U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–835 PDF 2018

S. HRG. 114–705 

REVIEW OF RESOURCES, PRIORITIES, AND 

PROGRAMS IN THE FY 2016 STATE 

DEPARTMENT BUDGET REQUEST 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

TRANSNATIONAL CRIME, CIVILIAN SECURITY, 

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND 

GLOBAL WOMEN’S ISSUES 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 5, 2015 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

BOB CORKER, TENNESSEE, Chairman

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

DAVID PERDUE, Georgia 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut 

TIM KAINE, Virginia 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

LESTER MUNSON III, Staff Director

JODI B. HERMAN, Democratic Staff Director

JAMIL JAFFER, Majority Chief Counsel

MARGARET TAYLOR, Minority Chief Counsel

JOHN DUTTON, Chief Clerk

——————

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN HEMISPHERE

TRANSNATIONAL CRIME, CIVILIAN SECURITY,

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND

GLOBAL WOMEN’S ISSUES

MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Chairman

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

DAVID PERDUE, Georgia 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

TIM KAINE, Virginia 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

(II)

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Marco Rubio, U.S. Senator From Florida ..................................................... 1 

Hon. Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator From California ............................................. 3 

Hon. Catherine Russell, Ambassador-at-Large, Global Women’s Issues, U.S. 

Department of State, Washington, DC ............................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

John D. Feeley, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Western 

Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC ................... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

Virginia Bennett, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of 

Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 

Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Responses of John D. Feeley to questions submitted for the record by Senator 

Bob Corker ............................................................................................................ 48 

Responses of John D. Feeley to questions submitted for the record by Senator 

Tim Kaine ............................................................................................................. 50 

(III)

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

(1) 

REVIEW OF RESOURCES, PRIORITIES, AND 

PROGRAMS IN THE FY 2016 STATE 

DEPARTMENT BUDGET REQUEST 

TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN HEMISPHERE, 

TRANSNATIONAL CRIME, CIVILIAN SECURITY, DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GLOBAL WOMEN’S ISSUES, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:35 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio ( chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Rubio, Flake, Gardner, Perdue, Boxer, Kaine, 

Markey, and Menendez. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator RUBIO. All right, the committee will come to order. 

Today’s hearing is to review the resources, priorities, and programs in fiscal year 2016 at the State Department budget request, 

focused on—here in our work in the Western Hemisphere, as well 

as transnational crime, civilian security, democracy, human rights, 

and global women’s issues. 

Our witnesses today from the administration are the Honorable 

Catherine Russell, the Ambassador-At-Large for Global Women’s 

Issues; Dr. John Feeley, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 

of State, the Bureau for Western Hemisphere Affairs; and Miss Virginia Bennett, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, 

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. 

And the hearing is going to focus on a review of resources, priorities, and programs in fiscal year 2016 budget request in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Bureau of Western 

Hemisphere Affairs, and the Office of Global Women’s Issues. I 

want to thank all of you for being a part of this today. 

These are important issues for the Department of State and for 

America’s role in the world. Just as ensuring that our military is 

adequately funded to deter our enemies, the international affairs 

budget, of which the State Department budget is just one component, is an essential element of our national security. The programs we will review today help us advance U.S. national security 

interests in key regions and help us ensure that our foreign policy 

reflects our values. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

2 

I want to take the opportunity to briefly review some of the challenges facing us in the Western Hemisphere, as well as across the 

globe. 

In Central America, the countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, 

and Honduras, which are collectively known as the ‘‘Northern Triangle countries,’’ have been mired in economic stagnation, rocked 

by violent crime brought on by the proliferation of narcotraffickers, 

and hobbled by entrenched corruption that inhibits economic 

growth and safety. I am cautiously optimistic about the desire of 

these countries to move themselves forward and the attention that 

the administration is now giving to this particular region. While 

there cannot be a blank check and no accountability, Central American governments must look within and stamp out corruption to restore public confidence in public institutions. 

In Colombia, I remain supportive of the Government of Colombia 

and the Colombian people’s right to seek what is in their best interest with regards to the ongoing peace talks with the FARC. 

However, the FARC’s most recent deadly attack violated a ceasefire that had been in place since December, and resulted in the 

death of 10 soldiers. This is not the first time that the FARC has 

violated a cease-fire agreement, and the attack highlighted how 

deadly FARC continues to be. Our assistance to Colombia has been 

instrumental to the success in bringing the FARC to the negotiating table. The United States and Colombia must make sure that 

the FARC knows that they have been defeated on the battlefield. 

In Haiti, the suspension of the October 26th elections last year 

was very startling, and the announcement of the President that he 

would rule by decree was even more disturbing. History—Haiti, unfortunately, has a history of turbulent elections, and the recent 

suppression of political protesters cannot continue. We are hopeful 

that the upcoming August election will go forward as planned and 

that a new democratically elected government will be installed that 

will be responsive to the people of Haiti. 

In Cuba, despite all the efforts by the Obama administration to 

fast-track and reestablish relations with that government, the Castro dictatorship has used this opportunity to ridicule and attack 

American interests. The Cuban Government has made no concessions, no attempts to open a society that has been in darkness for 

55 years, a darkness, make no mistake, that has been inflicted by 

the Castro brothers due to their ineffective and failed ideology. In 

fact, since December 17, the regime has increased its repression 

and beatings of dissidents, and has shown every intent of making 

U.S. overtures a one-sided deal. In particular, the consistent attacks on the Ladies of White show this brutal regime’s true nature. 

In Venezuela, we continue to be concerned with the increasing 

authoritarian rule of Nicolas Maduro over Venezuela. The recent 

announced nationalization of privately owned commercial companies through the use of his decree powers is an affront to a free 

society. He also continues to lash out at the United States as the 

cause of Venezuela’s problems, never acknowledging that he is the 

one who has imposed restrictions on currency, travel, and trade. 

The Venezuelan people deserve better. 

In Argentina, we continue to mourn the death of Argentine Special Prosecutor Alberto Nisman, a courageous man who relentlessly 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

3 

pursued those who were responsible for the bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association in Buenos Aires on July 18, 1994, 

that killed 85 people and wounded more than 300. I am concerned 

over the slow pace of the investigation into his death. And, with 

that in mind, I introduced a resolution today regarding his courageous work and life, and a call for a swift and transparent investigation into his tragic death. 

Nicaragua continues to reestablish its close ties with Russia, rekindling memories of Soviet presence in Central America during 

the 1980s. New military cooperation agreements between Vladimir 

Putin and Daniel Ortega serves as a further expansion of Russian 

reach into the hemisphere. 

Mexico, which we join today in celebrating its army’s defeat of 

the French Army on Cinco de Mayo, continues to be a strong partner of the United States, both economically through trade and security. I continue, of course, to be concerned about the violence that 

proliferates across the country, driven by drug cartels that seek to 

terrorize communities they operate in. I am particularly concerned 

about the massacre of 43 students in the city of Iquala. 

On democracy and human rights, we are seeing a deterioration 

of democracy and human rights across the globe. In particular, 

freedom of press and freedom of religion is being challenged in 

every corner of the globe. In 2015, Freedom House Freedom of the 

World Report identified that global press freedom declined in 2014 

to its lowest point in more than 10 years. A 2013 Pew Research 

study found that Christians were being harassed either by government or social groups in 102 of 198 countries included in the study. 

There are also serious questions about whether the U.S. Government is structured adequately to make human rights and democracy a priority of foreign policy. 

On women and girls—face numerous challenges across the globe, 

from China’s one-child policy, which places a preference on boys 

over girls, to Saudi Arabia, where the state of women’s rights is so 

abysmal that they are not even allowed to drive. Gender-based violence cuts across ethnicity, race, class, religion, educational level, 

and international borders. An estimated one in three women worldwide has been beaten, coerced into sex, or experienced some other 

form of abuse in their lifetime. 

While these lists of challenges seem daunting, the U.S. Government is dedicated to improving the status of democracy, human 

rights, and women’s rights. Today, we are exploring how we can 

best dedicate our resources to improve ongoing U.S. efforts. 

With that, I recognize the ranking member, Senator Boxer. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to 

thank you for holding this hearing, and I want to extend a warm 

welcome to our distinguished witnesses. 

Today’s hearing is part of a series of subcommittee hearings to 

examine in more detail the State Department’s strategic and budgetary priorities for fiscal year 2016. These hearings will help inform the committee’s efforts to craft a State Department authorization bill, which is a top priority for our new chairman. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

4 

Our subcommittee has jurisdiction over a range of critical matters relating to U.S. foreign policy and national security, including 

U.S. relations with countries of the Western Hemisphere, as well 

as a global responsibility for democracy, human rights, and women’s issues. 

I just want to call out for praise Secretary Kerry. When I went 

to then-Chairman Kerry with this notion that we add this very important part to our subcommittee—human rights, democracy, and 

women’s issues—he said yes. And Republicans support it, as well. 

I am very grateful that it stays with this subcommittee. 

The State Department’s budget request seeks to implement key 

policies and strategies in each of these areas. I strongly support the 

administration’s historic $1 billion request for a U.S. Strategy for 

Engagement in Central America. This funding will support a government-wide approach to promote regional prosperity and economic opportunity, address high levels of violence and insecurity, 

and strengthen democratic institutions. I also support the administration’s efforts to deepen U.S. engagement in the region, including 

its decision to chart a new path forward in United States-Cuban 

relations. And I know we are sharply divided on that in this committee, but that is healthy disagreement. 

In addition, I appreciate the administration’s strong commitment 

to promoting women’s rights, protecting women’s security, and ensuring their full and meaningful participation in all areas of public 

life. 

The budget request also includes funding for programs that combat gender-based violence, that our chairman alluded to, and for 

continued implementation of the U.S. Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence Globally. It is also critical that the 

United States continues to lead the world in advancing democracy 

and human rights worldwide. Today, sadly, we continue to see 

widespread human rights violations and threats to fundamental 

freedoms in countries from China to Russia to Uganda to Venezuela. So, I support funding for programs that support human 

rights defenders and civil society organizations, promote religious 

freedom, and strengthen accountability and the rule of law. 

It seems to me, if we are going to wrap our arms around the distress in the world, I think this subcommittee is a good place to 

start, because of our broad jurisdiction over these issues. 

And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Senator. 

And now we are going to begin with Ambassador Russell. 

Welcome to the committee. Thank you for being here. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE RUSSELL, AMBASSADOR-ATLARGE, GLOBAL WOMEN’S ISSUES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

STATE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Boxer, and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you very much for inviting me to testify today. 

We, at the Department of State, believe that advancing the status of women and girls worldwide is not only the right thing to do, 

it is the smart thing to do. Study after study demonstrates that 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

5 

countries are more stable, peaceful, and prosperous when women 

are healthy, educated, and able to fully participate in their economies and their societies. As the Ambassador at Large for Global 

Women’s Issues, it is my job to develop and help implement policies 

and initiatives that promote gender equality and advance the status of girls and women around the world. My office is focused on 

both policy and diplomacy efforts. We implement a handful of targeted programs to strategically advance our objectives. We share 

best practices for promoting gender issues within the State Department, and we coordinate with USAID and other U.S. Government 

agencies, as well as other governments, international institutions, 

and NGOs. 

I would like to begin today by providing you with an overview 

of my office’s three priority areas, and I will then outline how we 

use our resources to support these objectives. 

Our first priority is to prevent and respond to gender-based violence, both in conflict and in peacetime. As you said, Chairman 

Rubio, more than one in three women around the world faces sexual or physical violence in her lifetime. That is why I make sure 

that addressing gender-based violence is the—on the agenda every 

trip that I take. For example, I have met with survivors of acid attacks in Pakistan. I have met with the Government of Bangladesh 

to encourage them to uphold 18 as the legal age of marriage for 

girls. I have met with Afghan President Ghani to discuss the recent 

mob murder of a 27-year-old woman named Farkhunda. And we 

continue to push the Afghan government to fully implement the 

elimination on the Violence Against Women Act. 

Our second priority is to advance women’s full participation in all 

aspects of society. In the places where decisions are made, women 

are vastly underrepresented. From politics to peace negotiations, 

women often do not have a seat at the table. We are working very 

hard to change that. We also work to expand women’s economic 

participation. One of the most effective ways to empower women is 

to facilitate greater economic independence. Women’s economic opportunities have ripple effects for their families, communities, and 

countries. Women spend the majority of their earnings on food, 

schooling, and immunizations that help secure their children’s futures. And when more women work, when the gap between women 

and men in the workforce narrows, economies benefit, as well. Research has shown that the narrowing gap between male and female 

employment accounted for a quarter of Europe’s annual GDP 

growth over the past two decades. 

Our final priority is addressing the needs of adolescent girls. In 

too many parts of the world, adolescence is the most precarious 

time for girls. Many are at risk of early and forced marriage. In 

fact, one in three girls in the developing world is married by the 

time she is 18 years old. Millions of girls live in conflict settings 

that raise the risks of gender-based violence and further disrupt already perilous situations. And far too many girls have the education—far too few girls have the education they need to participate fully in the economy. Girls’ attendance in formal schooling 

during adolescence is also correlated with later marriage, later 

childbearing, lower rates of HIV/AIDS, fewer hours of domestic and 

labor work, and greater gender equality. That is why, through the 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

6 

Let Girls Learn Initiative, a government-wide effort recently 

launched by the President and First Lady, we are working to make 

the case that every girl deserves a chance to complete her education, especially secondary education. 

These are the priorities we are focused on. I would like to talk 

very briefly about how we use our resources and programs to advance gender equality. 

As I mentioned, my role is a strategic combination of policy and 

diplomacy. The majority of programmatic activities related to gender are carried out by State and USAID embassies and missions 

around the world, as well as some of our bureaus here in Washington. My office helps advance these issues through our own targeted programming. In many instances, we use our resources to fill 

gaps and test innovative strategic ways to address challenges related to women and girls. 

I am committed to ensuring that our funds are spent on programs that have real impact and that can serve as models for other 

work. That is why we have implemented procedures to carry out 

rigorous monitoring and evaluation of the projects we fund. 

One thing we have learned is that it is difficult to see change 

without comprehensively addressing the many challenges that 

women and girls face. For example, it is one thing to provide services to survivors of domestic violence, but to truly reduce rates of 

gender-based violence, we must also focus on prevention and empowerment. And for us to succeed in achieving full gender equality, 

we need everyone—diplomats, government practitioners, civil society men and women—to play a role. 

The same concept applies to U.S. foreign policy. Each of the global challenges we face include and involve women. We cannot effectively counter violent extremist groups without engaging women. 

We cannot create stable and prosperous societies without including 

women. We cannot build stronger economies without making sure 

that girls go to school. That is why, across every bureau and every 

embassy, we need to make every effort to advance the status and 

address the needs of women and girls. 

Your leadership and support are critical to the success of our efforts. And I thank you very much for having me here today and 

for supporting our work. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Russell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CATHERINE M. RUSSELL

INTRODUCTION

Good afternoon, and thank you, Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Boxer, and 

distinguished members of the committee for inviting me to testify today on the 

resources, priorities, and programs of the Global Women’s Issues Office. 

My principal responsibility as the Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s 

Issues is to develop and help implement policies and initiatives related to promoting 

gender equality and advancing the status of women and girls internationally. We 

do this by disseminating best practices for promoting gender issues within the 

Department of State and also through coordination with USAID and other U.S. Government agencies, as well as other governments, international institutions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). We are an office focused on both policy and 

diplomacy efforts, and we also implement a handful of targeted programs to strategically advance our objectives. 

The Department believes that advancing the status of women and girls worldwide 

is not only the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do. Study after study demonstrates that countries are more stable, peaceful, and prosperous when women are 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

7 

healthy, educated, and given the opportunity to fully participate in their economies 

and societies. In other words, we believe women and girls are a good investment. 

I would like to begin today by providing you with an overview of my office’s three 

priority areas, and I will then outline how my office uses our resources to support 

these objectives. 

Priorities 

Our first priority is preventing and responding to gender-based violence, including 

early and forced marriage, both in conflict and in peacetime. This work includes 

addressing cases that capture international headlines, like the rape and murder of 

young girls in India, Boko Haram’s brutal kidnapping of teenage girls who had 

gathered to take their college entrance exams, and the kidnapping of hundreds of 

Yezidi women and girls by ISIL. But it also includes the challenging work of changing social norms and deeply ingrained attitudes that lead to more than one in three 

women around the world experiencing sexual or physical violence in her lifetime. 

In too many places, far too many people—including women—think domestic violence 

is justifiable for a variety of incomprehensible reasons, all rooted in the low status 

of women and girls. 

