meeting at the meeting of the committee will come to order before we launch into today's agenda i'd like to notify the committee of important legislation that we soon will be reviewing as most of you know last year president bush met with president felipe calderon in the mexican city of matter that they discussed among other things the need to join forces to combat the terrible score job illegal drugs and violence that the drug trade has spawned in mexico and along the mexico u border ninety percent of the drugs entering the u s transit through the central american mexico corridor their drug trade is giving rise to ever more violence not a week goes by without news of another shockingly violent incident related to drug traffickers in mexico or central america last saturday a very close to my home town a gruesome drug related shootout claimed fifteen lives just across the border from san diego it's time for us to step up and address these issues as well as the illegal southbound flow of arms and our nation's expanding domestic demand for illegal drugs which fuels the whole terrible cycle a few months back president bush sent congress a proposal handle hammered out in america with the mexican government and our friends in central america faces courts together we have been studying this proposal carefully i'll the sooner do sing legislation to authorize the merit initiative the  billing clued support in the realm of security ports and borders law enforcement infrastructure and modernization as well as strengthen the rule of law and the institutions charged with its enforcement very much look forward to making this a swift and bipartisan effort to show our southern neighbors that we are they are not alone in facing this threat and now pursuant to notice i'll call up the bill h r fifty nine sixteen the security assistance and arms export control reform for purposes of markup and i will recognize myself to explain the bill the bipartisan legislation before the committee reforms the arms export control act control process certain aspects of the u s security assistance program title one addresses issues relating to the reform of the arms export control process based on proposals made by mr sherman and mr manzullo as introduced in h r forty two forty six the defense trade controls performance improvement act of two thousand and seven it also a man's the arms export control act to ensure that our close allies south korea and israel get treatment similar to nato and australia and new zealand and japan the nato countries australia new zealand and japan in this regard the bill partially draws from h r fifty four forty three the united states republic of korea defense cooperation improvement act of two thousand and eight which was introduced by our colleagues mr rice and ms tauscher of california in addition in order to address recent major sales of defense articles and services to countries in the middle east the bill ensures that israel can maintain its qualitative military edge and it authorizes the first year of military insistence under the recent us israel memorandum of understanding regarding security assistance the bill also increases the ability of congress to conduct oversight on the security assurances that the united states has provided to the government of israel since one thousand nine hundred seventy five including any revisions that have been or will be made i'm concerned  this came up in the recent arms sale with saudi arabia and some of the other gulf countries that the assurances that are being given to the government israel aren't subject to rigorous compilation and review leaving our committee unaware of the exact range of our commitments to an important ally over the years under the new provision the committee will receive copies of such security assurances and any revisions as well as a full summation every five so that we may independently assess the extent to which those assurances are being met and finally title three of this legislation provides for a limited waiver of current law to allow the united states to eliminate north korea's nuclear program the waiver would apply to portions of what is commonly called the glenn amendment this glen amendment keeps the department of energy from funding its own work i'm disabling in dismantling north korea's nuclear program including removing plutonium in the next phase of this process as well as verifying that pyongyang is living up to its commitments until now a flexible but limited fund at the department of state is paid for this work title three of our bill allows for more rational funding and planning of these activities without giving the administration a blank check it provides a narrow carefully tailored authority it also requires the ministration to document for congress each year the need for keeping this authority in place the committee will continue to keep a close eye on the implementation of the six party denuclearization agreement it is entirely possible north korea's own actions may sour the deal however in the interest of us in global security i think we need to forge ahead and accomplish what we can now towards that end title three also includes a provision authored by ranking member really on iraq slate and that reinforces u s policy regarding removing north korea from the state department's list of countries supporting terrorism the conditions laid out in that provision include that is before you can remove north korea from the list of countries supporting terrorism requires a certification it's present a presidential certification that north korea no longer is engaged in transferring to other countries any technology that enables the development of acquisition of nuclear weapons to north korea whatever think of doing something like that  thank you thank you thank you thank you to you and thank you to your excellent staff for working so closely with me and with my terrific