
Secretary POWELL. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. We have trespassed on your time shamelessly, and we are going to ask you to just take one more questioner.
Secretary POWELL. Yes, sir.
Chairman HYDE. Then we thank you for giving us the time you have, and we will surely want to welcome you back——
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman?
Page 355 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Chairman HYDE [continuing]. For those people who did not get to ask a question.
Before we go to Mr. Tancredo, Mr. Lantos has a motion.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have the right to submit questions for the record to our distinguished Secretary of State.
Chairman HYDE. Without objection. So ordered.
And now Mr. Tancredo for the final question.
Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, just in order to get things moving quickly let me just say ditto to all the wonderful things that have been said about you. I guess that makes me a Colin Powell ditto head. That is okay. I accept that.
Your testimony with regard to the position of the Administration vis-a-vis the African continent is especially interesting to me. I would like to focus even more on one place there because just a few hours ago now, I guess, we introduced the Sudan Peace Act.
Your vision, as you described it so eloquently, about how foreign policy should be conducted and for what purpose, leads me to believe that there is hope for us here and that this Administration is ready to do something dramatically different than it has been doing in Sudan.
Page 356 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
I wonder if you could tell me today in as specific terms as possible what the Bush Administration is prepared to do to bring an end to war in Sudan?
Secretary POWELL. Tomorrow afternoon I am meeting with my entire staff of the Africa Bureau and bringing in others as well from other agencies.
Last week when I was beginning to really hone in on the Sudan to get an understanding of the complexity of all those issues, getting an understanding of the nature of the tragedy that is occurring there—other Members have pointed this out to me with considerable emotion—I told my staff okay, look. We just have to set aside an afternoon next week for us all to sit around and let me get into this totally, this one country. Not a region. We are not talking about democracy and freedom. We are going to talk about this one country.
That will be tomorrow afternoon, sir. I do not have and am not even going to try to give you a pat answer right now, but I do know that there is perhaps no greater tragedy on the face of the earth today than the tragedy that is unfolding in the Sudan.
The only way to deal with that tragedy is to end the conflict. When you end the conflict, then you can start to repair the society and repair the families and repair the lives that are being lost there now. It will be a priority, but I am not going to try to give you an off-the-top-of-the-head answer. I will be ready for you next time we talk.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Secretary, I just wish you Godspeed.
Page 357 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 6
Secretary POWELL. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. And so do we all. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m. the Committee was adjourned.]
Next Hearing Segment(5)