That is why I make sure that addressing gender-based violence is on the agenda 

of nearly every trip I take. These efforts range from meeting with survivors of acid 

attacks in Pakistan, to encouraging the Government of Bangladesh to uphold 18 as 

the legal age of marriage for all girls, to encouraging the Afghan Government to 

fully implement the Elimination of Violence Against Women Act (EVAW). On a trip 

to Guatemala, I visited a USAID-supported 24-hour specialized court for cases 

related to violence against women, exploitation, sexual violence and human trafficking, which takes an innovative and integrated approach combining legal, medical, 

and psychological services for survivors of gender-based violence. Recently, I met 

with the President of Afghanistan, Mohammad Ashraf Ghani, and discussed the 

brutal mob murder of a 27-year-old woman named Farkhunda and the Afghan Government’s efforts to bring the perpetrators to justice. 

My office also works to make sure that our embassies and bureaus around the 

world incorporate best practices for preventing gender-based violence into their strategic planning, diplomatic efforts, and programming and to ensure continued implementation of the U.S. Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence 

Globally. 

Our second priority is advancing women’s full participation in all aspects of society, including in the political sphere. Today, only 22 percent of all of the world’s 

parliamentarians are women, and there are 21 women either serving as head of 

state or head of government. Only 18 percent of all government ministers are 

women, with the majority serving in the fields of education and health. Between 

1992 and 2011, women have represented fewer than 4 percent of signatories, 2 percent of chief mediators, and 9 percent of negotiators to major peace processes. These 

are the places where decisions are made. Decisions that affect women’s lives as they 

do men’s. Yet too often women don’t have the seats at the table they both need and 

deserve. 

We also work to expand women’s economic participation. One of the most effective 

ways to empower women is to facilitate greater economic independence. Women who 

take home dependable pay from decent jobs are better equipped to provide for themselves and more likely to stand up for their rights. Being a wage earner can also 

positively influence a woman’s sense of personal empowerment; she may have the 

means or wherewithal to leave an abusive situation. Becoming a breadwinner may 

provide a greater voice for her in household decisionmaking such as the education 

of her daughter. In addition, investing in women produces a multiplier effect: 

women spend the majority of their earnings on food, schooling, and immunizations 

that help secure their children’s futures. 

Furthermore, ensuring women’s participation in the workforce helps boost economies. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has 

found that the narrowing gap between male and female employment has accounted 

for a quarter of Europe’s annual GDP growth over the past two decades and that 

closing gender gaps in the labor market in the Middle East and North Africa could 

increase per capita GDP in that region by more than 25 percent. 

For example, the Women’s Entrepreneurship in the Americas Initiative, or WEAmericas, Initiative, which we implement with the Bureau of Western Hemisphere 

Affairs, leverages public-private partnerships to support women entrepreneurs. 

Through the Equal Futures Partnership—a U.S. led initiative—we are working 

diplomatically with 26 countries and the European Union to decrease barriers to 

women’s economic and political participation. We are encouraging every partner 

country to make and fulfill commitments on these issues and linking more develFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

8 

oped countries with others that still face significant challenges to the full inclusion 

of women. As an example of how Equal Futures countries work together, Italy 

recently shared with Mexico a successful anti-gender-based violence campaign. 

Studies show that gender-based violence is and remains a significant barrier to 

women’s full economic participation. 

We are also working to increase the role of women in peace and security efforts. 

This is part of our strategic commitment to the U.S. National Action Plan on 

Women, Peace, and Security, which affirms that ensuring the participation of 

women in issues such as security, stabilization, justice, and reconciliation is critical 

to lasting peace and to U.S. national security. 

For instance, I was recently in Baghdad and met Iraqi women from a range of 

different backgrounds as well as U.N. and minority group representatives to discuss 

the urgent security and humanitarian challenges, including the needs of traumatized women and girls such as those who have escaped or otherwise returned from 

ISIL captivity. The Department is actively seeking ways to further assist these and 

other survivors of sexual and gender-based violence, building on existing interventions by the U.N. and other international organizations. 

In Sierra Leone, a program funded by my office intended to strengthen women’s 

local leadership proved effective in responding to the Ebola outbreak. The group 

used its convening authority to engage in public outreach with health care providers 

and local populations on the Ebola response, helping to ensure that the unique 

needs of women and girls were addressed. 

Our final priority is addressing the needs of adolescent girls. Unfortunately, in too 

many parts of the world, adolescence is the most precarious time for girls. Far too 

many people believe that a few years of education is enough for a girl and that once 

she reaches adolescence, it is time for her to get married or increase her domestic 

responsibilities. 

A quarter of a billion girls live in poverty. In sub-Saharan Africa, only 1 in 10 

girls graduate from high school. One in three girls in the developing world is married by the time she is 18, and one in nine is married by the age of 15. Every year, 

millions of girls undergo female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). There are about 

380,000 new HIV infections among young women aged 15–24 every year. Millions 

more live in conflict settings that raise the risks of gender-based violence and further disrupt already perilous situations. And far too few girls have the education 

they need to participate fully in the economies of their countries. 

Through the Let Girls Learn Initiative, a government-wide effort recently 

launched by President Obama and the First Lady, we are working to make the case 

that every girl deserves a chance to complete her education, especially secondary 

education. One World Bank study found that every year of secondary school education is correlated with an 18 percent increase in a girl’s future earning power. 

Girls’ attendance in formal school during adolescence is correlated with later marriage, later childbearing, lower rates of HIV/AIDS and other reproductive health 

problems, fewer hours of domestic and/or labor market work, and greater gender 

equality. 

Resources/Programmatic Activities 

As I mentioned, my role is a strategic combination of policy and diplomacy, and 

I serve to advance the Secretary’s Policy Guidance on Promoting Gender Equality 

to achieve our national security and foreign policy objectives. The majority of programmatic activities related to gender are carried out by State and USAID embassies and missions around the world, and some of our bureaus here in Washington. 

In addition, my office helps advance these issues through our own targeted programming. In many instances, we use our resources to fill gaps and test innovative, 

strategic ways to address challenges related to women and girls. 

One such initiative is the Secretary’s Full Participation Fund, which provides 

resources to embassies and bureaus to implement innovative ideas that integrate 

gender equality into every aspect of their work. 

Last July, my office was proud to announce our largest Full Participation grant 

ever—$1.5 million—to help support our Embassy in Guinea in an effort to eliminate 

FGM/C, which U.N. data shows affects 96 percent of the female population in 

Guinea. This horrific practice has zero health benefits—and can even lead to death. 

Through partnerships with the Government of Guinea, Guinea’s First Lady, 

UNICEF, and 26 local civic and human rights organizations, our Embassy in 

Guinea has established nationwide educational and media campaigns that engage 

policymakers, health professionals, FGM/C practitioners, religious leaders, and the 

general public in an effort to abandon FGM/C. Our Embassy has helped to start a 

national dialogue about this practice and has implemented programs that will protect up to 65,000 girls and women. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

9 

We also have our Global Women, Peace, and Security Grants. In coordination with 

the Bureaus of African Affairs and International Narcotics and Law Enforcement 

Affairs, we are funding a program in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to help 

build local capacity to collect the forensic evidence necessary to prosecute rape 

crimes. The program supports training for local legal, law enforcement, and health 

professionals in the proper forensic documentation of sexual violence cases, chain of 

custody procedure, and use of court-admissible evidence to prosecute legal cases 

against alleged perpetrators of sexual violence. 

I am committed to ensuring that our funds are spent on programs that have real 

impact and that can serve as models for other work. That is why we have implemented procedures to carry out rigorous monitoring and evaluation of the projects 

we fund, including working with organizations at the outset of each award to establish detailed plans to achieve and demonstrate results, as well as through site visits 

and tracking of projects through quarterly reporting. 

One thing we have learned is that it is difficult to see change without comprehensively addressing the many challenges that women and girls face. For example, it 

is one thing to provide services to survivors of domestic violence. But to really 

reduce rates of gender-based violence, we must also work on prevention and ensuring that women and girls have opportunities for education and economic independence. 

We also know that everyone is going to have to play a role if we want to effectively address the challenges women face. We know we can’t do this alone—promoting gender equality is everyone’s job who works in diplomacy and development. 

We cannot effectively counter extremist groups without engaging women. We cannot create stable and prosperous societies without including women. We cannot 

build stronger economies without making sure that girls can go to school. Across 

every bureau and embassy, we need to make sure that we are making every effort 

to advance the status and address the needs of women and girls. 

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your questions. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you very much. 

Secretary Feeley, welcome to the committee. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN D. FEELEY, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF WESTERN 

HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. FEELEY. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Boxer, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for 

the opportunity to testify here today. 

Mr. Chairman, the Western Hemisphere is a top priority for the 

United States, because important national interests are at stake. 

I am pleased to report that almost every available metric supports 

the view that the United States remains an influential actor and 

a vital partner in this region. The Obama administration’s policy 

aims to forge equal partnerships with the countries of the Americas 

to advance our shared values and our common interests. And that 

is essential for the American people. It links families, it creates 

jobs, it promotes our common democratic values, and it increasingly enables us to work together on important regional and global 

issues, such as climate change, combating transnational criminal 

organizations, and promoting a prosperity agenda that begins here 

at home. 

Our budget request reflects the high level of importance that this 

administration gives to the Western Hemisphere. The request, as 

you know, is $1.99 billion, which represents a 34.7-percent increase 

from fiscal year 2014. Just over half of the total request supports 

the U.S. strategic engagement for Central America, a new wholeof-government approach to enhance prosperity, governance, and security in Central America. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

10 

Last summer’s spike in the migration of unaccompanied children 

and women was a clear signal that serious long-standing challenges in Central America remain and, in some instances, frankly, 

are worsening. The administration is committed to working with 

Congress to develop a new approach to Central America. 

Our assistance request for Central America includes new investments, as I said, for prosperity in governance consistent with our 

strategy while maintaining and strengthening our current focus on 

security. These funds are necessary to adequately address the complex web of factors that motivate many Central Americans—as I 

said, including women and unaccompanied children—to embark on 

a dangerous and undocumented migration to the United States. 

As the Vice President and President have stressed, we must cooperate with our Northern Triangle partners to create the opportunities that will keep Central Americans at home and contributing 

to the creation of a safe, secure, prosperous, and middle-class region. While the level of support represents a significant increase 

from previous years, we believe that the political will does exist in 

the region to merit this renewed investment in Central America’s 

security and prosperity. 

We realize this is an important task, and we do not take it lightly. We, in the executive branch, must move quickly to demonstrate 

results and hold ourselves accountable. That means that we will 

continue to consult closely with all of you and your staff on this 

committee, and your colleagues elsewhere in the House and in the 

Senate. We will evaluate our programs. We will craft the most assistant—the most effective assistance package. 

Beyond Central America, we must maintain investments in priority programs that are working. This past summer, Mexico was a 

key partner in the effort to stem the flow of migration to the 

United States. And it has a strong record of capturing important 

drug traffickers. Therefore, our request to continue the support for 

the Merida Initiative is of paramount interest to us. We must continue to support Mexico’s efforts to support and strengthen the rule 

of law, combat corruption, build resilient communities, and protect 

human rights. 

In Colombia, as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, a historic peace 

process poses the best chance yet of bringing an end to Latin America’s longest running conflict. Our request supports Colombia in 

that effort to strengthen their law enforcement and counternarcotics activities, to promote human rights effectively, to look at 

women in conflict in the conflictive zones, to work on economic development, and to work on social inclusion. All of this will be crucial for a lasting and just peace. 

In the Caribbean, our request includes $241 million for Haiti and 

$53 million for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, both of 

which are focused on important national and administration priorities. As you may know, Peru is now the world’s largest producer 

of cocaine, and the government will need our help to change this 

trajectory. 

Our request maintains important support for freedom of the 

press, human rights, and democracy efforts in the hemisphere, including in Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Nicaragua. And we will 

also continue to support a revitalized and a reinvigorated OrganiFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

11 

zation of American States. We are well aware that there are many 

challenges, but we are even more convinced that there are many 

opportunities for the American people. 

I look forward to this engagement. I look forward to this session. 

And I thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Feeley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN D. FEELEY

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Boxer, and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to testify on the FY 2016 request for U.S. assistance for the 

Western Hemisphere. 

Mr. Chairman, the Western Hemisphere is a top priority for the United States 

because important national interests are at stake. I am pleased to report that 

almost every available metric—including public opinion polls, levels of trade and 

investment, cultural and family ties, security cooperation, and shared democratic 

values—supports the view that the United States remains an influential actor and 

vital partner in the region. And this positive relationship with our neighbors is 

essential for the American people. It creates jobs. It links families. It promotes our 

common democratic values. The Obama administration’s policy aims to forge equal 

partnerships with the countries of the Americas to advance these shared values and 

our common interests. Today, we are not only working closely with our partners to 

address regional and hemispheric challenges, but we are increasingly working 

together on important global issues, such as climate change, combating transnational criminal organizations, and promoting a prosperity agenda that begins at 

home. 

Let me be very specific. In the Western Hemisphere, our top priorities are jobs 

and prosperity, education and innovation, energy cooperation, and promoting democratic values. We are also focused on improving citizen security with more comprehensive policies that advance prosperity and innovation, deepening the successful 

North America relationship, and supporting Colombia’s peace process. 

Our FY 2016 budget request reflects the high level of importance that this admin- istration gives to the Western Hemisphere. The request is $1.99 billion, which is a 

34.7-percent increase from FY 2014. Just over half the total request supports the 

U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America, a new, whole of government 

approach to enhance prosperity, governance, and security in Central America. Last 

summer’s spike in the migration of unaccompanied children was a clear signal that 

serious and long-standing challenges in Central America remain and, in some 

instances, are worsening. In order to change this dynamic, we must adequately 

address the underlying factors driving migration or be prepared for what is likely 

to be an ongoing cyclical phenomenon—with significant impact and cost to the 

United States. 

Our $1 billion assistance request for Central America includes new investments 

for prosperity and governance consistent with our strategy, while maintaining and 

strengthening our current focus on security, including the investments we have 

made through the Central America Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).These 

funds are necessary to adequately address the complex web of causal factors that 

drive many Central Americans to seek out better opportunities in the United States, 

despite the obvious dangers of making this journey as an undocumented migrant. 

As the President and Vice President have emphasized, we must cooperate with our 

Northern Triangle partners to create the opportunities that will keep Central Americans at home, where they can contribute to the creation of a safe, secure, prosperous, and middle class region. While this level of support represents a significant 

increase from previous years, we believe the cost of investing now in Central America’s security and prosperity pales in comparison to the cost of addressing migration 

challenges here in the United States. 

We are cognizant of the significance of this task and do not make this request 

lightly. We in the executive branch must move quickly to demonstrate results and 

hold ourselves accountable. That means consulting closely with the members of this 

committee and your colleagues in the Senate and in the House, rigorously evaluating our programs, and crafting the most effective assistance package. 

Most significantly, we believe the essential condition for success is in sight: political will in the region. Vice President Biden traveled to Guatemala to meet with the 

Presidents of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras in early March. It was only 

the latest of his, the President’s, and Secretary Kerry’s engagement with these leaders. During months of intensive work with these three Presidents of the Northern 

Triangle of Central America, it has been clear that the notion of ‘‘shared responsiFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

12 

bility’’ is much more than a bumper sticker. I was pleased to join the Vice President 

during his most recent trip to the region earlier this spring, where the leaders 

agreed to a joint statement including a host of public commitments—with timelines—for continued progress. Together we committed to actions in Central America 

in order to promote a better business environment for investors and small 

businessowners, to strengthen police and judicial systems, to increase government 

openness and transparency, to improve revenue collection and make streets safer. 

And we did so publicly, inviting scrutiny and accountability. 

Our prosperity agenda for Central America fosters the integration of a regional 

market of 43 million people and the reduction of legal impediments that hamper 

competition and growth and only benefit small groups of closely held, entrenched 

economic forces. Six million young people will seek to enter the labor force in the 

next decade. Encouraging an environment that enables investment and growth will 

encourage talented people to stay at home, and create jobs and local businesses to 

participate in a bigger market. 

Our strategy’s governance agenda recognizes that economic growth and security 

are only sustainable when democratic institutions of government are transparent, 

accountable, and actually deliver services to all citizens—and when independent 

civil society and the media can play their rightful oversight roles. Citizens and 

investors will trust institutions once those institutions establish a pattern of transparency, accountability, and effectiveness. Thus, the prosperity and governance components of our Strategy are essential for the success of our security investments. 

At the same time, security remains a core priority. Our $1 billion request for Central America includes $286.5 million for CARSI to scale up proven community-based 

security models and advance police reform. 

Beyond Central America, we must maintain investments in priority programs that 

are working.This past summer, Mexico was a key partner in the effort to stem the 

flow of migration to the United States. And nearly every week it captures important 

drug traffickers. But its serious security challenges have persisted, as we saw with 

the tragic disappearance of 43 students in Iguala. Therefore, our $119 million 

request in continued Merida Initiative support emphasizes technical assistance, support to additional Mexican states in line with Mexico’s priorities, and assists Mexico’s southern border strategy. It advances Mexico’s efforts to strengthen the rule of 

law, combat corruption, build resilient communities, and protect human rights—all 

important priorities for the American people—especially those living in border 

states. 