g o p staff on this bill in particular for  incorporating the language that you discussed regarding the ongoing six party talks in north korea and addressing proliferation concerns related to the regime in pyongyang and its links to other rogue nations such as syria the first part clarifies the north korea must meet in order to be removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism related sanctions to be lifted and while it does not add new ambiguity regarding north korea's obligations to declare all of its nuclear programs in accordance with the february thirteenth two thousand and seven six party agreement not just one reactor not just plutonium activities but all of its nuclear programs we should expect greater confidence that any concessions granted that regime is in accordance with u s law and our national security interests given north korea's abysmal record regarding its promises verification of its declared actions is of central importance to all americans for that reason the bill now contains language that requires the submission of a report to our committee describing the measures that the u s will use to verify north korea's declarations regarding its nuclear facilities the report will also include a description of any formal or informal agreement an understanding that the u s and north korea have reached regarding verification i believe this language compliments well the chairman's provisions in title three of the bill and as you said last thursday mr chairman following the briefings on the israeli strike of the syrian nuclear facility built with north korean assistance it is important for us to insist on a bare flyable enforcement mechanism to ensure that north korea honors its commitment to stop spreading the means to create nuclear weapons and to end its nuclear program permanently i believe that we have a product mr chairman that helps us achieve that and more broadly mr chairman this security assistance legislation has many commendable provisions for example the bill strongly reaffirms and strengthens u s security assistance to our strong ally the state of israel does so by requiring an ongoing executive branch assessment of israel's qualitative military edge and by authorizing an increase in foreign military financing consistent with the recent us israeli memorandum of military assistance as you pointed out it also includes the language by mr sherman and mr manzullo about management and process and movement and licensing of the fence exports and it also includes greater governmental oversight over the arms control process i congratulate and the staff to do a fabulous job of working through these issues and putting together a bipartisan consensus i'm now pleased to recognize for opening comments before we get into any amendments that might be offered the gentleman from california the chairman of the subcommittee on terrorism nonproliferation and trade mr chairman of california i thank the  one subtitle i thank the chairman for including this text in the larger bill i want to recognize mr manzullo and mr royce for working on this bill which now finds itself  within the larger piece of legislation and i want to address the importance of what is now title one subtitle of the bill before us the defense trade control improvement act se to address past performance failings and understaffing in the directorate of defense trade controls the state department agency responsible for adjudicating licenses with regard to commercial arms sales this agency was found to have more than ten thousand open at the end of two thousand and six they then tried an unsustainable winter offensive to reduce their backlog by cancelling overtime  cancelling leaves mandatory overtime etc which did bring the backlog down but this was as i mention unsustainable you can compare the relevant agencies the state department the defense trade controls rather the defense directorate or directorate of defense trade controls with its sister agency over in the department of commerce the state department deals with export munitions things we know are dangerous the department of commerce bureau of industry security deals with dual use items things that might be munitions might be dangerous and yet the department of commerce agency was responsible for about one third the number of applications and had five times the staff that's roughly fifty one fifteenth the workload that we see over in the state department no wonder the state department has a massive backlog this bill tries to beef up staffing at the d t c requiring by the third quarter of two thousand and one they have a licensing officer for every twelve hundred fifty applications even that is not a very large staffing level one person dealing with twelve hundred fifty  munitions license applications the bill also requires a complete strategic review of arms export control system a policy that has not a process that has not occurred since nine eleven the strategic review acquire the  new president undertake much needed top to bottom look at our export controls them to ensure that we are controlling the technologies that pose the greatest threats the bill codifies the new administration directive regarding the processing time for licenses with respect to the export of hardware to our allies our priority should be to focus on the export of american made hardware and we try to achieve the quickest process possible processing of those license requests in contrast the approval of defense service exports are not subject to the licensing timeframes in this bill the reason is that they are much more complex and include approval of the transfer of technical capacity to those who are manufacturing munitions overseas furthermore of course it is our focus ought to be on export ing goods not exporting technology or exporting jobs on a related topic our outlays often require offsets these are clearly a clash with the doctrine of free trade and our administration needs to work more effectively to eliminate the bill pryor provides for streamline process for approval of licenses for spare parts of items already export it and provides a blanket license that would be good for five years to build is not contain any provisions clarifying the jurisdiction with regard to civilian aircraft part licensing section sixty seventeen c of the export administration act states that standard equipment on aircraft is under the jurisdiction of the department of commerce there had been concern regarding the interpretation of the section given the fact that so many aircraft components have a military legacy but are in trickle components of civilian aircraft a clear and bright line needs to be drawn and i believe the state department has issued a proposed rule that provides that bright line i see that my time has expired and i thank the gentleman the time the gentleman has expired thank you for that explanation of very important section of this bill i now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee on terrorism nonproliferation trade the gentleman from california mr royce for purposes of debate only thank you mr chairman very much and i really want to express my appreciation for working with me to include the key elements of h r five five four four three the united states republic of korea defense cooperation improvement act of two thousand and eight and as you explained this legislation upgrades south korea's military procurement status and us law i think it's gain substantial note that this underlying legislation has a number of moving parts and that some of the elements may prove controversial in the other body and a question i was going to ask you mr chairman is if you could assure me that if this bill does not get active consideration in the senate during the next several months that you will strongly consider moving h r five four five four four three through the committee and to the other body as a standalone measure and i yield to the chair and i thank the gentleman for yielding and i want to share my good friend the reason is measures been included in the importance of the u s south korea relationship and the accepted generally recognized for five minutes i thank the chairman very much and i think this is a very important step forward as it relates to america's security assistance many of us are somewhat  if you will restrain when we begin to think of security assistance because many of us of course even though the facts are different i think of the calamity and the complexity of iraq but this bill is an important policy statement on how we interact with our allies and the importance of having relationships on important security measures and to chairman this bill provides criteria and i want to thank chairman berman and on the massive widespread and systematic violations of human rights or acts of genocide and it's i stand for as a criteria and basis for considering whether or not this particular request for security assistance  should occur additional amendment has another aspect to it this is amendment two that indicates that as we access the extent under section one hundred three eight t to which export control policies and practices under the export control act promote the protection of basic human rights so the recipient one of the criteria should be an assessment of how they're promoting  human rights i think this is the least we can do mr chairman one we should certainly be cognisant of whether or not those who are seeking our assistance or engage in genocide or the massive widespread systematic violation of human rights and then going forward in a proactive manner we should insist that we consider how they're promoting human rights let me also say to my colleagues a question that i made in korea is that if a country has had a metamorphic will change if they've been reborn citing some of the countries in africa if they have a new leader like mrs johnson in liberia we will be holding past indiscretions past acts as we go forward to providing security assistance so i would ask my colleagues to consider this and chairman i also want to make note in thanking the committee in the next bill that i might not be present for fifty eight thirty four korean assistance is just as thank them for the amendment that i've offered and that has been accepted on how korea and china interact on the refugees that cross into china but i would ask on this bill h r fifteen and sixteen my colleagues support the two  forward this gets a handle on how we issue financial assistance or export arms as we go forward i yield back the time to recognize myself i thank the aye the amendment is adopted the situation is if we actually have a reporting requirement we have at least one more person wants to speak to please everyone stay until after that and then we'll vote on this issue and will vote on the next bill and then we will talk about all the suspension bills but we won't need a reporting requirement so you could do whatever you want at that point  staff for taking the bull by the horns into looking into the launching of european free satellites on chinese long march rockets just recently we've learned that the tail  alina's space corporation a european company has removed all u s components from their satellites not to make them better but to get around a requirement and this in order to allow them to comply with this comply will have the same time launching their satellites on chinese rockets and we have been down this road before where people ar maneuvering and trying to put themselves in a spot to take western technology and launch it on chinese rockets because it's a good deal and in the long run it doesn't turn into a good deal the last time we did this was a decade ago and there was a dangerous transfer of technology to china in fact the chinese have recently shot down a satellite