In Colombia, all eyes are on whether the peace process can bring an end to Latin 

America’s longest running conflict. But we can’t take our eye off the ball, so our 

request includes $288.7 million to support Colombia’s efforts to secure the rule of 

law and support sustainable development, which will be crucial for a lasting and 

just peace. Our assistance to Colombia strengthens law enforcement, counternarcotics and rule of law, promotes human rights and humanitarian assistance, and 

expands support for economic development and social inclusion. The request also reflects Colombia’s ability to provide for its own needs. However, our assistance will 

need to remain flexible as Colombia pursues negotiations to conclude its decadeslong conflict. We appreciate Congress’ long-standing bipartisan support for our partnership with Colombia and the Colombian people and we will absolutely continue 

to consult with Congress on this important bilateral policy. 

In the Caribbean, our request includes $241.6 million for Haiti and $53.5 million 

for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). Our request for Haiti focuses on 

investments in infrastructure and energy; food and economic security, health, and 

other basic services; governance, rule of law, and security. CBSI assistance seeks 

to stabilize and reduce rates of crime and violence, which threaten both U.S. and 

Caribbean security. The request for CBSI emphasizes regional law enforcement 

information-sharing and cooperation, justice sector reform, and initiatives that 

address the root causes of crime and insecurity in targeted communities, with a 

focus on youth. 

Peru is now the world’s largest producer of cocaine, and the government will need 

our help to change that trajectory. Our request for Peru is $95.9 million, which 

includes support for traditional counternarcotics activities. Additionally, these funds 

would support alternative development programs. Our model of coordinated counternarcotics and alternative development has reduced coca cultivation in Peru’s San 

Martin region by 70 percent over the past decade, while simultaneously halving poverty, from 67 percent in 2001 to 30 percent in 2013. With USAID support, communities in San Martin now cultivate over 50,000 hectares of coffee, cacao, and other 

alternative crops for export markets in the United States and Europe. These proven 

models of success must go hand in hand with our law enforcement cooperation to 

help our committed Peruvian partners beat back the organized crime networks that 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

13 

grow, make, and ship illicit narcotics. This assistance will continue our strong cooperation with the Humala administration, which has demonstrated a clear commitment to partnership with the United States. 

The request maintains important support for freedom of the press, human rights, 

and democracy efforts in the hemisphere, including in Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, 

and Nicaragua. And we will also continue to support a revitalized and strengthened 

Organization of American States, under the leadership of Secretary General-elect 

Almagro, so that the organization is able to proactively engage on issues of democratic governance and human rights in the region. Ensuring the independence of the 

Inter American Human Rights System remains a key part of these efforts at the 

OAS. The United States has a long history of supporting human rights and civil 

society. Our request continues this approach. 

The United States remains firmly committed to engaging our regional partners 

on a positive agenda for the hemisphere. Our consistent vision is of a prosperous, 

democratic and stable region, which requires us to focus on areas such as Central 

America that are most vulnerable. The U.S. assistance that supports our policy 

makes a direct difference in the lives of citizens throughout the hemisphere and 

benefits the national interests of the United States. 

I thank you for your consideration and look forward to your questions. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you for being here today. 

Secretary Bennett. 

STATEMENT OF VIRGINIA BENNETT, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN 

RIGHTS, AND LABOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. BENNETT. Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Boxer, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the 

work we do in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 

to support freedom in closed societies and advance human rights 

and democracy around the globe. Your commitment to these vital 

issues is well known and much appreciated. 

Assistant Secretary Malinowski regrets he cannot be here today. 

He is in Vietnam, leading our bilateral human rights dialogue. I 

am personally delighted, if I might say, about his travel, because 

it means my first opportunity to offer testimony. And it is a true 

privilege to participate in the dialogue that is the very foundation 

of U.S. governance. And I thank you for that opportunity. 

Globally, space for civil society is shrinking. Restrictions and far 

more sinister acts to repress media are on the rise. Religious intolerance is captured through brutal imagery. And U.S. support for 

the organizations and individuals working to advance democratic 

freedom, human, and labor rights is making a difference in people’s 

lives across the globe. We are deeply appreciative that DRL’s advocacy work has long enjoyed strong bipartisan support from Congress. 

DRL’s total budget request is $89 million, sort of dwarfed by 

WHA’s. That request includes 60 million for the Human Rights and 

Democracy Fund, or HRDF, and 29 million for Diplomatic and Consular Programs, or DNCP. DNCP funds staff salaries, travel, and 

the like, as well as production of our annual human rights and 

international religious freedom reports. DRL also implements approximately $70 million of foreign assistance funding per year in 

Economic Support Funds, or ESF. That funding is transferred to us 

from the Department’s regional bureaus, and so is not included in 

our own budget request. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

14 

So, what do we do with these precious resources? Ninety percent 

of our work globally is in closed or closing societies where gross 

human rights abuses can occur unchecked and activists can be attacked and repressed with impunity. We seek to widen political 

space in struggling or nascent democracies and in countries with 

authoritarian regimes, including those where the United States has 

no diplomatic presence. DRL has many years of experience helping 

brave activists who target rights abuses and promote democratic 

principles in these environments. 

Our programs are notified to Congress, and overt, but we do take 

protection of our implementing partners very seriously. I would be 

happy to provide this committee or my colleagues with a private 

briefing at a later date about more details of some of what these 

programs entail. 

But, here let me highlight some examples of what makes our programming, in general terms, quite unique. 

First, the agility with which we can respond. Last year, we 

launched a new NGO Consortium for Truth, Reconciliation, and 

Justice. When mass graves were discovered in eastern Ukraine, 

just a couple of weeks after that, we were poised to deploy experts 

to advise the Government of Ukraine and local civil society on 

tracking missing persons, identification of individual remains, and 

preserving forensic information. 

DRL is also innovative. Our Digital Defenders Partnership has 

provided 350 civil society organizations with digital security assistance, and approximately 7 million people have benefited from software or hardware the Partnership has made available. 

We have also used technology solutions to improve physical security. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, an 

SMS-based system now permits villagers to alert U.N. or DRC protection forces of impending attack. This system has thwarted some 

three dozen rebel attacks on villages which are home to approximately 150,000 people. 

Many of our programs are tailored in their support of those who 

are targeted, whether women, religious and ethnic minorities, indigenous populations, or the LGBT community. Our Gender-Based 

Violence Fund just recently assisted 50 Yezidi women and girls 

who had escaped the brutality of ISIL captivity. 

We also leverage like-minded support to stretch money. Since establishing the Global Equality Fund to advance the rights of LGBT 

persons, we have been joined by 10 other governments and 9 private entities. Their contributions have grown our $2 million initial 

investment into $20 million of programs in more than 50 countries. 

And we are proud of that. 

Mr. Chairman, as the National Security Strategy in 2015 affirms, America is uniquely situated and routinely expected to support peaceful, democratic change. DRL stands ready to do our part. 

We must continue to seek the release of activists, continue to support civil society, and press governments to halt arbitrary detention 

to uphold freedom of expression. We must continue to seize opportunities to make a difference in democracies under threat and in 

countries in transition. 

Thank you again for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman, and I 

look forward to your questions. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

15 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bennett follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF VIRGINIA BENNETT

Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Boxer, distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for providing this opportunity for the Bureau of Democracy, 

Human Rights and Labor to discuss our work to advance human rights and democracy around the globe. I would like to share with you what we plan to accomplish 

with the foreign assistance funds we’ve requested. DRL enjoys strong bipartisan 

support from Congress, and we are appreciative. 

Assistant Secretary Malinowski regrets that he cannot be here today. He is in 

Asia leading the U.S. Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue with the Government of 

Vietnam. 

U.S. advocacy for democracy, human rights, labor, and international religious 

freedom are critical to our national response to the challenges we face. To continue 

this important work, DRL’s FY16 budget request for Diplomatic and Consular Programs is $29,432,000 for operations. Our operational budget represents the lifeblood 

of DRL’s policy initiatives on human rights. It covers staff, foreign travel, our 

human rights report, our international religious freedom report and engagement. 

We combine diplomacy with foreign assistance programs around the world that support democracy and human rights promotion. I’d like to focus my remarks today on 

our foreign assistance request. 

DRL has requested $60 million for the Human Rights and Democracy Fund 

(HRDF). Approximately $45 million would be obligated in accordance with the following core priorities: 

• Promoting international religious freedom; 

• Protecting labor rights; 

• Promoting human rights in China; 

• Providing emergency assistance to activists; 

• Ensuring Internet freedom; 

• Combating Anti-Semitism; 

• Supporting the rights of persons with disabilities; 

• Preventing atrocities and transitional justice; 

• Emergency response for populations at risk. 

DRL will use the remaining $15 million to fund other programs across the globe. 

We provide a global figure in our Congressional Budget Request to allow us to 

respond to human rights crises or emergencies that arise during the fiscal year. For 

example, last year, we adjusted our operational plan to support unanticipated free 

and fair elections in Ukraine. We are currently seeking to assist the new government with post-conflict accountability and reconciliation. We strive to be rapid and 

responsive, and most of our programs go from inception to implementation in 6 to 

8 months. 

Our HRDF request represents a critical component of our programming budget, 

but it does not reflect our entire programming budget. We also receive transfers 

from regional Economic Support Funds. DRL manages 350 grants a year on average, and implements approximately $150 million annually in foreign assistance. In 

general, ESF transfers are tied to specific countries and projects HRDF allows us 

to pivot in response to changing conditions. We have created and deployed rapid 

response assistance to religious freedom, human rights, and labor activists or organizations suffering repression. And we have developed strategic partnerships with 

other governments and with foundations and corporate donors. 

We support the use of new technologies to assist civil society activists and organizations worldwide. We support women; religious and ethnic minorities; indigenous 

populations; and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. We seek to widen 

political space in struggling or nascent democracies and authoritarian regimes. We 

target human rights abuses, particularly in countries that systematically repress 

fundamental freedoms. And our rapid response programs allow us to react immediately to protect human rights defenders under attack across the globe. 

I am confident our programs will accomplish these goals in FY16, as they have 

in past years. For example, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, DRL funded an 

initiative to create an SMS-based early warning and response system. This allowed 

communities in remote areas to alert authorities to threats and outbreaks of violence. These communities were then able to receive quick, comprehensive emergency 

assistance. 

Before this program, it was common for 10 to 15 communities to rely on one communication point to relay messages to U.N. protection forces. This left communities 

at the mercy of armed groups who could simply block roads and prevent them from 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

16 

sounding the alarm. DRL’s program provided villages with communications tools 

and provided training to civil community observers, civil protection officers, and 

rural police officers on how to use the warning system. Within the first two years, 

the system received 872 reports from remote villages. It thwarted 38 rebel attacks 

on villages that are home to approximately 150,000 people. 

This program’s success has demonstrated that training and communication technologies can empower communities and responders. They reduce response times, 

and help ensure comprehensive, real-time assistance from protection forces, as well 

as NGOs providing health or legal services. The provincial government of North 

Kivu has now taken the lead in managing and expanding these systems. 

Last year, DRL launched the Consortium for Truth, Justice and Reconciliation. 

It comprised nine civil society organizations recognized globally for their expertise 

on transitional justice mechanisms. Within 2 weeks of the program’s launch, our 

Embassy in Ukraine asked for assistance in responding to the discovery of mass 

graves in the Donbas region of Eastern Ukraine. There, Russian-supported separatists continue attacks against the Ukrainian Government. The Consortium quickly 

deployed technical experts to advise the Government of Ukraine and local civil society organizations on establishing processes and procedures to deal with reporting 

missing persons. They establish procedures for exhuming mass graves, identifying 

individuals, and preserving forensic information. In the last 6 months, the Consortium has begun longer term programs to document ongoing human rights abuses 

and to promote local reconciliation in Iraq and South Sudan. 

I am pleased to highlight the reach and impact our programs have. We are even 

stronger when we partner with others in defense of human rights. To that end, DRL 

has forged strategic partnerships with other governments, foundations, and private 

donors. This maximizes our ability to implement programs in support of the 

Bureau’s mandate. In many situations, our initial engagement has motivated other 

U.S. agencies or non-U.S. Government donors to provide funding to promote human 

rights and democracy goals. 

For example, we used HRDF to establish a multilateral fund called Lifeline, to 

provide emergency assistance to civil society organizations under threat for their 

efforts to advocate for fundamental freedoms. We have since recruited 16 likeminded governments and 2 foundations to contribute to a consortium of seven international human rights organizations. In FY 2014, Lifeline provided emergency 

assistance to 153 civil society organizations in 68 countries and territories. It also 

supported 61 advocacy initiatives that raised domestic, regional, or international 

awareness of a specific threat or restriction on civil society. 

Through a public-private partnership with the Avon Foundation and Vital Voices, 

we established the global Gender-Based Violence Emergency Response and Protection Initiative. This provides emergency assistance to survivors of extreme forms of 

gender-based violence. In Iraq, the Initiative has supported nearly 50 Yezidi women 

and girls who have escaped ISIL captivity. The Initiative provides fast, short-term 

assistance for the most egregious of GBV cases. These targeted grants pay for emergency medical, psychosocial, legal, relocation, shelter, and other related expenses as 

quickly as 72 hours after a request is made. Both survivors and those threatened 

with extreme violence are eligible for assistance. 

As citizens turn to digital tools to capture and spread information, we have seen 

authoritarian governments clamp down on rights of expression. In response, we 

used HRDF to form and fund the Digital Defenders Partnership with several other 

governments. Since its inception, the Partnership has provided direct emergency 

support to 55 organizations and 208 individuals facing digital emergencies, such as 

a denial of service or malware attack. The Partnership has provided almost 350 

organizations with small grants that have allowed them to assess and strengthen 

the security of their digital systems. Almost 700 individuals have received digital 

security trainings as a result of Partnership programs. And almost 7 million people 

have accessed hardware or software that improves their digital security. 

DRL used HRDF to establish the Global Equality Fund, a special Gift Fund that 

allows us to receive funds from like-minded states and private entities in order to 

protect and promote the human rights of LGBT persons worldwide. Since its launch, 

we have recruited 10 other governments and 9 private entities to join us. Those 

partnerships have allowed us to leverage the $2 million dollars initially invested by 

DRL into $20 million of programs. These are protecting and promoting the human 

rights of LGBT persons in more than 50 countries. 

We also enjoy a unique capacity to fund short-term, high-impact programs. In the 

past year, we pivoted quickly to meet needs identified by our embassies across the 

world. Since our Fundamental Freedoms Fund was established in 2011, DRL has 

provided $19 million to support 76 projects in every region of the world. Our rapid 

response programs have become an invaluable Department resource. They have 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

17 

involved more than 85 missions worldwide and provided immediate support to activists and organizations in urgent need. In 2014, we expanded the rapid response 

model to include a consortium of NGOs that can provide immediate technical assistance on transitional justice issues. 

DRL’s core focus remains closed societies. In those places gross human rights 

abuses can occur unchecked and activists can be attacked or repressed with impunity. And in such environments, direct U.S. Government engagement through bilateral assistance or even embassies may not be appropriate or possible. Over 90 percent of our budget goes to programs in such closed or closing societies. 

As repressive governments crack down on civil liberties, our programs become 

ever more vital to answering the administration’s call to assist civil society under 

threat. We work safely and effectively in spaces where others cannot. We adjust our 

operating procedures and apply best practices we’ve developed over years of implementing programs in high-risk environments to do so. We find ways to reach out 

and support civil society activists, by employing methods aimed at protecting the 

identity of our beneficiaries and reducing their risk of exposure to oppressive governments. Let me be clear that our programs are overt. They are notified to Congress. We acknowledge them publicly. Indeed, we would be happy to provide this 

committee with a detailed briefing on our closed society programs. But we work 

hard not to endanger our partners in high-risk environments, and we take that 

responsibility seriously. 

Our support empowers local NGOs and citizens to press for reforms and build 

foundations for more accountable governance. We support those promoting freedom 

of association, freedom of expression, and the right to collective bargaining. We support the efforts of human rights activists as they work to build democratic institutions, support access to justice, create independent media, and document human 

rights abuses. Our programs help advance international religious freedom, labor and 

disability rights, and transitional justice, and they promote the rights of marginalized people. We counter religious intolerance, anti-Semitism, and violent extremism. In the face of increasingly sophisticated tactics for disrupting activism online, 

we promote digital security, help activists obtain independent information, and support policy and advocacy projects in countries that seek to restrict Internet freedom. 

Governments that protect human rights and fundamental freedoms are more stable, successful, and secure than those that do not. The United States finds stronger 

partners in governments that reflect and act in the broad interests of their own people, rather than the narrow interests of the few. 

We must continue to seek the release of activists and to make progress on issues 

of mutual concern, such as disability and labor rights. We must continue supporting 

civil society, and pressing governments to halt arbitrary detentions, and uphold 

freedom of expression. We must seize opportunities to make an immediate difference 

in democracies under threat, or countries in transition. 