using their technology and there is a lot of reason to believe that without the help of the companies a decade ago they might not have capability congress needs to decide if we are serious about the transfer of rocket and missile technology to the chinese and if the us government will conduct business as usual with companies that do extensive business with the missile and rocket divisions of the people's liberation army then we also need to know if they're willing to do that and if we let that happen is that a threat to our national security i read in space news and in the wall street journal on monday that european tele satellite plans to launch one of its satellites on a long march rocket at the moment the united states government relies on this satellite fleet for vital communications capabilities i would like to work with the managers of this bill to draft an amendment to this legislation that would shine some light on these satellite operators who would do business with china great wall corporation which is of course a people's liberation shell company people's liberation army shell company that is basically the company that owns and controls the long march family of rockets which of course is the people's liberation army mr chairman i want to thank you again for looking at this issue and this is something that  time important because we know that the people's republic of china is worth to increase their capabilities in space in a way that will make them more but make them stronger in terms of their international positioning this is not in the interest of the united states to see that western technology much of it based on research and development here in the oppose no the eyes have it the motion is adopted without objection the bill of the reporters a single member of the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments adopted by the committee and the staff has direct to make any conforming changes we have a series of non controversial bills on the agenda it is the intention one of which needs a reporting majority will take that up first steps the ranking members build we have a series it is intention of the chair to consider these measures and block and unanimous consent authorize the chair to report certain measures dollhouse and c consideration of the remaining bills under suspension of the rules all members are given leave to insert remarks on the measures into the record should they choose to do so before turning to our first measure h r fifty eight thirty four i turn to the ranking member for some comments chairman in light of the time constraints i have some very insightful comments on my bill that i would like to be made part of the record and spare all of you and then without objection the amendments to h r fifty eight thirty four the ranking members legislation which i'm co sponsoring of the north korean human rights reauthorization act of two thousand and eight is deemed to be adopted and the bill is reported favorably to the house of representatives without  objection the bill reported as a single amendment of the nature of a subsidy incorporating the amendments adopted by the committee staff directed to make any techno conforming changes does anyone wish to be recognized to speak on any of the additional measures mr house resolution eleven sixty six the general from california thank you very much mr chairman i do have concerns regarding this resolution when you read this resolution it notes that russia has carried out policies to undermine neighboring georgia sovereignty well that's correct and i think it rightly condemns several provocative russian actions my objection regards indorsing nato membership for georgia i realize that the administration is pushing for this but mr chairman i i'd ask my colleagues whether we have really fully considered it nato is not a club  it's a defense alliance it's a commitment to come to each member's defense and this makes nato the most solemn and consequential commitment our country can make by endorsing nato membership what we're doing here is saying that georgia is in our vital national interest that it's worth american lives and treasure defending and i question that especially when our military is stretched thin we'd better also consider that georgia and russia could be a spark away from serious conflict there and i realize that russia wants georgia out of nato it wants georgia out desperately trying to signal us to reject georgia so i understand my colleagues position but just because russia opposes something in this case georgia in nato doesn't mean it's in our interests to do it to make this commitment nato membership for georgia may seem like an easy commitment but events move in unpredictable ways starting down this road could lead to a one no win choice for us on the one hand on or in our commitment or end up with a difficult and painful military action and action our nato allies by the way i think would likely shun for those concerned with nato as vitality expansion may not help nato in this in this instance we cannot defend every country we shouldn't try there are vital interests and then there's other interests and georgia has disputed territory maybe nato membership would help resolve that dispute but maybe not we should help georgia resist russian intimidation yes but i just don't see georgia as a sacred security commitment and i thank you mr chairman for allowing me to the gentleman you know i well i thank the gentleman for i'm going to recognize the i am i am struck before making mr wexler i am struck by the notion that at bucharest nato denied membership action plan status provide a membership action plan to ukraine and georgia and this house unanimously voted for a resolution endorsing membership action plan status for ukraine and georgia and what the resolution before us provides in its language is simply the language that nato unanimously voted out of the bucharest s and what that language stated of course was that the republic of georgia also ukraine but in this context we're focused on georgia that the republic of georgia will become a member of nato that's what the administration supported that's what all of the nations of nato supported this house voted unanimously for map membership action plan for georgia and just in terms of housekeeping i believe this was a provision and i agree with it entirely but a provision that the ranking member be included in the resolution which i totally support but we did so with her urging and i'm glad that we did the language here is exactly what nato provided a mostly and it doesn't go any last or any more than that which nato has already provided and the position of our government at nato thank you m one of the issues we always face in our foreign policy is self determination when people want to establish their own independent states versus territorial integrity when states won to retain all of their territory with regard to the eastern european area we supported self determination of the peoples of yugoslavia we supported the self determination for the republics that made up the soviet union and we supported self determination of serbia's region of kosovo but then we oppose self determination and support territorial integrity of up and south those that some would say that makes us inconsistent they are wrong we are consistently anti russian with regard to all five of those instances we are reflexive li anti russian i'm not necessarily against being anti russian but i think we shouldn't be refle say that if georgia were to become a member of nato today we would be in a state of war with russia a major nuclear power state that is not something that should be handled through a suspension bill that nobody pays any attention to so i would hope that we would think again about this resolution there are substantial claims of the people of the people of south those  said to go their own way and not to be part of georgia there are arguments on the other side and that perhaps we would need a more extensive review before we put the national security of the united states on the line observation that too many people are reflexively anti russian and let me know that for my entire life i have been reflexively and by soviet union and i am very happy that it's russia now so i don't have to have the most recent one has been of course kosovo i have been in favor of each and every one of those whether it was ukraine or all of these former soviet republics or as well as kosovo i've been  on the floor of the house but i did raise objections and i raised them in the record i was unable to get to the floor but that resolution on the house floor did not go through the committee process if it had gone through this committee process i would have raised these objections then turning to this resolution i'm questioning whether checking russian aggression by taking on a treaty commitment is in our national interest and in the interest of data and i think it's a question worthy of the committee's consideration in today's wall street journal there's a story about the rapid escalation of tensions between russia and georgia there yesterday russian's defense ministry said it was increasing troop deployments in georgia's separatist territories while georgia said it would block moscow's efforts to join the world trade organization and also yesterday georgia said it filmed a twenty nine aircraft shooting down one of its unmanned aerial reconnaissance aircraft and traced it back to return to russian airspace russian officials denied the attack but that's the state of play on the ground in georgia today and why also to the gentleman from florida thank you if we could just put this in the context of this resolution please the resolution is not it's a bit of a stretch to make an analogy between the process that resulted in cost of becoming an independent state and what is now unilateral actions by russia shooting down a georgian drone engaging in unilateral aggressive actions not through a negotiated process not through the united nations not through any  deliberative international body it was a unilateral aggressive act that offended the sovereignty of the nation of georgia as to the issue of nato membership this resolution does not guarantee nato membership in fact it does not go any further not one common little word further than that which all of the na y voted to support at the bucharest summit recently so that's what we're saying that we support what was done at the nato summit if you disagree with what is done at the nato summit then that's a fair position but respectfully it is not fair to make this resolution into something anything other than support for what was stated in b resolution is simply stating that when russia goes ahead unilaterally shoots down a drone violates another nation's cyber that we the united states house of representatives in a resolution can point that out and say that's not constructive and that we support a peace process that the georgians have initiated and that yes we the united states house of representatives support what nato did at the bucharest summit which our government supported which every member of nato supported are we not prepared to go as far as all of the other governments involved in nato went in terms of the issue of enlargement as it relates to georgia we did vote i understand mr royce correctly pointed out i assume that he had reservations but we voted on the floor of the house unanimously understanding the gentleman's reservations for membership action plan the president apparently lost that argument at nato and instead the nato countries determined that they would issue the statement the language of which is reflected in this resolution no more no less well we can reclaim my time i just want to point out that my colleague from florida speaks about