This is the work of decades, not days. As the 2015 National Security Strategy 

affirms, ‘‘America is uniquely situated—and routinely expected—to support peaceful 

democratic change.’’ Careful stewardship of the resources allocated to DRL enables 

us to advance U.S. foreign policy priorities in this regard, and we stand ready to 

do our part. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Boxer, committee members, your commitment to 

human rights is well known, and much appreciated. Thank you, again, for holding 

this hearing. I look forward to answering your questions. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you all for being here. We will enter the 

questions now. 

I will begin with Ambassador Russell. Earlier this, I introduced 

the Girls Count Act, with Senator Shaheen, which promotes programs that will assist with birth registration of both girls and boys. 

A nationally recognized proof-of-birth system is important to determining a child’s citizenship, their nationality, their place of birth, 

et cetera. The lack of that documentation, of course, can prevent 

girls and women from officially participating and benefiting from 

formal economic, legal, and political sectors in their country. 

I was hoping you could briefly describe to us—well, I guess, not 

briefly; however long it takes—the current barriers that girls face 

around the world in receiving a birth certificate, what you are 

doing—what we do about that, and how the Girls Act Count could 

supplement your current work. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

18 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Great, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And 

thank you very much for introducing that legislation. 

It is interesting, when I travel, I meet so many girls. It is an 

issue that I was not as aware of before I started this job as I probably should have been and certainly am now. But, one of the consequences of this is that girls—I mean, it is just—to the name of 

your bill, they just are not counted, they are not considered in any 

equations, and it makes it very difficult for them to get to school, 

it makes it difficult for them as they get older. Sometimes they do 

not have any paper that supports who they are, what their identifies are, so they cannot get loans to start jobs. I met some women 

who run a little taxicab service in India, and they talked about how 

so many of the young—they take very poor women, and they get 

them trained to drive taxicabs. And it is important, because, in 

India, there is a lot of nervousness about—on the part of women, 

about using public transportation, so they have these women-only 

taxicabs. But, how some of these very poor women never have any 

paper to sort of establish who they are, so they cannot go to a 

bank, they cannot get a driver’s license. So, it is a problem that follows them throughout their lives. And, I think, from our perspective, the efforts to change that are critically important. And it also 

goes to the—another issue that I know you care about, which is 

trafficking, which is—again, it makes them very—much more vulnerable to things like that when they do not have any way to establish their identify. So, we are definitely supportive of the notion 

and very anxious to work with you on that bill. 

Senator RUBIO. On a followup note, in 2011, the administration 

announced its National Action Plan for Women, Peace, and Security. How would you assess the implementation of this plan? And, 

in particular, are we assisting with including women in these highlevel negotiations? 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Well, we are certainly trying. It is a priority for us. And it is—I think it is not always easy, as you can 

imagine, because what happens in these conflicts is that the people 

who are negotiating the peace are typically combatants, and they 

are typically not women. And what we do—USAID does a great 

deal of this; we are supportive of the efforts, as well—we do training for women so that, once we get them to these tables, they know 

how to negotiate, they are more effective in these roles. And we 

have been engaged in this. We are happy to see that there are 

women in the Colombia negotiations. We are happy that—we believe—the early reports are, in Afghanistan, we have had three 

women on that, sort of, early process negotiation between the Afghans and the Taliban. So, we—I think that countries are starting 

to recognize that women have a stake in the future of their country, so they should be involved in the discussions about how the 

country’s going to move out of conflict. But, I cannot tell you that 

it is an easy battle. It is a constant—it is something that we are 

constantly working on and trying to engage on the diplomatic side. 

Senator RUBIO. Secretary Bennett, I wanted to talk to you about 

religious freedom. It is not just an American ideal, it is a human 

one, and protecting these freedoms around the world should be a 

top priority of our foreign policy agenda. What progress has DRL 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

19 

made in both protecting and advancing religious freedom around 

the world? 

Ms. BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, I think that—I first would like to say that, from the 

perspective of the administration and, I think, all of us who are 

really very privileged to work on these issues, religious freedom is 

a top priority. The threat that religious minorities, I think, are currently experiencing is of extraordinary proportion, whether it is 

Christian populations in the Middle East, whether it is—or, it— 

really, whatever stripe of religious minority is out there, it is under 

complete pressure and threat. 

As to what progress we are making, in terms of protecting individuals, it is hard to measure, very honestly. We have certain types 

of programs. We have, you know, one—Protecting Belief Fund, for 

example, which enables us to provide real time, very targeted assistance to individuals who have come under attack, to provide protection or exit capacity for them to get them and their families to 

someplace safer. So, that is obviously on a very micro level. 

But, I would also like to take a step back and talk just a little 

more on kind of a strategic framework, where our Ambassador-AtLarge for Religious Freedom, David Saperstein, and Assistant Secretary Malinowski have joined forces, I think very effectively, to go 

out and engage with governments—for example, on a recent trip to 

Iraq—about the importance of promoting tolerance. And they will 

continue to do so, I think, in a wide number of the global communities with which we are engaged. 

Senator RUBIO. You would agree that the—obviously, all religious intolerance is abhorrent. I want to focus, in particular, however, on the plight of ancient Christian communities in the Middle 

East, communities that existed, and still do, to some extent, in 

Syria, in Iraq, in Lebanon, and in other parts of the Middle East. 

Would you agree that they face a challenge today unlike anything 

we have seen in recent history, in terms of the violence that they 

have now been exposed to, whether it is the beheadings just recently that we saw once again in North Africa, or just the destruction of entire villages, churches, and otherwise, the—we have 

reached a crisis point? And is that going to—will that be a priority 

of our foreign policy in that region as we focus on all of the atrocities that are occurring, but, in particular—this is an aspect I do 

not hear pointed to enough—is that a priority? And, if so, you 

know, what have we done or what expressions have been made 

over the last few months to include that in our conversations as we 

view those issues in that region? 

Ms. BENNETT. Sadly, we do agree that that is a priority. I mean, 

the level of threat that these communities are experiencing is remarkably intense. We will continue to engage with local communities to try to create, again, as I said, sort of the promotion of tolerant space and also with the relevant governments in that region 

to articulate the importance of preserving these ancient cultures. 

A flashing light, so I think that means I stop? No. Sorry. 

Senator RUBIO. Yes, there is a little leeway there. Keep going. 

That is okay. 

Ms. BENNETT. Sorry. I am new to this, as I said. 

Senator RUBIO. I understand. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

20 

Ms. BENNETT. So, the—but, for our—you know, for our purposes, 

I think that we look at this in a couple of different ways, both in 

terms of longer term and the work of decades, not days, in trying 

to create and foster improved environments in the communities, 

and the importance of tolerance. And then we look at it also on a 

very near-term basis. And that includes engaging with—you know, 

in dialogue with religious leaders in all communities about how to 

address the very real systemic threat. 

One of the—you know, one of the unusual experiences I think 

that our Office of International Religious Freedom has had over the 

past 6 to 8 to 9 months has been the very effective relationship 

that we have crafted with our colleagues in the interagency, in 

terms of actually defending communities under threat. While this 

has been less focused on the Christian community in particular, 

and more on the Yezidi community because of the nature of some 

of the threats that we have seen, we really do believe that we are 

making some progress in this regard. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Boxer. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Bennett, I wanted to pick up on the Yezidi issue, because my 

understanding is that the Gender-Based Violence Emergency Response and Protection Initiative has supported nearly 50 Yezidi 

women and girls who have escaped ISIL. Could you define what 

that support has been? 

Ms. BENNETT. In general, what that support has been—well, I 

will take a step back. This is a partnership that we established 

with Vital Voices in the Avon Foundation. The nature of the support has been varied with the individual, but it is, you know, posttrauma counseling, working within the community to find a new 

place for individuals to reside, to be reintegrated into communities. 

It is to provide to them some measure of inclusion in the communities in which they are, and, in some cases, actually support to be 

removed and to relocate someplace. So, it actually has been very 

dependent on the particular situation of the individual. 

Senator BOXER. Now, does your current funding level allow you 

to provide assistance to meet the needs of vulnerable women survivors of gender-based violence in Iraq and Syria, or is your budget 

limiting your activities to just Yezidies? 

Ms. BENNETT. There is always more, I would say, to be done, but 

our—because our funding is so flexible in its nature, the way that 

we fund, in general, is much more on a compressed timeline than 

that sort of longer term, bigger development assistance projects. 

And so, that enables us to be very responsive and to shift resources 

where they are needed, when they are needed. 

Senator BOXER. Well, that is good. 

I want to talk to Ambassador Russell. Last month, Senator Rubio 

and I wrote to the Chinese Ambassador to the United States, urging the Chinese Government release five women’s-rights advocates 

who were detained for planning to raise public awareness about 

sexual harassment in conjunction with International Women’s Day. 

After spending more than a month in detention, the five women 

were conditionally released. However, according to a Reuters story, 

one of the women was verbally attacked during an 8-hour interroFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

21 

gation by the Chinese police less than 2 weeks after her release. 

Can you confirm that? This is unacceptable, if true. How can the 

United States increase pressure on China to uphold its domestic 

and international commitments to respect the universal human 

rights of its citizens? 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Thank you, Senator Boxer. And thank you 

very much for that letter, because I did see it, and I think it does 

make a difference. 

The key, from our perspective, is that we—both Ambassador 

Power and Secretary of State—issued strong statements. And I 

think, ultimately, all that attention helped. And so, the leadership 

that you displayed really reinforces that. So, thank you for that. 

But, I think the key, going forward, is that we just cannot let up 

on the pressure, and we need to make sure that everybody understands that we are continuing to watch the situation, that we are 

aware of what is happening with these women, and that we are not 

letting—you know, taking our eye off the ball on it. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I hope—you can do a followup. It would 

help. I am sure that the chairman and I could write another letter. 

But, having someone be released, only to be interrogated for 8 

hours—I mean, the word gets out pretty quickly. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. It is—— 

Senator BOXER. So—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. I agree totally. And I think, especially 

given that they are working on domestic violence—I mean, it is 

truly just inexcusable—— 

Senator BOXER. Right. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. What happened, and—— 

Senator BOXER. But, would it help if the chairman and I wrote 

another inquiry, and you could send it off, or you—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. I think an inquiry is always great. I think 

just speaking out like you are doing today, they will know that. 

Senator BOXER. Okay. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. If you continue to speak out, I think your 

voices are incredibly important and helpful in this matter. 

Senator BOXER. Well, they should know that we care a lot about 

this. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Yes. 

Senator BOXER. And it is just—you cannot say, on the one hand, 

‘‘We are really letting people go,’’ on the other hand—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Exactly. 

Senator BOXER. You are harassing them and intimidating 

them—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Exactly. 

Senator BOXER. And frightening them to ever open their mouth 

again. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. I agree. 

Senator BOXER. That is just not what we do in life, or should not 

be what we do. 

Ambassador Russell, in your testimony, you state that one of 

your top priorities is addressing the needs of adolescent girls, particularly improving access to secondary schooling. It is so important, because we know research shows that girls who attend secondary school are healthier and more productive members of sociFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

22 

ety. And I understand your office is currently developing a comprehensive strategy specifically focused on adolescent girls. Can 

you tell us a little bit about the strategy, when you hope to release 

it, and what you hope it will achieve? 

Ambassador RUSSELL. I can. And thank you for that question. 

I think adolescent girls is one of the issues that is most important to me, personally, and to our office, because, as we have traveled around, we have seen the impact of—all of the terrible things 

that happen to women around the world are really just horrible for 

these young girls. And what—the international community and the 

United States have spent a lot of time and money and effort educating children, and we have really made a dent in the number of 

primary school kids who are not in school. And we have done a 

good job on that. But, we are seeing that, at the secondary level, 

girls are dropping off in alarming numbers, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. And the problem for those girls is 

that they are so much more vulnerable to everything else that can 

happen to them: gender-based violence, HIV, trafficking, all of it. 

It just makes them—they are so much more vulnerable. And they 

are never really in a position to participate fully in their economies. 

That was the genesis of this. 

And I think the idea is that we need to address this—and this 

is my view about all of the work we do—we have to try to address 

these issues in a comprehensive way. And that, I would say, has 

not always been the strength of the international community. We 

tend to do one thing or another. And we are looking at taking this 

group of girls—the single most important thing we know we can do 

is keep them in school, but even keeping them in school—it is not 

so easy just to build a school; you have to figure out what the reasons are that they are not going to school, why are their parents 

getting them married off, why are they subjected to violence either 

in the school or on the way to school. It is a very complicated set 

of problems. But, we are committed to addressing them holistically. 

And that is—that was the purpose, and is the purpose, of the strategy. 

Senator BOXER. So, just cutting to the chase, when will you have 

something for us to see on this? 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Well, it is—I would say it is almost finished and has to go through the clearance process—— 

Senator BOXER. Good. 

Ambassador RUSSELL. At the State—— 

Senator BOXER. Well, we will look—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Department. 

Senator BOXER. Forward to it. 

Ambassador RUSSELL.RUSSELL. So, that could be, like, 2 days or 

10 year—no, I am just—— 

Senator BOXER. Well, I—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. We will get it done. We will definitely 

get—— 

Senator BOXER. Well, remember, the President only has a limited 

time, so—— 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Exactly. Exactly. 

Senator BOXER. I have one last question, and then I am going to 

leave it to you. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

23 

I wanted to ask this to Mr. Feeley, so he does not feel that he 

is left out. Latin America and the Caribbean have booming renewable energy markets. In 2013, over $7 billion was invested in renewable energy in countries including Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Costa 

Rica, Peru, and Panama. The Caribbean wants to break free from 

its dependence on Venezuelan oil. And, as far as I am concerned, 

that is a good thing. Chile and Mexico are discovering that solar 

power is an inexpensive source of power for many projects, and 

many countries are looking to renewable energy as the way to 

make bold commitments ahead of the upcoming Paris Climate Conference. What are we doing to promote renewable energy in the region? And what more can we do to help American clean energy 

companies take advantage of the tremendous growth opportunities 

in Latin America and the Caribbean? 

Mr. FEELEY. Thank you very much for that question, Senator 

Boxer. 

We are doing quite a bit. In point of fact, we agree with you completely that this is an area where we absolutely must demonstrate 

American leadership. The Vice President has launched something 

called the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative. We held a summit 

here in January. The focus of this, frankly, as you rightly put, is 

not necessarily on Venezuela, but it is using technology and using 

the force of markets to get one of the world’s most energy-dependent regions—dependent upon imports—to a place where they can 

have the same types of reliable, secure, affordable energy that 

comes from a diversified energy mix, in terms of both generation 

and distribution. 

CESI, as we call it, the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative, has 

received tremendous welcome in the region. You may be aware that 

the President just traveled to Jamaica. And, in that trip, the President announced a—for a clean energy finance facility for the Caribbean in Central America. This will be a $20 million facility that 

will encourage investment in clean energy projects in the region. It 

will provide early-stage funding to catalyze greater private- and 

public-sector investment, and will be working very closely with our 

colleagues in the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. So, it 

is on our, sort of, frontal lobe. As they say in Spanish, ‘‘[Spanish 

phrase],’’ it is right there. 

Senator BOXER. I like that. 

Mr. FEELEY. And we are going to continue to push it. 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman, I am going to leave this to you. 

I wanted to say, for me, getting them away from having to deal 

with Venezuela on their energy lifeline is a good thing. Just for the 

record. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Perdue. 

Senator PERDUE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. Thank you for holding this very important hearing. 

And thank you for your attendance and testimony. 

I want to make a comment. Senator Gardner and I just got back 

from a trip to the Middle East, and we saw five Ambassadors over 

there, and many staff. I want to tell you how impressed we are 

with State Department personnel who devote their careers to Foreign Service. And I just want to thank you for your career of conFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

24 

tributions. You know, we all seek perfection. And there is no such 

entity. But, I admire what you guys are doing. 

I want to change the topic a little bit to Haiti, briefly. I was very 

blessed to go on a mission trip, after my first election, last November, to Haiti, to a small town called Grand Goave—it was about 45 

miles southwest of Port-au-Prince—to a projects—an orphanage, 

basically—well, it was an orphanage sponsored by the Good Samaritan Project. I was really troubled. We had about 275 kids there. 

A significant number of those kids had parents in the location—in 

the area environs there, southwest of Port-au-Prince, but they had 

given their kids up to the orphanages because they could not feed 

them. Now, this is 5 years after the catastrophe there, the earthquake. Their church, their school, their dormitory had all been destroyed. Total—no injuries. A miracle. They were out playing soccer. But, a miracle, nobody injured. But, here we are, 5 years later, 

and, even with all the money—31⁄2 million—31⁄2 billion dollars we 

have poured into that—and, by the way, you know, I was so proud, 

at the time that happened, with U.S. support there. The Navy, all 

the NGOs, all the religious, all the other foundations that were 

pouring time, money, and people in there. And yet, here we are, 5 

years later—I am not criticizing. I just want to know, Madam Ambassador, you know, what—what is your take on what is going on 

there, particularly as it affects young mothers who are having to 

give their kids up to these orphanage because they cannot feed 

them? 

Ambassador RUSSELL. Senator, thank you. Thank you for taking 

that trip. I traveled there, shortly after the earthquake, with the 

First Lady and Dr. Biden, and was truly shocked at the devastation that I saw, the people living on the streets. And I know that, 

throughout this time—and I am sure Assistant Secretary Feeley 

can discuss this more—but, we have made an investment and have 

had some success, moving forward, but the challenges remain. And 

what we are very concerned about in my office are the issues that 

you raise of the violence that these children are facing, the fact 

that they are not really being well taken care of, and the violence 

that their mothers are facing in their communities and in their 

homes. And I think, you know, we—USAID is doing a fair bit of 

work there, working hard on it, but I do recognize that it is a continuing challenge. 

Senator PERDUE. Secretary Feeley, I would like your comment. 

But, also, how do you evaluate, you know, the money—not just the 

money; it is the time, the heartbreak, everything else that we have 

put into countries like that after the fact to evaluate the effectiveness of what we do in catastrophes like that. 

Mr. FEELEY. Absolutely, sir. I would just echo what Ambassador 

Russell said, and what you said. Haiti is perhaps the most difficult 

case that we have of persistent underdevelopment in the Western 

Hemisphere. And it is a testament to the very good people of the 

United States that, every time I travel through the Miami Airport, 

I see the brigades of kids in T-shirts from churches and communities. That is all absolutely necessary, but it is not sufficient. 

One of the things I think that we have to look at is the manner 

in which our policy, in addition to our programming assistance to 

work on the development issues—the education, the child/maternal 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

25 

health, the basic delivery of services—how our policy toward Haiti 

is absolutely essential. Supporting elections coming up this year, 

providing in Haiti what they, frankly, have not had for a very, very 

long time, which is a regular, predictable, strong democracy, where 

you have multiple voices from civil society that are included, that 

has got to be one of the metrics. It is not—nobody in my building, 

and no Secretary of State, is going to say that we are there yet. 

All democracy strengthening is never an end zone, it is a constant 

process. But, I do think that we have, with the elections coming up 

this fall—we have an opportunity to continue to help that, frankly, 

blighted country. 

I would also say that our assistance has made inroads in making 

sure that we are addressing the emergency aspects. And, you are 

right, it is 5 years after. But, there is still food insecurity in Haiti. 

There are still—you have flown over it—— 

Senator PERDUE. I am sorry. Food insecurity? 

Mr. FEELEY. Food insecurity, meaning that they are unable to 

feed all their people. 

Senator PERDUE. I have another word for that, but—— 

Mr. FEELEY. And we call it—that is the technical term. 

Senator PERDUE. I know. I know. 

Mr. FEELEY. The term ‘‘hunger,’’ many—— 

Senator PERDUE. In your heart. It is a terrible situation. 

Mr. FEELEY. It is horrible. And if you have flown over the Dominican Republic and Hispaniola, you can see where the deforestation 

line is right there. So, our assistance goes to trying to reforest, trying to provide money to small communities, and provide technical 

assistance so that they can grow sustainable crops, so that they can 

feed themselves. There is a program that is been very successful, 

the Global Cookstove Initiative, whereby, in Haiti, as you know, 

they have got to burn trees to get the carbon to heat their water 

so they can avoid cholera. Cookstoves—solar cookstoves, the use of 

technology, all of those things go into it. 

We absolutely agree with you that we have to keep Haiti as a 

priority. We do keep Haiti as a priority in our 2016 request. And 

we will continue to work with this committee and with, frankly, the 

very good people of the American religious and civil society communities. 

Senator PERDUE. Secretary Bennett, would you follow up on the 

elections? You brought it up, Secretary Feeley. I would love to hear 

what the State Department’s doing to influence an open and honest, forthright election process there. Because I agree with the Secretary. I think if you are ever going to solve the problems there, 

we have got to get a participatory representative government there. 

Ms. BENNETT. Thank you, Senator. 

We engage very assiduously on this point, both—some of us publicly, but privately in our dialogue with the government and with 

civil society organizations in Haiti. From the DRL perspective, we 

do not have a foreign assistance, sort of, niche in Haiti, either if 

it is their much more basic needs, as my colleagues have identified, 

that are right at the top of the ‘‘urgent’’ list. But, having a reasonable elections process is absolutely critical to, you know, the prospect of future success. And so, our encouragement in that regard, 

I think, is well. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

26 

Senator PERDUE. Are you optimistic with this next round? 

Ms. BENNETT. I think that I will defer to my colleague here. 

Mr. FEELEY. I will jump on that grenade, sir. 

Sir, the legislative, local, and Presidential elections are going to 

be held in three rounds, we hope. This is one of those places where 

diplomacy and the strength of an American diplomatic presence, 

quite frankly, is worth more than money and funding. The political 

will to be able to make the hard decisions within Haiti—they have 

got a terribly, terribly fractious situation with vying and competing 

parties and within their own legislature. They have got significant 

logistical—just simply, How do you get Haitians in from places to 

vote? How do you count those votes? So, I am not going—and the 

reason I will not do this is because, as you are aware, sir, we have 

a Special Haiti Coordinator, and so it does not always fall directly 

to the Western Hemisphere. But, one thing we do do in my purview 

is, we support election monitoring. It is one of the strongest and 

best exercises that we undertake in the Western Hemisphere to ensure that elections are as transparent and as well run as possible. 

And we will certainly be doing that. And I believe that, with 

MINUSTAH providing the security presence—and, although there 

is going to be a drawdown at the end of the year, and they are proceeding toward that, we will look to international solidarity and to 

our hemispheric partners. That, again, is a function of our diplomacy, getting those governments who support free, fair, transparent elections and want to support the Haitian people onboard 

in this effort. 

Senator PERDUE. Well, thank you for your testimony. Thank you 

for your service. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Kaine. 

Senator KAINE. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for calling this hearing. 

And thanks, to the witnesses, for your testimony. 

The Americas have all the challenges that we have described, but 

there are some real opportunities now. And one that I think is kind 

of interesting is that we might be on the verge of two continents 

without war, with the negotiations in Colombia over the end of that 

civil war. And for any continent to say that is pretty unusual if you 

look at the globe today. And for the Americas to say that—I do not 

know if there has been a period in history where the Americas 

could say that. What is the current status of the negotiations between the Colombian Government and the FARC? The United 

States is playing an important role accompanying the government 

in those negotiations. But, Secretary Feeley, if you could update us 

on that. 

Mr. FEELEY. Absolutely, Senator. And thank you very much for 

your personal commitment to the Americas, in the multiple trips 

that you have taken. 

You absolutely put your finger on it. The support for a Colombian peace process remains at the top of the President’s hemispheric agenda. As you are aware, we have recently tapped former 

Assistant Secretary Bernie Aronson to join in at a strategic moment in those talks between the FARC and the Government of Colombia. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

27 

Whenever I talk about Colombia, I have to be careful not to get 

too sentimental, because I worked there in 1992 and 1993. December 3, 1993, Pablo Escobar was taken down. December 5, I was 

walking with my two little kids and a car bomb went off about six 

blocks away. That was just [Spanish phrase]. 

Senator KAINE. Every day. 

Mr. FEELEY. That is what it was, and you remember it. Colombia 

has become a country transformed into a net security exporter cooperating with the Mexicans, cooperating with the Central Americans, to take much of the professionalization of their police and 

their military and now provide that to countries that are suffering 

many of the same symptoms—different causes, but many of the 

same symptoms—that are the product of transnational criminal organizations and the violence they do. 

You are well aware that they have closed three chapters in the 

discussions in Havana. We will be doing everything we can to support President Santos in seeking a successful finish to the negotiations. I think it is very important for the American people—and I 

thank you for this question so that we can get it out—for the American people to understand this is the longest running continuous 

insurgency in any country in the world. And the Western Hemisphere, by and large, is blessed not to have state-on-state conflict, 

not to have the types of ethnic cleansing or sectarian struggles that 

we see that make the Middle East such a riven area. 

So, our job right now is to support the President. There are going 

to be some very difficult political decisions to be made. You are well 

aware of the split between President Uribe and President Santos, 

where there are the hard issues about military justice. And this is 

one of the areas where I think our commitment to human rights 

and the rule of law, which has been consistent in Colombia—not 

necessarily always perfect in its implementation, but held out as a 

goal—and the inclusion of women in conflict in those discussions is 

one of the things that we support very strongly. 

I will take a guess on this one, because Colombia does come in 

my portfolio. I am cautiously optimistic, and I would say that I believe the Secretary is, as well. 

Senator KAINE. Excellent. Thank you, Secretary Feeley. 

And I am going to segue, using Colombia as an example, to the 

plan for Central American engagement, the President’s proposed 

billion-dollar investment in the Northern Triangle. These are challenging countries with high violence rates, high poverty rates. The 

Unaccompanied Minors Program demonstrated that. But, in the 

hemisphere, we could have reason to be optimistic. Colombia went 

from failed state to security exporter and third-largest economy in 

Latin America within the space of 15 years. And Mexico now has 

no net migration to the United States because of improving Mexican economy, even amidst violence challenges. So, there is reason 

to believe that an appropriate level of support, as we did with Plan 

Merida or as we did with Plan Colombia, could have a positive impact in the Central American nations. 

I visited Honduras with Senator Cornyn in February to go back 

and talk to friends there and hear about, really, the way that an 

investment of this kind could be managed to have the biggest bang 

for the buck. You could waste a billion dollars or you could spend 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

28 

a billion dollars that would really help put the Northern Triangle 

on a path similar to the arc that Colombia or Mexico have been on. 

So, talk a little bit about what we are doing in dialogue with the 

leaders of those three nations, and especially with civil society in 

those three nations, to figure out how—if we were to get that investment through the appropriations process, how would we program it in those countries to have the biggest impact on security 

and economic improvement? 

Mr. FEELEY. Absolutely, sir. And thank you very much for that 

question. And again, thank you very much for your personal support, your interest, and your expertise in that region. 

The new Central American strategy for engagement calls for 

three basic lines of action: promoting prosperity and regional economic integration, promoting improved governance and fighting 

corruption in government inefficiency, and enhancing security. 

Note that I put security last. It does not mean that it is, in order 

of priority, last; but what it does mean is that we have learned, in 

working with this committee, in working with American and civil 

society, in working with our Colombian and our Mexican partners, 

that you do not go after the types of problems that afflict the 

Northern Triangle, where you have very weak institutions, where 

you have serious scofflaws and weak rule of law, where people basically do have the opportunity to commit crimes and get away with 

them, and impunity levels are high—you do not fix those problems, 

which are deeply rooted and systemic, by simply going to a security 

strategy. 

You have to do a whole-of-government holistic approach to all of 

it. That is why our strategy, which—I will be very frank, and I 

think it is been told before—we had actually begun an Central 

American strategic review. Roberta Jacobson and I had sat down, 

had talked to our folks, and wanted to move CARSI. We were, in 

the, sort of, words of—many people, I think, claim this quote— 

‘‘never waste a good crisis’’—we were shocked, quite frankly, Senator, last year, when we saw the visages of those kids, of those 

women who were coming north because they had gotten bad information about immigration reforms and things like that. The push 

factors are incredibly strong. The push factors can only be sort of 

mitigated by a political will from the countries that are down there, 

and the leadership and the Presidents and their teams. We believe 

we have that. We have seen a number of hard decisions already 

taken by many of them. Honduras has extradited people, with 

great personal threat to senior leaders and judges. The President 

in Guatemala extended CSIG, the U.N.’s body that investigates 

crime and impunity, originally dating from the internal conflict 

that ended in 1996, and now has developed tremendous expertise 

in going after precisely the impunity that does ail all three of those 

countries. El Salvador has an anti-extortion law. They have passed 

anti-money-laundering legislation. 

These are real movements, real changes and reforms that give us 

the confidence that we are working with people who do have the 

political will and the commitment, and that they will be putting in 

significantly more of their own resources. They will be taking the 

steps needed to do tax reform, to do the types of—in Honduras, 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

29 

they will be doing special bonds. This is something we learned from 

Colombia as they did their war bonds earlier. 

So, our report—I am sorry—our request is significant. How will 

we go ahead and spend it? In general, we look to—of the billion 

dollars, we are looking at 314 million for security, 437 million for 

prosperity, 248 million for governance. 

Let me give you just one example—I do not want to filibuster 

here—one example of how we will work in each of those areas. 

When we talk about working with governance, what are we talking about? We are talking about making government responsible to 

the people. That means, in many of these countries, and in the 

Northern Triangle, the leaders themselves will tell you they have 

to root out corruption. Government corruption is something that 

absolutely saps the strength of any country that seeks to provide 

a better future for its people. Take a look at what Honduras has 

done. They have invited in the Transparency International to set 

up an office in that country. 

In prosperity, what have we got? We have got a number of programs that we will, hopefully, with this—with this Congress’ assent, we will be able to fund better—broken down into a number 

of entrepreneurial activities. There is something called the 

WEAmericas Program, which is a public/private partnership that 

seeks to leverage private sector in both regions to create the capacity for women in those countries, wherever we—and we currently 

do it throughout the hemisphere—we have trained over 20,000 

women from 20 countries to step into what we call ‘‘the missing 

middle.’’ There are plenty of micro entrepreneurs in Latin America, 

as you well know. They work out of their home, they work in the 

informal sector, they are not banked, they do not have—they do not 

pay taxes, they do not have the ability to go to a civil court to settle 

disputes. How do you take those women and move them? Well, 

there are a lot of smart people, smarter than me, who were able 

to figure that out. That is what that program does. 

We have something called the Small Business Network of the 

Americas. This takes the great American ingenuity that we have 

in small business incubators, whether it is at the University of 

Texas at Austin, whether it is in small chambers of commerce 

around the United States, and we link them, both virtually and directly, with small business incubators in Latin America. We have 

been running this for about 3 years. We would seek to continue 

that in an effort to push prosperity from the ground up to create 

opportunities for folks. 

And finally, in security. We have been doing this under the Central American Regional Security Initiative, as you well know, for a 

number of years now. We need to help them professionalize their 

police. I have to say, I am—sound like Bill Brownfield here—but, 

it does begin with the police. It is not absolutely sufficient. You 

have to go beyond. But, until you have community policing, where 

average Hondurans and Salvadorans and Guatemalans see a cop 

and do not run away from that cop, you are not going to have security on the ground. 

Senator KAINE. Thank you. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Flake. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

30 

Senator FLAKE. Thank you. 

Mr. Feeley, the budget request for FY 2016 includes a request for 

roughly $6 billion—oh, I am sorry, $6 million, gratefully, for converting the U.S. Interests Section in Cuba to an embassy. Just to 

be clear, that is separate and apart from—you know, this infrastructure that is requested is separate and apart from establishment of diplomatic relations, right? 

Mr. FEELEY. That is correct, sir. That comes under the—that 

would come under what we call our diplomatic and consular programs budget. And we are asking for a roughly $6 million increase 

over FY14 to be able to offer the types of services that would be 

needed when—if and when diplomatic relations are reestablished. 

Senator FLAKE. Right. Those types of services, I am interested 

what you expect to be providing that you are not providing now 

with the Interests Section. The assumption there will be more 

American travelers down there, some will be doing more business 

that will be allowed. Can you just give some sense—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Certainly, sir. 

Senator FLAKE. Of what we will be doing? 

Mr. FEELEY. As you are aware, we are the largest diplomatic 

mission in Cuba. That is a tremendous surprise to many people. 

The fact that we do not have formal diplomatic relations does not 

mean that we do not have a full diplomatic mission down there. It 

is currently called the U.S. Interests Section. We have been in 

there since 1977. It was built in 1953. And, quite frankly, there is 

no more room at the inn. It does not fit, it does not support active 

diplomacy in the way that we need it to. 

So, we would be—the services we currently provide are consular 

services. These would be the standard American citizen services, 

requests. Several months ago, you—or actually, it is about a year 

ago now—you might recall there were some American fugitives who 

took a sailboat down there. We worked with Cuban authorities to 

be able to find them and to bring them back to face justice in the 

United States. The consular section works with the Department of 

Homeland Security very closely to implement the Cuban Family 

Reunification Program in the1994–95 Migration Accords. We have 

political and economic reporting that we do from down there. These 

are the people who go out and meet with independent Cuban civil 

society actors. An average of 2-to 300 encounters a week—they 

write the cables, they inform us as to the reality on the ground, 

they do the support activity for many of those brave individuals. 

We also have got law enforcement liaison down there. 

So, I can go on. I do not want to take up too much of your time. 

But, more or less, it looks like a lot of other embassies that we 

have in the region, but we do not have formal diplomatic relations. 

Senator FLAKE. The current Interests Section sits right along the 

Malacon. I think it is about 47,000 square feet. Is that going to be 

expanded, or simply refurbished or brought up to—— 

Mr. FEELEY. It is a very good question, sir. Right now, we are 

still, as you well know, in the midst of negotiations to establish diplomatic relations. That is a process, and that will take some time. 