facts as if they were current and yet my concern is i read this resolution and the first whereas clause we talk about the aircraft was shot down all the georgian territory reportedly by a russian made twenty twenty nine the next paragraph goes on to say where as russian officials have denied any involvement in the downing of the reconnaissance plane i feel very uncomfortable accepting that as having been vetted through any kind of a committee process and simply to accept that  as as factual day it has the appearances if you will of the potential to be interpreted by the russian government as being reflexively anti the process for removing this resolution for either further consideration or a separate vote from the unanimous consent that we're currently operating under regarding the rest resolutions  if the effort is to get it off of the can sell calendar one member requesting that it be taken off the consent well achieve that that will not keep it from coming up i'll just keep it from coming up as part of  universal declaration of human rights i also want to thank your fine staff on their efforts on this measure as well on december tenth one thousand nine hundred eighty eight the memory of a brutal world war which took tens of millions of lives scarred millions of survivors of an unimaginable holocaust and unleashed the full fury of atomic power on the guilty as well as the innocent remain vividly etched in the world's collective consciousness in the view of this unprecedented devastation and in the hope of preventing future conflict united nations general assembly proclaim the universal declaration of human rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations and recognize that the inherent dignity an equal and alienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom justice and peace in the world as the memory of world war two continues to recede into history it becomes ever clearer to me that our rapidly changing world appears to be losing sight of guiding principles that have a company the promotion of human dignity and prosperity since the earliest progression of civilization i also believe that we are living in a day when the myriad distractions of modern life in the united states leave precious little time on the philosophical foundations to reflect on the philosophical foundations which have guided this nation through many turbulent times to draw attention to these important principles and to the pivotal role of the united states in bringing the universal declaration to fruition mr delahunt and i were pleased it is this reservation resolution to recognize the sixth anniversary of the declaration of human rights is my hope that this effort will serve as a vivid reminder of the profound contributions of the united states throughout our short history as a champion for human rights the work also left to be done and inspire thoughtful the gentleman from i just want to knowledge the gentleman's leadership on this issue on this resolution it is a resolution that i support enthusiastically it is well drafted and i think it reflects well on the gentleman from nebraska and this committee and urges adoption alltime of the time of the gentleman has expired gentlemen from puerto rico mr for twenty six recognition he's recognized for five minutes thank you chairman vermin i first want to express my deep  chairman i want to briefly explain why this bill makes sense the foreign service act lists angel in which the state department may pay the travel related cost of foreign service members one section the f s a states of the department may pay the travel may be taken in the fifty states and the u s territories another section of it as the f s a states of the apartment may pay the costs incurred by foreign service members or are in our travel on like home leave which is granted to all foreign just as they proudly serve in our nation's armed forces restaurants of the u s territories also represent this great country abroad as diplomats treating them on equal terms with their colleagues from the fifty states is the right thing to do  department from this bill is expected to be minimal and the department does not oppose its passage in closing i would like to put a human face on this bill mr i want to go only as a u s citizen born and raised in puerto rico a few other to west point and  proposed legislation four point four million live in the commonwealth of puerto rico and i know some one hundred thousand of our foreign service workers possibly could come from puerto rico so i thank the gentleman for  eight which will fix anomaly contained in the forest service act which currently prohibits foreign service personnel serving in hardship posts to take rest and recuperation travel known as  in the five u s territories as a former ambassador to the federated states of micronesia i'm aware of the stress our foreign service officers undergo all serving in hardship posts and the need for rest and recuperation travel but i have never understood why fs owes cannot be compensated for taking our nari in our own u s territories which sometimes are closer and more assessable than a long and arduous trip to the states as mr fortunate has noted in his remarks it also makes no sense that u s citizens and foreign service officers who have been raised in one of the s territories and still have family there cannot be compensated for a trip to visit his or her family and relatives and i want to commit mr fortuna for offering this legislative and i rules and their members to those measures which the members have before them shall be deemed adopted r three six five eight h r one zero one one h r one zero six three house resolution eleven zero nine house resolution eleven twenty seven house resolution eleven sixty house house concurrent resolution three one seven house concurrent resolution for you one eight three three two house concurrent resolution three three seven