And, honestly, I cannot tell you when that will happen. When it 

does happen, we do not anticipate, certainly in this calendar year, 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

31 

that we will be requesting any funding or assistance. It will be basically a revenue—or, I am sorry, a cost-neutral exercise. 

But, in out years, as our diplomatic activity ramps up, as we 

keep human rights, and as we keep the promotion of democracy 

and promoting a peaceful, democratic transition on the island, we 

would anticipate that we will need upgrades. For example, we do 

not have a fleet of cars. Most embassies—and you know this. When 

you travel, the U.S. Embassy provides transportation assistance, 

security assistance for visiting Senators and congresspersons. We 

need to do that. We do not have—and you know this—we do not 

have the IT infrastructure that we need to run a modern 21st-century Embassy in Havana. And so, we would need that. 

So, we do not have any requests in to expand our personnel at 

this time. It would be primarily for the types of physical upgrades 

that would take a 1953 building and make it something that is 

adequate for 2015. 

Senator FLAKE. We have about 50 FTEs there now. 

Mr. FEELEY. That is correct, sir. We have approximately 50 U.S. 

direct-hire personnel, and the rest are Cuban employees who come 

from PALCO, which is the government service provider that provides diplomatic personnel to all of the embassies in Cuba. 

Senator FLAKE. Right. 

Mr. FEELEY. Another anomalous, nontraditional diplomatic situation, as you are well aware. 

Senator FLAKE. There has been at—the administration has requested $20 million for the Cuban Democracy Fund or to promote 

democracy and human rights. I am sure you are aware—and some 

of this is not directly related to the State Department; it is 

USAID—but, we have had some issues there. It was—Alan Gross 

was recently released after 5 years in prison there. He was there 

on a USAID-funded project. There have also been stories in the 

media—the fake Twitter accounts, HIV clinics as front for other activities. What is going to be done in the future to ensure that at 

least those who are on the—the end users, I guess, or participants 

in Cuba, are aware that they are—of the program that they are 

participating in? My concern has been—well, a couple of concerns. 

One, that you have some Cubans who are put at risk—considerable 

risk—if it is found out—and they may not even know that the program that they are participating in—are we going to have better 

transparency, moving ahead, than we have had in the past in these 

programs? 

Ms. BENNETT. Thank you, Senator. I think that is a really good 

question. 

Yes, the administration requested $20 million for FY16. And I 

think, in Assistant Secretary Jacobson’s and Malinowski’s testimony, they did commit that we would not cut back on these programs, simply because of the importance we attach to advancing 

the space for human rights in Cuba. 

I cannot speak for my colleagues at USAID. We do have a very 

collaborative relationship with them. But, I would just say, here— 

and perhaps we should have, perhaps, a more private conversation 

about what some of these programs entail to protect the people 

with whom we do work. But, to the extent that we will continue 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

32 

to manage our programs in Cuba in a manner that does protect 

human rights activists from further reprisal. 

Senator FLAKE. Okay. I—— 

Ms. BENNETT. These are very, very brave people, and we are 

committed to ensuring both their safety and that they continue the 

important work that they are doing. 

Senator FLAKE. Well, I think it is important that we not only 

protect them, but protect the reputation of USAID in other areas 

of the world in which they work. And if it is assumed that these 

may be semi-covert or discreet or whatever you want to call it, that 

does not serve us very well in other areas. And so, I will be following up on this. I have already had discussions with USAID. 

But, we cannot allow to go on in the future what has gone on in 

the past in this regard. 

And, Mr. Feeley, you wanted to add something? 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, Senator. I just wanted to say, as you are well 

aware, these programs did come to an end in recent years. We have 

not engaged in any programs like ZunZuneo or the others. 

I simply would like to make a plea—well, a thanks and a plea 

to the members of this committee. I have had the enormous privilege of meeting a number of these very brave people, having Berto 

Soler come up, of having Rosa Maria Paya come up, of—I have gotten to know Yoani Sanchez quite well. What they all tell us is that, 

when we are very publicly supportive of their work, it does provide 

them with—not a complete shield, but with a little bit of protection 

from some of the activity. Now, we are well aware that there are 

many activists who are detained. Short-term detentions have gone 

up. That is absolutely intolerable, and we will continue to cry out 

against that as we go forward. Your continued support, from this 

committee and from your colleagues in the Senate, is enormously 

helpful. 

Yoani Sanchez said to me one time, she said, ‘‘You have no idea 

how helpful it is to have the names of individual Senators and 

congresspersons being bandied about on the Mesa Redonda, which 

is their nightly talk show. And, while they may not be taking those 

names in the most favorable of terms, it does provide a measure 

of international solidarity and protection for them. So, I thank you 

for that, and I would encourage all of you to continue that with us. 

Senator FLAKE. Thank you. 

My time is up. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Markey. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. 

The U.N. Committee on Enforced Disappearances has raised serious questions about Mexico. Reportedly, 26,000 people disappeared just since 2006. There has not been the kind of focus by 

the Mexican Government on this issue that satisfies the families 

or, I think, satisfies the world community. We are, in your budget, 

receiving a request for $80 million for security cooperation with 

Mexico—a multiyear security partnership. And that is meant to 

fight organized crime, it is meant to accomplish a lot of goals. But, 

I think one of the goals that we should accomplish, as well, is dealing with this disappeared persons question, 26,000 people. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

33 

So, how can we leverage this funding in order to make sure that 

the Mexican government gives us the answers that we want? Some 

people have said that there should be a publicly available Web site, 

where all the names are up, and their status. Should we make that 

a condition of our $80 million assistance? What can we do, you 

know, to pull back the curtain and to use our clout in order to get 

the answers for these families? 

Mr. FEELEY. Thank you, Senator, for that question. 

You put your finger on exactly what is one of the most difficult 

challenges in our relationship with Mexico. Mexico is a strategic 

partner, and Mexico’s transformation, much like Colombia’s, has 

been stunning. And we have the entire commercial side of our activity that is in direct benefit of the American people through trade 

and through commerce and through family exchanges, et cetera. 

Where we are still in a process very much of helping Mexico in a 

new paradigm of cooperation under the Merida Initiative, where we 

are in terms of this request for 80 million, which is, specifically, the 

INCLE funding that we would be asking, is very much where you 

are, sir, to use that, in conjunction with effective diplomacy and 

partnership, to make sure that Mexico is able to investigate the 

people, not just in a Ayotzinapa and Iguala and Tlatlaya and the 

other places where some of these horrific disappearances occur—— 

Senator MARKEY. So, what conditions should we attach to our 

funding that could effectively ensure that the Mexican government 

is creating the transparency, which—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Well, there are—— 

Senator MARKEY. It needs to make sure that this secret system 

is ended? Only if we apply our clout—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. Is there ever going to be an answer? 

Mr. FEELEY. Well, there already restrictions on past-year Mexico 

funding, as you are aware, dependent upon human rights reports 

that we routinely submit and we work with both appropriators and 

with authorizers to ensure that we get the best answers that we 

can. 

I think it is important to understand and to signal, here, that, 

in the case of Iguala, which is a horrible tragedy and which we 

made our repulsion, frankly, at what had happened very clear, it 

appears to be, in the investigation, where they have got—where the 

Mexican authorities have got over 100 people detained, they have 

got a number of—whom they believe to be the intellectual authors 

and the actual people who carried it out, those Guerreros Unidos— 

they have got them in a judicial process. We—every time we talk 

to them—and we just had Secretary Malinowski, we just had Deputy Secretary Blinken in Mexico, we raise it with them, and the 

Mexicans know very clearly—— 

Senator MARKEY. Is it unreasonable to request a publicly accessible database of all of the names of the missing? Is that an unreasonable request for the United States to make of the Mexican Government as part of our—a transfer of $80 million to them? 

Mr. FEELEY. My understanding, sir, is that the Mexicans have 

been working on—in the Ministry of Government—on getting databases. This is—and I cannot give you a specific status report on 

their efforts. But, I would point to their—— 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

34 

Senator MARKEY. So, you are saying they are going to put up a 

database with all the names of all of the missing? Is that what you 

are saying? 

Mr. FEELEY. I cannot say that, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. Well, I think that is the question. You know, 

should we—— 

Mr. FEELEY. It is a good question. 

Senator MARKEY. Should we condition our funding on them putting the names up? 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes. 

Senator MARKEY. Twenty-six thousand people. You know, we are 

still talking about Argentina, from 30 and 40 years ago, huh? We 

are still trying to come to grips with that. This is the here and now. 

This is—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Well, as you know—— 

Senator MARKEY. This is 20 years post-NAFTA. 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. This is with a request for us to be cooperating 

with them. This is with children on our borders last year in a partnership with them. Should we not be requesting that transparency? 

Mr. FEELEY. We request transparency in a number of ways. And 

if you take a look at the recent anticorruption law that was passed 

to—— 

Senator MARKEY. No, I am talking about a database. 

Mr. FEELEY. Information. 

Senator MARKEY. I am saying, ‘‘Put the names up there’’—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. ‘‘Mexican government. Let us see, tell—prove 

to us that you have a government that is willing to come to grips 

with the actual names listed, that the families can see, that questions can be asked about.’’ Can we do that as a government? 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, in general, having maximum flexibility to spend 

and work, in coordination and in consultation with the Senate, 

maximum flexibility to decide how we will spend our money with 

the Mexicans, is what every administration seeks, and we are no 

different. 

What I would say is this. We have developed what I call—and 

I have had the privilege of working in Mexico on two separate occasions. And the history of cooperation with Mexico on human rights, 

on democracy, on transnational organized crime is one that has, indeed, taken a quantum leap forward—— 

Senator MARKEY. And I appreciate that. I am dealing with a specific—— 

Mr. FEELEY. The one specific thing—— 

Senator MARKEY. Dealing with this—— 

Mr. FEELEY. I got it. 

Senator MARKEY. 26,000 missing persons. And that is—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. That is all I am dealing with. Everything else 

is—— 

Mr. FEELEY. I hear you. 

Senator MARKEY [continuing]. Not part of this conversation. I 

just want to get an answer to that. A Web site, a—something that 

is transparent, something that actually would bring accountability. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

35 

You know? Why do we not just ask the Mexican Government to do 

that, and condition the funding on that? I mean, talk about crime, 

talk about a suspect area, where you are wondering—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Sure. 

Senator MARKEY [continuing]. How much can we trust a government on the rest of their cooperation when they will not even list 

the names of the people who have disappeared. And—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, that is something we will take back—— 

Senator MARKEY [continuing]. Conditions under which they disappeared? 

Mr. FEELEY. Let me take that back. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

[COMMITTEE INSERT] 

Mr. FEELEY. One thing I would point out, and you know this 

from your experience with other countries. Those numbers are very 

difficult to pin down because of the very nature of disappearances. 

How many are reported? How many are not? 

Senator MARKEY. That is the problem. 

Mr. FEELEY. And that is—— 

Senator MARKEY. What I am saying is—— 

Mr. FEELEY [continuing]. And in the Ministry—— 

Senator MARKEY [continuing]. If there was a Web site, then people could say, ‘‘Hey, the name is not up on that Web site. I want 

my family member up on that Web site, too.’’ There would be a 

mechanism that would then be publicly, you know, listed that 

would give those families, you know, the reason to say to human 

rights groups, ‘‘They are not putting my family member’s name up 

there, as well,’’ huh? 

So, I just think that, from our government’s perspective, it is 

kind of a simple thing to do, but I think it would be a powerful tool 

that would be used by families who believe they have been abandoned, believe they are just nonpersons, huh? Just having your 

name up there, it is like having a loved one’s name on the Vietnam 

Wall. 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator MARKEY. It is just—it is recognition. You know, you can 

touch their spirit, at least. You know? It keeps hope alive in a family. 

So, I would just say to you that I think that is a powerful opportunity for the U.S. Government to act, and to act in a way that I 

think would empower people to say to their government—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Thank you, sir. 

Senator MARKEY [continuing]. ‘‘Please give us the answers to our 

family.‘‘ 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to be 

back. We had the President of Armenia. So, I appreciate the opportunity. 

Let me ask Ms. Bennett. Earlier this year, this committee, under 

the leadership of Chairman Corker, took a very strong interest in 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

36 

ending modern slavery, highlighted by an important hearing on 

February the 4th. On April 22, the Senate voted, 99 to 0, to 

strengthen domestic penalties against human trafficking and to 

provide additional protections for victims. On the same day, Congressman Smith held a House subcommittee hearing examining the 

State Department’s trafficking-in-persons report and emphasizing 

the need to maintain the integrity of the tier ranking system. 

Later that very same day, a strong 16-to-10 bipartisan vote, the 

Senate Finance Committee, accepted my amendment to the trade 

promotion authority bill to prohibit expedited congressional procedures for trade deals with countries ranked Tier 3 on the TIP report. Of course, Tier 3 is among the worst countries. 

So, do you believe that we should be in the midst of providing 

fast track for countries that are the worst offenders in human trafficking? 

Ms. BENNETT. Thank you, Senator. 

I think the administration is deeply committed to preventing and 

eliminating all forms of trafficking in persons throughout the 

world. And I can just say that some of what I have seen in my own 

previous incarnations overseas in my Foreign Service capacity, it 

is—I mean, it is simply horrific. And so, we engage—— 

Senator MENENDEZ. We can agree to that. So, you and I are in 

agreement on that. My question, which could be a simple yes or no, 

is, Do you believe that we should be fast-tracking countries that 

have the worst record, under our own reports, in terms of human 

trafficking? 

Ms. BENNETT. I think it is a fair point that economical engagement is a tool in our toolkit, and we are certainly following the 

amendment closely as it is under discussion, as the House and the 

Senate work through the bill. 

Senator MENENDEZ. But, we have used economic engagement, 

and other countries have not moved off the list as a result of economic engagement. 

Let me ask you this. The State Department’s 2015 TIP report is 

due to be released next month. In the State Department’s own 

words, it, quote, ‘‘is the U.S. Government’s principal diplomatic tool 

to engage foreign governments on human trafficking.’’ Now, all of 

us who share a deep concern about the scourge of human trafficking depend on the integrity of that report for the truth about 

where the trafficking is worse and what must be done about it. Is 

the issue, human trafficking, important to your work in the Bureau 

of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor? 

Ms. BENNETT. Yes, it is important to our work in the Bureau. I 

will just note that the trafficking-in-persons structure, the office 

that authors the report and advances this foreign policy priority 

programs, is actually separate and is not under my purview. That 

said, we work quite closely with them. And the—you know, and we 

work very hard to, sort of, deconflict, I would say, where they can 

provide some assistance that perhaps we cannot, and vice verse. 

We work very collaboratively. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So, is there—and I understand, technically 

it is in—— 

Ms. BENNETT. Right. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

37 

Senator MENENDEZ [continuing]. Secretary Sewall’s ambit. But, 

is the accuracy, the reliability, the integrity of the TIP report important to the Department? 

Ms. BENNETT. It is, absolutely. This is a process that is—you 

know, that every embassy in our world is vested in. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Do you have any reason to doubt the integrity of the reporting process? 

Ms. BENNETT. I do not, although I am not involved in it this year 

in quite the same way that I have been in prior incarnations, 

but—— 

Senator MENENDEZ. But, based upon your prior experience, do 

you believe—— 

Ms. BENNETT. No, I do not. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Based upon your prior experience, are the 

rankings subject to political pressure, in light of other priorities? 

Ms. BENNETT. My experience does not suggest that, but I cannot 

speak more broadly. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Okay. 

Mr. Feeley, as you know, Cuba and Venezuela are ranked Tier 

3 in the TIP report, the worst ranking, which indicates they do not 

comply with the Trafficking Victim’s Protection Act’s minimum 

standards, and are not making significant efforts to do so. So, is 

the integrity of the TIP report important to your section of the 

State Department? 

Mr. FEELEY. Undeniably yes, sir. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Are you confident of the integrity of the report? 

Mr. FEELEY. I believe that we work with our embassies and with 

our DRL and our trafficking-in-persons colleagues to produce the 

very best report that we can with the information that we have—— 

Senator MENENDEZ. So, even though Cuba is a Tier 3, one of the 

worst traffickers—Voyeur magazine had, a couple of years ago, ‘‘the 

sexual hotspot of the world’’—even though, in fact, it is a Tier 3, 

we are in the midst of giving them a series of concessions even 

though they are among the worst traffickers in the world. 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, the approach that the administration has taken 

to restart diplomatic relations with Cuba is in no way a reward for 

any perceived good behavior. We agree completely with you and 

Senator Rubio and many members who believe that the Castro government is a single-party state that clearly wants no part of democracy and which has systematically abused the human rights of its 

people. What I would say is that, with regard to TIP, the previous 

Tier 3 rankings, we believe that they have been justified, based on 

the specific criteria of the TIP law. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Yes. Well, let me just say that—so, you have 

a country that is a Tier 3 ranking, you have a country that violates 

U.N. Security Council resolutions in shipments of arms to North 

Korea, for which it not even a slap on the wrist. You have got a 

country that just accepted—it was in the midst of receiving another 

shipment of arms, in violation of international law, that was probably headed for the FARC. You have a country that has Joanna 

Chesimard, a convicted terrorist on the FBI 10-most-wanted list of 

terrorists in the world, who killed a New Jersey State trooper. And 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

38 

I know we are not, you know, rewarding them for that behavior, 

but we are certainly not making progress on any of it. 

Let me ask you one last question, which is a broader question 

than beyond Cuba. In our democracy programs, I am sadly concerned. We have never in the world—our democracy programs have 

ever—being rejected by a totalitarian government or a repressive 

regime, that that has subverted the very essence of our democracy 

programs. And yet, there is a suggestion that somehow because a 

country does not like it or we did not tell them everything about 

our democracy program, which we work with a lot of groups in the 

world in which we do not tell them, the country that does not like 

the fact that we are trying to promote democracy on their country, 

that we would subvert it. So, I hope we do not go down that road, 

because then I, for one, will lead a charge, as much as I am the 

biggest supporter, and have been for 23 years, of our democracy 

programs, if we are going to start subverting it to a country that 

does not like it, and therefore, we are going to start changing what 

we are doing, then, to be very honest with you, that is a slope for 

which there is a lot of consequences. A lot of my friends who do 

not seem to have a problem with—you know, with what goes on in 

Cuba, but are very strong about places in Burma and other places 

in the world; yet, if you are going to start subverting democracy 

programs because a country rejects it because they are totalitarian, 

then that is a slippery slope, and I hope we do not get to that, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Thank you for the opportunity. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Senator Menendez. 

Secretary Feeley, let me touch on a couple of points here. And 

I do not know if any of the other members have any followup questions. 

I wanted to first touch on Colombia, the negotiations going on 

with the FARC. Has the Santos administration asked for Simon 

Trinidad’s release or temporary release for purposes of participating in the peace negotiations? 

Mr. FEELEY. Mr. Chairman, the Colombians have not asked us 

to release Simon Trinidad. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Are you prepared today, on behalf of the administration, to state that the release of Mr. Trinidad from U.S. 

custody is a part of any future deal between Colombia and the 

FARC is off the table? 

Mr. FEELEY. Senator, as you well know, Mr. Trinidad is incarcerated in the United States for very serious crimes. And I have to 

be honest, I am not—I cannot make final decisions that will be 

made by my superiors. What I will tell you is that our extradition 

relationship with Colombia is one of the most fruitful. I was privileged to participate in the beginning of it, before they had extradition of Colombian nationals, and President Santos and his negotiating team know what an incredibly serious tool this is and the priority that we make keeping our extradition relationship strong 

with Colombia. 

Senator RUBIO. But, you can say that, as of this moment, you are 

not aware of any efforts to either release or temporarily release Mr. 

Trinidad. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

39 

Mr. FEELEY. What I can tell you, sir, is, I am not aware of any 

effort. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

I wanted to—I agree with this project, the Central American 

strategy and the billion dollars, obviously. But, here is what is important. How are we going to measure progress? Do we have benchmarks set for how we are going to measure success, what the 

project is going to look like? Because you touch an interesting 

point. And I have talked about this often. Whether it is the migratory crisis that we have now seen or some other issues regarding 

the Northern Triangle countries, there are entire parts of those 

countries that are not under the writ of the government. In essence, they are controlled by transnational criminal groups that 

terrorize the populace, and, quite frankly, are driving people out of 

there, for fear of their own safety and, of course, lack of hope in 

their own future. So, the idea that we would get involved in an alliance for prosperity, or I guess this is called the—I have met with 

the Presidents of all three countries, and their Foreign Ministers. 

This plan for prosperity is a good idea, but how are we going to 

measure success in these programs? What are the metrics? 

Mr. FEELEY. Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question, and 

thank you for raising the importance of metrics. 

I said in my testimony that we have to be accountable and we 

have to work with you. I think one of the things that we—before 

we began this effort, we looked to see if we could get some signals 

of measurable progress, the demonstration of political will. It was 

the assessment of the President and the Vice President that we did 

have indications—certainly not getting us over any goal line, but 

we did have indications from them. I mentioned some of them earlier. If you take a look at Honduras, they have dropped their murder rate. Still way too high, but they have dropped it 22 percent 

in the last year. If you take a look at what, in Honduras, they did 

in the Ministry of Public Security, they published a huge glossy 

that indicated almost where every lempira went, in terms of their 

spending. 

Go over to El Salvador. I mentioned earlier the antiextortion law. 

Take a look at what we did with El Salvador, in terms of our MCC 

compact, their second one, for $277 million. There were a number 

of things that the Salvadorans had not done, in terms of making 

their domestic legislation regarding anti-money-laundering up to 

international FATF standards, the Financial Action Task Force 

things. We worked with them through our diplomacy, and we were 

able to get them to a place where we were able to approve that. 

You put your finger on it. Metrics are absolutely important. Now, 

having said that, I will also say, you can look at a whole bunch of 

statistics on inputs and not necessarily get the outputs that you 

seek. I used to tell people, when they would come and visit us, as 

you did in Mexico, that the—you know, what does success look 

like? I cannot sit here and tell you every single thing, but I can 

tell you that how a country presents itself and how the people of 

a country feel about their government, about their mayors, about 

their police, about their justices, and the building of that confidence, is extremely important. May be difficult to measure, but 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

40 

we can use polling and things like that. But, metrics is absolutely 

on the forefront of our efforts, here. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, I would just add that, obviously, the $1 billion will not be enough to finish the plan. There is—I would imagine there are out-year planned—assuming that there is success 

with the plan, there would be future years for continued implementation. 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, we—right now, I can only speak, as you can appreciate, for FY16, but—— 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

Mr. FEELEY [continuing]. If we look at our history in Colombia 

and we look at our history in Mexico, I would say there is no substitute in this hemisphere for strong American leadership, technical assistance, and the leveraging ability that we bring, both in 

terms of the programming, as well as in terms of the political and 

diplomatic support. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. I want to examine the $6 million for 

changes to the Interests Section into an embassy. 

In May 2014, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General 

released a report, following an inspection of that facility. The report included, by the way, a classified annex that—with key judgments, which I have reviewed, and recommendation on how to improve the security and functionality of the Interests Section. Can 

you tell us, here in this setting, without, obviously, going into any 

of the details in the classified annex, what—how many of those recommendations have been acted upon? 

Mr. FEELEY. I cannot tell you specifically. I owe you that answer, 

sir. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. Can you tell us, then, how much of this 

money will go toward addressing those portions? And of—even—it 

can be a written update or a response, classified if necessary, on 

what the State Department has done or plans to do to the Interests 

Section, and how many of their recommendations, particularly of 

the ones in the classified annex to the report, have been addressed. 

That is an important point that the committee needs to understand, is, how many of those things in that report, both the open 

portions of it and especially the classified portions of it, are going 

to be addressed with these $6 million that you are asking for? 

Mr. FEELEY. I owe you that as a takeback, sir. 

[The written reply to the above information requested follows:] 

Mr. Feeley. The Office of the Inspector General’s report on the U.S. Interests Section in Havana identified key areas of concern and we are working to mitigate those 

concerns. The classified annex contains several key judgments that we are also 

addressing. We would be happy to discuss the budgetary implications of implementing the recommendations and progress on following through on the recommendations in a classified setting at your convenience. 

Mr. FEELEY. As I mentioned, in general terms, what I can say 

here in this setting is that the additional $6.6 million that we 

would be seeking for D&CP—diplomatic and consular program 

funding—is basically for necessary modernization. But we owe you 

a more specific answer. 

Senator RUBIO. Physical upgrades. 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

41 

Mr. FEELEY. There are no FTEs, as we call them—full-time employments. We do not anticipate expanding the number of diplomats that we are sending down there in the short term. And 

so—— 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. Well, let—because you talked about—these 

are all going to be updates to the facility, and that is important, 

in terms of—not just in light of that report, but, in general, the 

functions that you are talking about providing there. But, beyond 

it, you talked about—there is no IT capability or advanced IT capability, there was no cars. 

And that leads me to my following point. Let us talk, first, about 

personnel. You talk about FTEs. This employment of Cuban personnel provided by the Cuban Government, there is no doubt in 

your mind that these employees just are not random people that 

applied for a job, that a significant portion of them, if not all, have 

strong links to Cuban intelligence. 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, what I would say to that is that we and every 

other diplomatic mission deal with the circumstances that we find 

on the ground. This is not ideal, this is unique. There are—I am 

not sure if there are other places in the world where the host government provides your local employment—your locally employed 

staff. 

Senator RUBIO. Or even—that, in and of itself, raises a tremendous flag, does it not? We are going to have an expanded embassy 

capability on the—in this country, a nation that we know has made 

the United States a priority of intelligence-gathering, a country 

that we know expenses—despite their poor budgetary condition, 

spends a significant amount of money on intelligence activity. And 

they provide us employees, and I guarantee you that not a single 

one of them is just a plumber or a janitor. Every single one reports 

back to the government. And I just think that is a major red flag, 

in terms of expanding an embassy capability, where, in fact, we 

are—probably require us to expand the number of Cuban employees working—employed by the government. People—I do not know 

if the American people realize this, how many—what a large number of, basically, Cuban Government employees work inside of our 

consular facility and will be working inside of our Embassy in Havana. That is a huge problem. 

Let me ask you something else, because, as part of upgrading 

this—do we have commitments from the Cubans that we will be 

able to bring in new, modern equipment and supplies? 

Mr. FEELEY. Senator Rubio, that is one of the issues that we are 

discussing with them. And I am—my boss is the lead negotiator. 

And, quite frankly, I am not able to provide you, in this setting, 

with a status of where we are with regard to access by our lead 

officials or the importation. As you can appreciate, these are conversations that are at the core of our diplomatic conversations, and 

nobody is prejudging the outcome. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, let me ask you this. Will the embassy—or 

the Interests Section now, embassy later—be able to receive regular secure shipments, unmolested by the regime? 

Mr. FEELEY. Once again, sir, one of the issues we are discussing 

with them, and I am not in a position today to be able to tell you 

yes or no, categorically. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

42 

Senator RUBIO. Well, again, that is a huge area of concern. 

Mr. FEELEY. Huge priority. 

Senator RUBIO. We are being asked to invest money in an embassy in Havana, but we are going to have to hire Cuban agents 

to work in the embassy, we are—and there is no guarantee, as of 

yet, that we are going to be allowed to bring in any equipment we 

want to upgrade the embassy. Because we are being told this 

would be an embassy just like any other embassy in the world, except it will have Cuban agents working inside of it, we will not— 

and we have no commitments yet that we will be allowed to bring 

our own equipment, and we have no commitments yet that we 

would be allowed to bring secured containers of equipment into the 

embassy. Other than that, it is just like every other embassy, I 

suppose. 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, I think that there is—the embassies—— 

Senator RUBIO. It will have a door and a window, but it will not 

have our own computer equipment, our own employees, or a secure—— 

Mr. FEELEY. I understand. 

Senator RUBIO [continuing]. Method of delivering material. I 

mean, this is a big issue of concern, and one we are going to be 

debating as we get into this whole funding issue. Because, irrespective of how you may feel about an opening towards Cuba, if we are 

going to have an embassy, it should be a real embassy, not an embassy that is mined with Cuban intelligence officials, unable to upgrade its equipment, and unable to bring in, in a secure way, both 

documents and material for the use of the embassy. And I understand it is not your decision to make, but I am—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Sure. 

Senator RUBIO [continuing]. Just pointing to the fact that that is 

going to be a major problem—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Well, and it is a major priority for us. If you take 

a look—we are attempting to reestablish diplomatic relations—we 

are not there yet, as you well know—under the Vienna Convention 

on Diplomatic and Consular Relations. The overriding principle of 

that is that there is reciprocity. In many embassies around the 

world, we do not have 100 percent perfect reciprocity, and we have 

to deal with the circumstances that we have. The fact that we have 

PALCO employees in the Interests Section, currently, is one that 

is an inherited state of affairs. But, I absolutely do take very seriously—and I know my boss does, and you have spoken with Roberta Jacobson and with the Secretary on this—we do take very seriously the issues you have raised about shipments, about movement, and about our ability to conduct relations—diplomatic relations in a country where we have not had them before—— 

Senator RUBIO. Well, again, I am—— 

Mr. FEELEY [continuing]. Where we have not had them for—— 

Senator RUBIO. No, I understand. But, I guess my point is, as 

this was represented to the committee, it should not be represented 

as an embassy just like any other we have around the world. I 

think it is important that if, in fact, this is an embassy that is 

going to have Cuban intelligence agents working in it, unable to 

upgrade equipment unless the Cubans allow it, unable to bring in 

cars unless they allow it, unable to upgrade our technological capaFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

43 

bilities, and unable to securely deliver documents and other type 

equipment into the facility, it is not just like every other embassy. 

It is—and that is an important thing to point out. 

Beyond it, on the personnel issue, is there plans for the embassy 

to be able to have the capacity to host members of Cuba’s prodemocratic opposition? 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, as you are well aware, we currently offer free 

Internet to independent civil society members. We get upward of 

about 300 people a week who come in. We absolutely have regular 

contact with all of those folks across the wide spectrum of independent civil society people in Cuba. They are not a monolithic 

group, as you know well. And we will absolutely—one of the issues 

that we are discussing is to allow for our people to be able to go 

out and meet with those folks without fear of reprisal. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, so you will continue the programs of allowing pro-democracy activists and other to come into the facility, use 

the Internet, assuming we can get the equipment in there, and all 

sorts—so, that is the good news. 

But, let me ask you this. And you talked about being able to go 

out and reach out to people. Is there—is it our intention to create 

the equivalent of a response team at the embassy that will be able 

to visit dissidents when they are jailed, when they are beaten, 

when they are harassed? Has there been conversations about creating a group of individuals working for the U.S. Government that 

will be able to go out and interact with these dissidents when they 

are arrested, when they are beaten, when they are jailed—out in 

the country, not simply in our facility? 

Mr. FEELEY. Once again, Senator, as I have not been party to the 

negotiations, I, unfortunately, am not able to give you a specific answer to that specific question. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

Mr. FEELEY. But, it is a priority that future diplomats of the 

United States in an embassy are able to reach out and speak freely 

with independent members of civil society. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, you also talked about, in the past, that facility’s been used for issues of fugitives, the Interests Section that, 

in the past, has sent teams there to seek out fugitives. You talked 

about the importance of an—a U.S. embassy having law enforcement liaisons working from the facility, correct? 

Mr. FEELEY. That is correct, sir. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. And—— 

Mr. FEELEY. And, in point of fact, the Cubans have agreed to a 

law enforcement working group with us. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. And does that mean that they have also 

agreed to open the case of Joanne Chesimard to be returned to the 

United States? Has that been discussed at all? 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, I am from New York, and I am the—I am from 

a family of cops and firemen. And I remember when Warner Trost 

was killed. And I know that his family has cried out for justice. 

And I know that there are many other fugitives from American justice and international justice there. It is the administration’s policy 

that, through a engagement that is diplomatic, that allows our law 

enforcement people to speak to one another, we will pursue, at 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

44 

every level that we can, the return of fugitives. I cannot guarantee 

any outcome, sir. 

Senator RUBIO. No, I understand. I—— 

Mr. FEELEY. But, I can tell you it is a priority. 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

And again, I just want to go back to this point, because it is 

going to be part of our conversations. This is a budget oversight 

hearing, not a—— 

Mr. FEELEY. Sure. 

Senator RUBIO [continuing]. Policy one, per se, although it— 

budget and policy overlap. And we are going to be asked to fund 

a new embassy in Havana. But, I think it is important for members to understand, before they approve that funding—and I think 

it is important for the State Department to understand, before they 

come here and ask for that—we need to understand exactly what 

we are funding. And that is why I asked you these questions. 

Are we funding a building that, in essence, continues to be limited, but just has the name ’’embassy‘‘ on it, or are we going to be 

funding a building where we will have our own personnel, our own 

equipment, our ability to send material in securely without interference from the Cuban government—in essence, a real embassy— 

or is it just going to be the current Interests Sections filled with 

Cuban agents, unable to upgrade technologically, and just costing 

more money? And that is an important point that we are going to 

have to have a conversation about as we get closer to that. 

I wanted to end with a couple more points. And Senator Menendez touched upon this, because this is important. You know, on 

February 28 of this year, a Chinese flag vessel was intercepted in 

Cartagena, Colombia, en route to Cuba, carrying 15 containers of 

heavy weaponry hidden as a grain shipment. This is the second 

time in 18 months that the Cuban military has been caught smuggling weapons internationally. Has the State Department made 

any statements regarding this matter? 

Mr. FEELEY. I am going to have to check for you, Senator. 

[The written reply to the above information requested follows:] 

Mr. Feeley. Since the Colombian investigation of the incident is still ongoing, the 

Department of State has not made any public statements to date. We believe that 

it would be premature to speculate on the incident, though we take the matter seriously and continue to consult closely with our Colombian partners. We appreciate 

the Colombian Government’s efforts to ensure safe maritime transportation 

throughout the region, particularly for ships that enter populated ports, and transit 

the Panama Canal. 

Mr. FEELEY. We were very well aware of the case. I am trying 

to recall if we have made any statements about it. As you are 

aware, from the Chong Chon Gang incident in the Panama Canal, 

the provenance and ultimate destination of an awful lot of shipping 

on the high seas is not always completely clear at the outset. We 

have spoken to our Colombian partners on that. But, I owe you a 

better response as to whether or not we have made public statements on it. We have certainly consulted with our Colombian partners. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, I think this is a critical point, because 

weapons between China—weapon sales between China and Cuba 

are not otherwise sanctioned internationally. So, why would they 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

45 

hide this weaponry in grain if, in fact—that, alone, should raise 

alarm as to what exactly they are doing. 

Which brings me to perhaps my final point, and that is, according to the memorandum of justification for the recission of Cuba’s 

designation as a state sponsor of terrorism that was shared with 

Congress last month, the Cubans reject, ‘‘Cuba rejects and condemns all terrorist acts, methods, and practices, in all its forms 

and manifestations. It likewise condemns any action intended to 

encourage, support, finance, or cover up any terrorist act, method, 

or practice.’’ 

Can my office be provided a copy of the communication between 

Cuba and the United States in which Cuba committed to these 

words that I just read? 

Mr. FEELEY. Sir, I am not authorized to get that. I will certainly 

take it back—to give you that assurance—I will take back the request. 

Senator RUBIO. Well, we will make that request, as well, of the 

Secretary of State. Would that be the appropriate individual? 

Mr. FEELEY. Yes, sir. 

Senator RUBIO. It also states that the governments of Spain and 

Colombia have no objection to the recision of Cuba’s designation as 

a state sponsor of terrorism. I would also put in the request for 

those documents. 

Mr. FEELEY. If those documents exist, sir—— 

Senator RUBIO. Okay. 

Mr. FEELEY [continuing]. We will certainly— 

[The written reply to the above information requested follows:] 

Mr. Feeley. The Government of Cuba provided us with written assurances that 

it will not support acts of international terrorism in the future, consistent with the 

requirements of the relevant statutes. While the written diplomatic message is private, we have shared the content of the assurances with Congress. In the assurances, Cuba reiterated its commitment to cooperate in combating terrorism, rejected 

and condemned all terrorist acts, methods, and practices in all their forms and 

manifestations, and condemned any action intended to encourage, support, finance, 

or cover up any terrorist acts. The Government of Cuba further committed to never 

supporting any act of international terrorism, and never allowing its territory to be 

used to organize, finance, or execute terrorist acts against any other country, including the United States. 

The Government of Cuba also addressed its support for the Revolutionary Armed 

Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) during the 

peace processes and provided assurances that it would never permit FARC and ELN 

members present in Cuba to use Cuban territory to engage in activities against 

Colombia or any other country. The Government of Cuba provided assurances that 

it would never permit Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) members living in 

Cuba to use Cuban territory for that organization’s activities against Spain or any 

other country. 

Cuba has also made a number of public statements condemning terrorism, including President Castro’s December 2014 speech rejecting terrorism and his January 

2015 statement of outrage against the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack in Paris. 

The Government of Colombia communicated to the United States it has no evidence that Cuba has provided any political or material support in recent years to 

the FARC or ELN that has facilitated, supported, or promoted the planning or execution of terrorist activity in Colombia. The Colombian Government believes the 

Government of Cuba plays a constructive role in the peace negotiations and has no 

objection to the rescission of Cuba’s state sponsor of terrorism (SST) designation. 

For those two ETA members for whom Spain has requested extradition, Cuba and 

Spain have agreed to a bilateral process to resolve the matter, which is now underway. The Government of Spain told the Department that it accepts this process as 

a sign of Cuba’s willingness to cooperate on this issue, and that it has no objection 

to the rescission of Cuba’s SST designation. 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

46 

Senator RUBIO. And I guess my final question is one related to 

the democracy programs on the island. And, you know, we have 

heard some criticism here—Senator Flake—but, others have, as 

well—that these programs as some sort of a covert program. I 

think it is important to point out that—and I think Senator 

Menendez touched upon this—but, these programs—these were not 

weapons program, correct? 

Mr. FEELEY. No. 

Senator RUBIO. These were not—what—programs to hand out explosives on the island. These were programs to basically help individual Cubans become empowered by having access to social media, 

having—as reported in the media, that is what they were—to have 

access to social media, access to the Internet. Does not the fact that 

that, in and of itself, is considered subversive, tell us everything we 

need to know about that regime? 

Mr. FEELEY. Our human rights funding hedge has been supported from this committee for many years, does, in fact, seek to 

empower the Cuban people. Our strategy, our strategic end state 

in Cuba, has remained the same from December 16 to December 

18. It is to promote a peaceful democratic transition on the island 

of Cuba, led by Cubans, so that they will become a democratic, 

prosperous, and secure country and join the rest of the countries 

of the hemisphere. My colleagues in DRL, my colleagues in USAID 

have engaged in those programs, with the goal of doing exactly 

that. And there have been many people who have benefited from 

that. And there have been many lessons learned along the way. As 

my colleague from DRL said, providing democracy assistance in restrictive environments is one of the most difficult tasks we do as 

diplomats. 

Senator RUBIO. So, those programs remain a priority. 

Mr. FEELEY. Those programs remain a priority, sir. 

Senator RUBIO. And, under no circumstances, as far as you know, 

will those programs ever be weakened or watered down or eliminated in an effort to gain further concessions or the favor of the 

Cuban Government. 

Mr. FEELEY. Senator Rubio, I can only speak to the FY16 request. The FY16 request requests the same amount of funding as 

in the past, $20 million. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator Kaine. 

Senator KAINE. Just briefly. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Secretary Bennett, we are—I am going to follow up on a line of 

questioning from Senator Menendez. An issue that is of great moment right now is the discussion over trade promotion authority 

and, ultimately, a—the idea that a transpacific partnership deal 

would follow. To what extent has your Bureau been engaged in discussions with the U.S. Trade Representative about labor protections as part of either a trade promotion authority or a transpacific 

partnership deal? 

Ms. BENNETT. Thank you, Senator Kaine. 

Through the TPP negotiations—I mean, we really are seeking 

strong and enforceable commitments on fundamental labor rights. 

Our International Labor Affairs Office within the Bureau is 

vectored into that. I cannot give you specifics, without taking it 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

47 

back and continuing this, on precisely what stages of negotiations 

and whatnot they have injected, you know, their views. But, we 

have been involved in—you know, what we can do to, you know, 

advance elimination of forced and compulsory labor, child labor, 

commercial sex, of course—I mean, a whole variety—— 

Senator KAINE. Yes. 

Ms. BENNETT [continuing]. Of angles in that regard. 

Senator KAINE. I think I am going to submit a question for the 

record on this, because I would like to get specifics about the Bureau’s engagement with USTR on this point. 

I am generally pro-trade, but I do think the labor protection elements are very important, given the—you know, the nations we are 

dealing with. We do not want to disadvantage American workers. 

And the degree to which your Bureau has interacted with USTR 

would be something I am interested in. So, I will submit that one 

for the record. 

Ms. BENNETT. Sure. 

Senator KAINE. Let me just—Secretary Feeley, just follow up 

with you. And I would second comments made by the Chairman 

about the Central American Engagement Plan, the need for 

metrics. You talked about the—sort of, the three pillars of investment: prosperity investments, governance investments, and security investments. And they are very critical. I will just kind of put 

on the record: A lot of this violence in the nations that are corrupting their institutions, affecting both the security and governance pillars, and the prosperity, too, is driven by the drug trade. 

This is a committee that has, not only the Western Hemisphere as 

its jurisdiction, but transnational criminal activity. The drug trade 

is not coming to Honduras because Hondurans consume a lot of 

drugs. The drug trade is coming to Hondurans because—Honduras—because Americans consume a lot of drugs. It is our consumption of drugs, whether it is heroin now raised cheaply in Mexico or whether it is cocaine, as you indicate, raised in Peru—it is 

our consumption of drugs that has turned a nation that is a real 

ally of ours into a transit point, and the amount of cash that we 

are willing to spend for drugs basically just corrupts the institutions of a nation that has a 65-percent poverty rate. They have a 

responsibility to improve their own institutions, but they have a 

real challenge of improving them to the degree that we might want 

to see as long as U.S. dollars by—driven by a U.S. demand for 

drugs is corrupting their institutions so badly. 

And so, you know, as I see—in Virginia, whether it is, you know, 

opioid overdoses in rural Virginia or methamphetamine problems 

in, you know, other parts of the State or—and we see it all over 

the country—I mean, all over the country, we are seeing this drug 

problem—unless we get a handle on the demand side here and do 

things really to fundamentally change the equation of the demand 

side here, you know, we can extradite more and more people, we 

can arrest more and more people, we can, you know, pay for 

trainings of police or security officers, but we will not see the outcomes that we want in Central America unless we own our own responsibilities. 

When kids from violent neighborhoods were arriving at our border and then surrendering to the first American they saw in uniFOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

48 

form, and, you know, there was some attitude of kind of, you know, 

blaming the countries, but, I mean, to some degree, they are arriving at our doorstep because we are the source of some of the problem. So, those nations have got to own responsibility for their institutional improvements. We have got to own our responsibility. And 

it is U.S. cash that is corrupting these countries, these poor countries, because of the demand for drugs. And we have got to get a 

handle on that. And there is no silver-bullet answer to it, but we 

have got to own that as a responsibility. 

Mr. FEELEY. Senator, I’ll—just very quickly—I could not agree 

more. I think that it is not in the State Department’s bailiwick, 

which tends to deal more with the law enforcement and supply 

side, but this administration, the Obama administration, has trebled the amount of money that we spend on—out of—and my good 

friend Mike Botticelli, the Director at ONDCP, has trebled that. 

This was, quite frankly, in diplomatic terms, sort of a watershed 

moment, when President Obama and former Secretary Clinton told 

the countries of the region, ‘‘We are co-responsible for this.’’ And we 

agree, we do have to own it. It is not in our bailiwick or operational 

purview, but we could not agree more with you. And it is one of 

the reasons why, within that cooperation that we do with these 

countries, we include demand reduction, because what we, sadly, 

see many times is the—sort of the curse of geography. As the drugs 

move up through the isthmus, many times the drug traffickers, 

who are, you know, pretty rapacious individuals, will pay off, in 

product, and try to use supply to create their own demand. 

So, I thank you very much for your support and recognition that, 

in the United States, we have our co-responsibility, as well. 

Senator KAINE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Thank you all for being here with us today. It was a 2-hour hearing, and I appreciate your patience, your service to our country. 

Ms. Bennett, it was not bad at all, was it? [Laughter.] 

Senator RUBIO. No? 

Ms. BENNETT. It was delighted, thank you. [Laughter.] 

Senator RUBIO. Sure. 

The record is going to remain open until the close of business on 

Thursday, May 7. 

And, with that, the hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF JOHN D. FEELEY TO QUESTIONS

SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BOB CORKER

Question. The United States is encouraging trade facilitation and capacity-building around the world by working with regional organizations, such as the East 

African Community (EAC) in Africa, APEC in Asia. These agreements promote harmonization, economic integration, coproduction and other cross-border initiatives. 

The United States has encouraged similar initiatives in the past through trade and 

development policy such as CAFTA, ATPA. 

♦ What initiatives has this administration undertaken to continue to encourage 

economic integration and trade developments in the Western Hemisphere region 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

49 

as a whole, and in subregions such as Central America, the Caribbean, and the 

Andean region? 

Answer. The administration has embraced economic integration and trade promotion initiatives in the region established by prior administrations (e.g. NAFTA, 

CAFTA, four bilateral free trade agreements) and continues to implement their provisions to ensure a level playing field. We are likewise pursuing a broader, ground 

breaking initiative—the Trans-Pacific Partnership—that in the Western Hemisphere includes Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Peru. It represents a significant opportunity to integrate the Americas in the rapidly expanding Asia-Pacific economy and 

create new export markets for goods and services produced in the Americas. 

We are also implementing trade capacity-building programs through initiatives 

such as Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas, the Small Business Network of the 

Americas (SBNA), and Women’s Entrepreneurship in the Americas (WEAmericas). 

Under this initiative, the United States has supported customs and border workshops which have leveraged public-private partnerships to modernize procedures in 

Central America, the Dominican Republic, Peru, and Uruguay. 

The SBNA builds connections between U.S. and regional institutions providing 

counseling, training, financing, and other support services to small and medium 

businesses. Through the WEAmericas initiative we have worked with the regional 

partners to certify businesses as women-owned and integrate women entrepreneurs 

into global supply chains by connecting them with direct trade opportunities. 

In Central America, USAID is improving trade facilitation and market access for 

agricultural value chains by reducing trade costs across borders, promoting publicprivate dialogue on trade facilitation, and harmonizing trade and investment laws, 

regulations, and procedures. 

Our energy initiatives in Central America and the Caribbean also aim to foster 

conditions for economic integration. Connecting the Americas 2022 promotes access 

to electricity through enhanced interconnection, power sector investment, and 

renewable energy development, which will increase competitiveness for trade and 

investment. Vice President Biden announced the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative in June 2014 to work with the Caribbean to diversify and integrate their energy 

sectors. 

Leadership on economic integration extends past our borders. Chile, Colombia, 

Mexico, and Peru established the Pacific Alliance in 2012. The United States 

became an observer in July 2013 and supports the efforts by the Pacific Alliance 

countries toward integration, lowering barriers to trade and strengthening economic 

ties. The United States has proposed cooperation on regulatory matters, trade and 

travel facilitation, research institution partnership, and entrepreneurship. 

Question. In both the U.S.-Colombia and U.S.-Peru free trade agreements, there 

is a reference to regional integration, building on the supply chains that were created as a result of previous U.S.-Andean trade agreements (i.e., ATPDEA). Namely, 

the agreements includes a section in the textile chapter, specifically on regional 

cumulation which states: ‘‘In the light of their desire to promote regional integration, the Parties shall enter into discussions, within six months of the date of entry 

into force of this Agreement, or at a time to be determined by the Parties, with a 

view to deciding, subject to their applicable domestic legal requirements (such as a 

requirement to consult with the legislature and domestic industry), whether materials that are goods of countries in the region may be counted for purposes of satisfying the origin requirement under this Chapter as a step toward achieving regional 

integration.’’ 

The U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreements entered into force on February 1, 2009. 

The U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement entered into force on May 15, 2012. 

♦ Has the United States entered into discussions about regional cumulation with 

Peru? With Colombia? If not, has a later date been determined by the parties? 

Have there been discussions about setting a date? Can you explain why these 

discussions have not taken place? Would you say that the delay in the discussions is due to a policy decision or to simple negligence? 

Answer. Discussions of cumulation with Peru and Colombia have taken place on 

several occasions, including at the most recent U.S.-Peru Free Trade Commission 

meeting and during bilateral meetings in Colombia in late 2014. As we explained 

in those meetings, any agreement to provide such cumulation between Peru, Colombia, and the United States would require extensive consultation with stakeholders, 

the renegotiation of bilateral Trade Promotion Agreements (TPAs) with each country, and the passage of implementing legislation. We also discussed the ‘‘short supply provisions’’ contained in the agreements with Peru and Colombia. These provide 

a well-defined administrative process for expanding the use of nonoriginated inputs 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER

50 

which are not available from producers within either TPA. U.S. trade officials stand 

ready to work with each government to facilitate use of these provisions. 

RESPONSES OF JOHN D. FEELEY TO QUESTIONS

SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TIM KAINE

Question. Respect for international labor rights must be a fundamental focus of 

any trade deal to ensure American workers are not disadvantaged in the global 

economy. 

♦ To what extent has the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) 

worked with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to promote 

labor protections as part of Trade Promotion Authority or a Trans-Pacific Partnership deal? 

♦ Please provide specific examples of DRL’s engagement with USTR. 

Answer. DRL has consulted closely with USTR at the highest levels throughout 

the TPP negotiations. DRL’s objective is to ensure that our TPP partners reform 

their laws and practices so that they are consistent with the International Labor 

Organization’s fundamental labor rights, including adopting laws on minimum 

wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health. In the course of our consultations during trade negotiations, we have specifically identified where partner 

countries have fallen short of international standards and steps that need to be 

taken to bring laws and practices in line with international standards. When TPP 

negotiations are concluded, we expect our negotiating partners will undertake specific, concrete steps to bring their labor laws and practices into conformity with 

international standards. The Department is now working with USTR and other 

USG agencies to ensure that there will be appropriate labor capacity-building plans 

in place for TPP partners who do not yet meet their obligations as members of the 

International Labor Organization, including obligations outlined in the 1998 ‘‘ILO 

Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.’’ 

Æ 

FOREI-MBP-19 with DISTILLER